Examining Racial and Ethnic Reality Part 1: Introduction, Home and Hearth, and Education

 

Growing up in the United States in the 1960’s and 1970's, we were often told that “polite society” doesn’t publicly discuss religious, political, or sexual preferences.  Race was another such topic. Today, things have changed and it seems that everything is on the table.  There are those who seem to expect some sort of positive reinforcement for wearing their political, religious, racial, or sexual allegiance on their sleeve.

They feel entitled to an obligatory pat on the back, a celebratory ice cream cone, or handout, and when that reward isn’t forthcoming, they become offended, indignant, or defensive. They become upset that their life choices or fluke of genetics aren’t being rewarded or as impressive as they think they should be to others. 

You’re expected to embrace their world view or face being ostracized (aka “cancelled”), shouted down, physically attacked, or worse yet, being called a name and incredibly, they become indignant when they are the ones called out.  Race and ethnicity are such topics, and ones which warrant critical examination.  

Introduction

For example, when we examine race, we find something similar in the reaction. Individuals, almost two centuries removed, want not just sympathy for what some ancestor may or may not have endured, but they want to be compensated for what they never experienced. Those who look beyond color and (to quote Dr. Martin Luther King), judge people by the “content of their character” are often considered the worst offenders.

They behave as if this was a one off historical phenomena. Just one group--- white Europeans---were somehow solely responsible for the institution of slavery, forgetting that the most prolific dealers of human flesh weren’t Europeans, but the Arabs of Northern Africa (who put a premium on white flesh).

They give no thought to the historical fact that forced servitude has existed since Mankind existed. Every people and every race has at one time or another been slave and master. It’s a chain we all wear. They have also conveniently ignored the fact that it was these same white Europeans who all but put an end to this hateful institution or that they implemented legislation and taxpayer supported programs balance the scale that has existed since we roamed the African savannahs.

Equally, they’ve chosen to disavow the historical fact that it was their brethren who betrayed them and sold them into slavery, which sadly still continues to this day in Africa as well as parts of Asia. Perhaps the ancestors of the person on the street they randomly call “brother” or “sister” may been responsible for the plight of their ancestor, only to have later been caught up in the net? Such twists of fate aren’t as uncommon as one might think. It’s well documented that blacks owned black slaves in the U.S. or that native Americans had slaves of all races.

Nevertheless, for some reason, they “demand” to be compensated for what they aren’t entitled to (and arguably have already been given). They “demand” that the people who freed their distant ancestors from bondage must also assume some form of self-imposed “guilt” for doing so. Why is that? Is this anger at the people who delivered them from slavery justified or is it anger at themselves for not taking the initiative to free themselves and their refusal to place the blame where it truly belongs?

Shouldn’t their anger be more accurately directed to those who ensured their bondage in the first place, or is that just a little too close to home? If there is some sort of guilt to be had, perhaps it should be their failure to take responsibility for their own future, trading a “master” on a plantation for a politician or bureaucrat? What of the millions of immigrants who’ve come here from a different culture and customs, not speaking the language, and with next to nothing in their pockets, but have adapted very quickly?

They took advantage of the opportunities available, and as a people, kept their independence, and succeeded while the so-called “freed” people who’ve had the advantage of time, language and integration remain in a state of self-imposed bondage, blaming others for their poverty, broken homes, crime, high unemployment, alcoholism and drug abuse. If it was systematic, there should be few or no exceptions, but there are many.

In their anger at themselves, they lash out at others, such as in Cincinnati a few weeks ago, violently attacking individuals who were of no threat to them or looting the businesses of immigrants who’ve succeeded. Is this self-loathing, reversed racialism, opportunism or a combination? Let’s set aside emotions, pre-conceived ideas, and bias in order to examine the data and see what it can tell us.

Home and Hearth

According to the U.S Census Bureau, Whites have 50.5% of all live births while Blacks have 13.9%. Asians and Pacific Islanders are responsible for 6.2%. Native Americans have 0.7% of all live births, and Hispanics make up 25%. Nevertheless, the overall percentage of White and Black fertility rates have been in decline over the past several decades as has Native Americans.

 However, Hispanics, Asians, and Pacific Islanders on the other hand have seen their fertility rates increase, meaning that Asian and Hispanic populations are growing relatively faster than that of whites and blacks. By 2050, the U.S. is expected to reach a near racial parity with no dominate race. How that will work out remains a guess but often cited as a key factor for an eventual (and likely) balkanization of the United States.

A key factor in predicting the eventual success of a child is whether or not they are born in a dual or single parent homes. According to the Center for Equal Opportunity, Black Americans have the highest rate of illegitimate children. According to the Center, nearly 70% of Black children---69.3%-- are born out of wedlock. Compare that to 41.6% of Hispanics and 21.9% of Whites. It’s 59.3% for Native Americans. For Asians of Chinese origin, that number is 6.4% while Japanese Americans it’s 9.7%.

Two interesting asides worth mentioning are these. 45% of Black professionals (including managers) have had at least one illegitimate child compared to just 3% of White professionals.73% of Black high school students admit to having sex. That compares to 52% of Hispanic students and 44% of White students. Also, Black adults have the highest divorce rates while Asians have the lowest. Native Americans have the second highest and Hispanics have the second lowest.

When it comes to preschool care, Hispanic children are most likely to receive home centered care from a parent.  Black children are most likely to receive some form of home based care from a non-parent relative (like grandparent, aunt, uncle, etc.). White kids are most likely to receive home based care from a non-parent or relative such as a nanny or babysitter. Children of mixed race were most likely to receive preschool care from some sort of center (such as a daycare). When it came to subsidized care, Hispanic and black children were most often the beneficiaries.

The National Library of Medicine reported that Black infants tended to have lower birth weights than other groups. They also reported than less than 1/3 of children living at or under the national poverty rate took advantage of programs such as Head Start, and while Head Start tends to provide higher quality care than other centers, Black children receive poorer quality care compared to children of other races. The reasons cited were the birth weight (including high nutritional foods, as well a poor educational levels Black as well as Hispanic ethnicity, especially in family care centers.

 Interestingly, a 2013 study by the Centers for Disease and Prevention reported that 70% of Black fathers who live with their kids were active in their lives compared to 60% of Whites and 45% of Hispanics. 78% of Black fathers tended to have dinner with their children every day while 74% of White fathers and 64% of Hispanic fathers did. Additionally, 27% of Black fathers took their children to and from activities. By contrast, just 20% of White fathers did.  When it came to the all important homework and childcare, 41% of Black fathers stepped up. Meanwhile, only 29% of Hispanic fathers and 28% of White fathers helped out.  

Education

When it comes to graduation, Asian and White students have the highest rates with Asians leading the way. Among Asians and Pacific Islanders, the graduation rate is 94%. For Whites it’s 90%. Hispanic graduation rates are 83% while for Black students it’s 81% and 74% for Native Americans.  

Some additional statistics along the same lines that I found was that 68% of Asians have a bachelor’s degree or higher. That compares to just 25% of Hispanics and 44% of Whites.  On the other side of spectrum, just 4% of Asian had less than a high school diploma. Only 5% of Blacks didn’t have a high school degree along just 7% of whites. However, just over 20% of Hispanics lacked a high school diploma.

It bears mentioning the Black females graduate at a higher percentage than Black males. 64.1% go on to college and graduate. Of those, 71.5% earn a master’s degree, and out of those, an impressive 65.9% obtain a doctorate although more Black males  overall have a doctorate or professional degrees such as a law  or medical degree. It bears mentioning that Black female students face a unique hurdle their counterparts don’t.

For those that tend to be “overachievers”, they are often harassed or treated as social outcasts for their academic performance, often being accused as “acting White”, coming most often from their Black male peers. There have been instances reported where Black students have asked that they not be singled out publicly for some achievement or award to avoid being bullied.

 Some actively try to downplay their academic performance, and even join in with the “bad crowd” in order to blend in. Some have reported being coerced into skipping assignments or school, drinking, drugs, violence, crime, and sex in order no to stand out. The result is that they usually end up holding the proverbial  “bag” and sidetracking their lives.

Finally, it bears mentioning that there are 180 “Black Only” academic scholarships and over 25 “Hispanic Only” scholarships and about 12 scholarship programs directed toward Asian-Americans. Native Americans can apply for approximately 150 “Native American Only” scholarships plus individual tribal scholarships. As for Whites, there are none. The reason, it's argued, is that Whites aren't a minority (the U.S. Census Bureau would disagree. White males are in fact a minority). 

Nevertheless, as the counter argument runs, scholarships should not be based on racial or other quotas, but rather on financial need based on their social-economic situation. It’s also worth noting that prior to 2023, ranked racial quotas were used by many colleges and universities in order to increase  on campus “diversity”, even bypassing higher qualified candidates.

In part two of our look at race, we'll take a look at employment and unemployment, Affirmative Action and quotas, racial equality in politics, crime  and prison sentencing. Finally, we’ll address the issues of reparations, the future of race relations, and what does all this mean, if anything?

Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you find our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free-thinking individuals. We ask, however, that you "like" us on whatever platform you found us on in order to keep our articles available for free to others. Lastly, in order to keep costs down, we depend on passive marketing, and therefore, depend on our readers to please forward our posts along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 

Trans-Saharan slave trade

Barbary slave trade

Barbary Pirates and English Slaves

Percentage of Births to Unmarried Women

Study: Black dads more involved in activities with theirchildren than other groups

Quality Disparities in Child Care for At-Risk Children:Comparing Head Start and Non-Head Start Settings

Fast Facts: Women of Color in Higher Ed

Race and Intelligence

First Divorce Rate by Age and Race/Ethnicity  

A Look at the Early Origins of Anti-Semitism and Its Effects Today

 

Anti-Semitism is perhaps the oldest forms of prejudice in the world.  At its heart is  the hatred of Jews and Judaism. Anti-Semitism includes a general belief that Jews are no long the "chosen people" as stated in the Bible due to their rejection of Jesus as the new "Messiah who would usher in a "Kingdom of God" on Earth. 

This role as "chosen" was annexed by a new sect known as "Christians" (from the Greek "Christos" for "anointed" similarly as a king or prophet who using olive oil). Based on their belief that Jesus was the anticipated messiah of prophecy, and through him, all believers were now the "chosen" or "elect" of God. They also believe that since Jews rejected Jesus as the messiah, they also have forfeited their divine "blessings" or "birthrights" including their right to the Holy Land.  That now belongs to Christians.

The Catholic Church, since the Council of Nicaea in the 4th Century, considers itself the sole legitimate arbiter of Christianity, has, historically, been at the core, of anti-Semitism down through the centuries. some even consider it the originator of anti-Semitism.  The Eastern Orthodox Church broke off in 1054 over a number of technical and doctrinal issues, but most notably the infallibility of the Bishop of Rome, now known as the "Holy Father" or Pope and head of the "catholic" or universal church in what became known as "The Great Schism".   

It was here, starting in the 4th Century, the Vatican begins issuing official edicts or "Bulls" to enforced Church orthodoxy. In 1095, Pope Urban II called for the liberation of Jerusalem from the Muslims in what was  the first of eight major church sponsored crusades (in realty, there were dozens of crusades, though without the direct support of the Vatican).

 Pope Urban, in his directive, openly referred to Jews as "Christ killers" and "devils", and urged the crusaders to convert or murder any Jews they encountered along the way (the same applied to Muslims or non-conforming Christian sect which didn't recognize the sole authority of the Vatican as well). 

It's worth noting that even before reaching the Holy Land, those of the First Crusade (aka the "People's Crusade"), in keeping with the Pope's instructions, attacked Jewish communities in Germany in what became known as the "Rhineland Massacres of 1096". As many as 2000 Jewish men, women, and children were murdered; some were burned while others were hanged or simply run through by a pike, sword, or whatever was handy in the name of God.  

Throughout history, Jews were forced to move from one town to another, or from one country to the next; whoever would let them settle, at least for a little while. Special taxes were almost common place and restrictions were routinely placed on them. Most notably where they could live. In the east, most were limited to the "Pale of Settlement" which encompassed parts of modern Lithuania, Belarus, Poland, Russia, and Ukraine. It was extremely poor and diseases were commonplace.

 In other places, be it in Poland, Germany, France, Spain, or England, they were herded into small, cramp sections of cities known as "ghettos". These areas were often known to be largely run down, rat infested, with little in the way of sanitation or access to fresh water. Residents had strict curfews. Failure to comply meant beatings caught by authorities. It was often much worse, especially if you were female.

Permission had to be requested to live outside of the ghetto (which could just as often be revoked). It often involved paying another tax or fee (bribe). Jews were often prohibited from owning land (though they may work for someone else who owned the land) just as some occupations were closed to them.

Have you ever wondered why Jews are associated to certain types of jobs such as pawn shops, rag collectors, "patchers" (individuals who patched or repaired pots and pans), or tailors?  That's because in most countries Jews weren't allowed to own property, particularly farmland. They could work on farms or even manage large estates, but never own them.

As a result, many moved into towns and cities where they could find other lines of work. Many would become tailors, and since they were often prohibited from joining trade guilds, were only permitted to fix broken items such as pans, pots, or furniture. In time, some became plumbers, roofers, painters, glaziers, and so forth. Ragmen collected bits of cloth and made them into towels for instance.

A few became loan brokers or ran pawnshops. Some became accountants and managed the money of wealthy...Christian...families, especially among the aristocrats. This is how the famous (or infamous) Rothschild financial house got their start. In a very few countries, some managed to become advisers of members of the elite, particularly in politics, and fewer yet ran for office (such as England's Benjamin Disraeli) and even became titled themselves. It wasn't uncommon, however, they had to leave their Jewish heritage behind in order to do so.

However, these were very few and far between. In fact, you could say they were rare to the point of hardly being believable even at the time itself. For the overwhelming majority, stories of the Rothschilds or Disraeli were the stuff of legends . For the rest, there was the constant and ever present danger of eviction on a moment's notice; forced to leave with just a few hours advance warning.

That meant leaving pretty much everything behind or selling (if you could) whatever you didn't need to virtually nothing since the only ones remaining were your Christian "neighbors". For those who were even only slightly better off, there was always the jealousy and rumors. Most just scavenged whatever remained of your existence.   However, perhaps what was worse were the pogroms.

Pogroms were little more than orchestrated violent riots directed at the closest Jewish settlement (commonly referred to as a "shtetl" in Eastern Europe). Generally these protests were result of some trumped up claim that a Jew from the shtetl stole of goose or seen after curfew. In reality, pogroms were just an excuse to intimidate Jews (such were the way Jews were thought of).

Worse is when a local child went missing or was found dead (usually accidently drowning, etc). Jews were often seen as the culprit. In the case of missing children, they were accused of "blood libel", which was perhaps one of the most heinous of charges which could be brought against a Jew. Essentially, it accused the individual of murdering the child and then using their blood (sometimes their bones) in the making of matzo or unleavened bread, to been eaten of the Jewish Sabbath (or especially on one of the special Holy days like Passover).   

Homes and businesses were burnt down, and if caught out, Jews were often beaten, robbed, raped, or in worse cases, murdered.  There was little that the local could do about it. Reporting the crime to authorities was useless. The pogroms were often ordered by the local lord who also happened employed some of the Jews since they couldn't own land. 

Thus they risked losing their income, home, a small tract to grow their own meger crops, all of which they desperately needed by reporting the crime! Church authorities were also often involved with these pogroms and it was frowned on to even speak with the priests and forbidden to enter a church. Then there were the inquisitions.  

Beginning in 1194, the Dicastery for the Doctrine of Faith was founded for the sole purpose of flushing out what the Church defined as "heretics" through investigations and trials. In reality, they sought out and eliminated those perceived to be enemies or threats to the Church. Like the Mafia of old, they were the "enforcers". They inspired terror wherever they went. They relied on rumors, lies, circumstantial evidence, hearsay, and even considered moles and birthmarks to be direct evidence!

They were often summoned at the request of a monarch or powerful lord who used the act of calling for an inquisition as their own personal "proof" of devotion to the God and the Church. Many used the inquisition as a means to rid themselves of potential threats to their authority, thus preventing or reducing the chances of being assassinated, a coup, and ensuring loyal.

They were also handy for getting rid of troubling groups ranging from gypsies, various religious sects such as the Cathars and Waldensians, Hussites, or emerging Protestants following the Reformation. During the subjugation of South America by the Conquistadors in the 1500's, the Church used inquisitions against the native populations (which later expanded into what's now southwest United States).

Punishment by the Church appointed court could consist of anything from simple confession of your "guilt" and the utterances of a few prayers ("donating" a few coins didn't hurt either) all the way up to being burned at the stake (the Church often took possession of whatever you owned to boot).

Beatings and other tortures such as waterboarding or the rack were commonly employed as was "dunking" in vats of boiling or freezing water to force your confession (interspersed with prayers and promises of "divine forgiveness"). Individuals could be stripped naked and intimately "inspected" for signs of demonic or Satanic possession (including females and children) by these allegedly chaste priests. Conviction was often viewed as random, but assuredly, the "guilty" would be found out.

Technically, the torture couldn't endanger the life of the accused. It could not result in the permanent injury or loss of one's arms or legs (including hands, feet, nose, eyes, ears, or tongue) although nothing were off limits when it came the application of torture itself. In addition, once used the torture may not be reapplied, therefore you got one trip to the torture...err...I mean confession chamber. But, how does this apply to Jews and Anti-Semitism?

While officially the Inquisition could not be applied to Jews or Muslims based on previously issued edicts, the use of pogroms were seen as a way to circumvent the edicts. Violent attacks were often conducted against Jewish and Moorish (Muslim) communities. However, since Christians were prohibited from attacking other Christians, if these individuals would convert, they could be spared the beatings, lootings, pogroms, and special taxes. They could be welcomed into the trade guilds and into society in general. The incentives were enormous. All you had to sacrifice was your identity. 

As a result, thousands of Jews and Moors converted and became known as "Conversos" or "Marranos". However, many would later convert back to their original faith. This is where the Inquisition came in. One of the goals of the Holy Office of the Inquisitor was to ensure to loyalty of the masses to the Church and the "sincerity of their faith". 

Thus, a Converso who reverted to their prior faith was seen as "endangering their soul" which, of course, was of primary concern of the Vatican. Therefore, the Inquisitor would round up all the lapsed Catholics they could find and remind them of their commitment. Think of it as a revival with whips and thumbscrews!

In 1478, King Ferdinand II of Aragon and the Castilian Queen Isabella of Christopher Columbus fame ordered up one of these "revivals" in what became known as the Spanish Inquisition (as an aside, Columbus is believed to have been a Converso). What was different from other Inquisitions was that the royal couple were deemed "most Catholic" enough by the Holy See to oversee the Inquisition independently of Vatican, although it's general operation was still staffed by appointed clergy. 

All Jews who had not converted by 1492 were ordered out of the country (Columbus went a step further, he left the continent). All Moors were ordered out by 1501. Anyone who remained would be subject to continued used of the Inquisition. All possessions were to remain.  Not to be outdone, King Philip of Spain applied the same standards to his possessions in the New World starting in 1569.

Portugal got into the act in 1520 with the appointment of a "Grand Inquisitor" by Pope Paul III. Not only were and Moors, it extended to "witchcraft" or form divination (including playing cards) and bigamy. The purpose was to exert political, social, economic, and religious control over the population.

One of the most notorious Inquisitions was requested by the Jesuit priest Francis Xavier in 1540 which became known as the "Goa Inquisition", which was applied almost exclusively on "New Christians" (Jews who had been forcibly converted) reverted back to Judaism, however, it also included Muslims and even Hindus!

There's no existing data telling us how many individuals died during the pogroms or Inquisitions nor the financial loss which resulted. No doubt the loss of lives must have been in the tens of thousands at the very least. We have a general idea that when it came to the various Gnostic Christian sects or other that the Church referred to as "heretical" (such as the Cathars, Arianians, Merovingians, Pelagianism, or orders like the Knights Templars) suffered in the millions.

In terms of financial loss, one can only guess but it was likely in the billions by today's standards, not mentioning the historical artifacts which have been destroyed or hidden away in the caverns of the Vatican's archives. However, to the Holy Office of the Inquisition, no price was too high to maintain Catholic orthodoxy.

Fascist Spain, Italy, and Argentina, with its close Catholic traditions, continued to tie itself to this absolutist orthodoxy while they reigned. Nazi Germany tried to replace it with more vulgar version harkening back to a mix of mythical past and pseudoscience with Hitler as the "New Martin Luther". Communism equally sought to replace organized religion with a purely secular faith where ideology of Marxism, the party and the state served as the three prong godhead. Politicalized Christianly and Critical Race Theory each offer the same possibility today as does radical Islam does.   

Faith, in the form of spiritualism, has been with this from the beginning whereas religion with its dogma, pageantry, and sacrifices sprung in unison with government as means of awe and control. One temporal and the other eternal. We must be aware of all things created by Man for no matter how noble their intent, they inherently contain at least a kernel of vanity and greed, which given time, will block out all light of freedom and poison the soil of enlightenment.

 

   If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps beat the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!

 Anti-Semitism in America is Nothing New. Don't Deny Jewish Culture or Culture by Calling Us "White"

Anti-Semitism

Why Jews Don't Believe in Jesus

 

List of Crusades

Inquisition

Religion in Nazi Germany

Communism and Religion

Marxism and Religion