Movie Review: What Black Men Think

by Racialicious special correspondent Latoya Peterson

If you take nothing else from this review, remember this:

That often-touted statistic that there are more black men in jail than in college? That’s a myth.

In the documentary What Black Men Think, director Janks Morton takes a sledgehammer to the falsehoods and misconceptions that are used to describe and categorize black men. Using expert opinions and cold hard facts, Morton tackles popular perceptions and assumptions that plague black men to this day. (Racialicious has mentioned the film before, here and here.)

Assumptions include:

- There are more black men in jail than there are in college
- The crack epidemic and the resulting violence in the black community
- Black Men on the DL and the AIDS crisis
- “I can’t find a black man because they all want white women.”
- Black Men don’t pay child support.

The trailer for the film addresses some of these statistics directly.

The documentary shines by using a very clear methodology to debunk some of the most deeply ingrained myths about African-American males, combining Matrix-style public announcements with expert commentary and factual analysis. The experts cited in the film came from all walks of life and all ends of the political spectrum. Discussion and commentary were provided by John McWhorter, Armstrong Williams, Juan Williams, Clenard Childress Jr., Michael Steele, Mychal Massie, Jessie Lee Peterson, Steve Perry, Shelby Steele, Alvin Poussaint, Earl Ofari Hutchinson and Darryl James.

Check out what they have to say:

[Note on the experts: some people - self included - were a bit shocked to see some of the experts on the panel. My boyfriend in particular was extra salty about the inclusion of Shelby Steele and John McWhorter. “What do they know about being black?” he fumed. I shared some of his sentiments, as some of the people cited in the film seem to have had issues with embracing black issues, or have challenged their own black heritage. However, in viewing the film, I was pleased to see that politics was left by the wayside this time. The discussion focused on black masculinity in all forms, and all of the gentlemen included on the panel were able to discuss their ideas and experiences without the sensationalism that normally marks their public statements. The range of perspectives was both refreshing and telling: Refreshing, as Morton quietly tackles the concept of “blackness” by choosing to feature perspectives from individuals outside of the black mainstream media (and some who have been accused of being “Uncle Toms”) and telling because all of the speakers hold differing ideologies and experiences - yet they all saw the same basic problems, and shared similar ideas for a solution.]

In addition, two spoken word artists (one of whom is Taalam Acey) wax poetic on being black and male in our society.

Morton’s film also spends a lot of time on exploring what black women think. When I saw the segment heading, I braced myself for the worst. However, Morton’s views of the conflicts between black men and women do not seek to find fault with one side or another, nor do they feed into the same overdone battles and arguments. Taking an analytical look at some of the most common actions attributed to black men, Morton reveals the not-so-silent partners who seem to have a vested interest in African-American gender conflict.

I watched Morton’s movie three times - once by myself, once with my boyfriend, and once with a close black friend of mine. Each time, something different caught my attention. Each time, one of my companions literally leapt out of his chair at one of the assertions made in the film. And each time, I was overwhelmed by the instinct to find a mini-DVD player and start playing random segments from the film on the metro.

This is not to say that Morton’s movie is perfect. There are some assertions made that can be very hard to swallow. Revealing the answer to the question “What is the number one killer of black people?” for example, sparked a debate between my friends that has resurfaced three or four times in the last few weeks. [I am not revealing the answer here - you will have to go see the movie to see why there is cause for debate.] Fans of the NAACP and Michael Eric Dyson may also be in for a rude awakening.

[Side point two - This is not to say that systemic racism, and discussions about the impacts of systemic racism] are ignored. The film covers the civil rights movement, the idea and implementation of the black family, healthcare, FICA, etc. However, from where I sit, the film’s predominant theme is to deconstruct some of the flawed thinking about black manhood. This is where the film lays its focus, and it is effective in this goal. Perhaps Morton will discuss racism on a higher level in another film; but this film
is well served focusing on the internalized racism and self-hate that African-Americans need to overcome before we can tackle outside forces.]

However, that is a very minor point. The film is otherwise outstanding, and fulfills its set purpose: to open a dialogue about the images and perceptions of black men in America. Morton is very clear about what he wants to accomplish, where he found his facts and figures, and how some topics (like the role of the government) are too expansive to cover in one film.

Other film highlights include an excellent montage of images of black men in the media, set to the tune of “The Whole Town’s Laughing at You.” While many of the faces presented are familiar to us all, the choice of background music takes comedic scenes and paints them with tragedy.

It is painful to see Tyler Perry, Martin Lawrence, Wesley Snipes, and Eddie Murphy near the end of the montage, made even more painful as Morton quietly states, “Ok, we get it. A black man dressed up as an overweight black woman is funny. How many more movies do you need to make to prove that?”

After watching the film, many of the fallacies surrounding black manhood were in tatters. However, being a little more aware, it is easy to see why Morton’s film is so necessary.

In making my normal rounds through the blogosphere, I came across a post on BlackProf.com written by Adrian Wing. Wing writes about a community wide educational crisis, stating:

Will the University suffer the fate of the University of California after Prop 209, which now only enrolls 2% blacks? We continue to have many more black males in prison than in college. At this stage, one-third of our males will do prison time.

If one- third of white men were in prison, would they declare it a national emergency??

Before watching What Black Men Think, I would have probably shaken my head at the statistics quoted and mindlessly accepted them as the ugly truth.

Now, I know better.

Before debunking this particular myth, Morton shows you how this statement is skewed by asking a simple question: what are we comparing? If the average age range of a college student is 18-24, and the average age range of a person in jail spans from 15-55, is this really a fair comparison?

[The age range difference had never crossed my mind - and I have heard this statistic more often than I care to remember.]

Morton decides to debunk the myth at face value, even with the huge discrepancy in age range.

Citing figures from 2005, Morton compares the total number of black men in jail and prison (801,995) with the total number of black men enrolled in college (864,000). So, almost 64,000 more black men are in college than there are in jail.

He then takes it a step further, and isolates the data out into the 18-24 year old demographic.

Of black men 18-24 years old, there are 106,000 in the prison system.

There are 473,000 in college.

4 to 1.

Thinking of the black men in my family and in my circle of friends, the statistics ring true to me. Of the black men I know, two have gone to prison. All the rest have gone to some form of college, or are college graduates.

I wondered why I had never challenged that myth before, with the truth literally staring me in the face.

Perception is a powerful thing.

You can see more clips and previews from Jank’s Morton’s film “What Black Men Think” on YouTube or on his blog/website. The film is currently sold out through Amazon; I will update here once I find out where the film can be purchased.

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. » Movie Review: What Black Men Think on 12 Sep 2007 at 3:55 pm

    […] Original post by Latoya Peterson […]

  2. The Rhin Riddilin.com » The “Facts” about Stats on 23 Jan 2008 at 7:40 am

    […] A wonderful review on this movie is done over at Racialicious.com. […]

Comments

  1. Allen wrote:

    I need this film

  2. dnA wrote:

    Uh Mychal Massie of the supposedly “black Republican” group Project 21 which is headed by a white guy? Armstrong Williams (talk about trapped in the closet)? John McWhorter? (no commentary needed) Michael Steele (who lost two elections badly and simoltaneously)? Juan Williams (who wrote an entire book arguing against reparations for slavery, as though it were a pressing political issue) This panel is skewed heavily to the Right, which is really not so reflective of how or what black men think.
    More importantly, I don’t know how a film can deconstruct black manhood by relying on figures who support patriarchy in its most persistent and traditional forms. (”You wouldn’t be a poor single mother if you just got married or kept your legs closed!”)

    Also, I would be cautious with statistics. I believe the saying was not more black men in jail than in college, but more black men in some phase of the correctional system, which includes parole, probation, and incarceration. Jail and prison are also two different types of incarceration, one being at the state and federal level and the other being at the city /county level.

  3. ccch wrote:

    WHATEVER!. I’m too busy fighting patriarchy!

  4. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    dnA -

    Don’t get me started on Steele - that’s my jurisdiction hon. John McWhorter, I’m on the fence about. I am well aware of his whiny asshole statements, but deeper into that are some good thoughts, opinions, and ideas.

    Did you not read the first side note above?

    Blackness occurs regardless of political affiliation. It’s one of the things so intriguing about the film. I know how the black left thinks - hearing similar sentiments and actual thoughtful statements from the black right shocked me.

    Also, where is that statement in the film? I have no doubt that some of the people on the panel have written on said things to that extent - yet so do people on the left. An exploration of partiarchy in the black community is not offered in this film.

    I try to judge movies, media, and the like based on intent, realism, and content. So, I feel that it is unfair to bring discussions patriarchy into the mix when the film does not claim to discuss this. (Not saying it shouldn’t be discussed, but saying there needs to be some understanding of intent. )

    I agree with the being cautious about statistics, but you saw the blackprof article I referenced. No one said corrections. The word was jail. When people I showed the film to made the associations, the word was jail. While the entire prison industrial complex is an issue unto itself, the idea that sticks out in the minds of people here (and overseas) is that more black men are doing time behind bars than are on college campuses.

    [BTW, Morton distinguishes between Prison and Jail in the first statistic set. He does not distinguish in the second. I have asked him to make that segment available online so you can watch the process - it is a bit much for me to summarize here.]

  5. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    ccch -

    Must be nice to be able to choose the battles you want to fight.

    To be a womanist (or feminist, whatever you like) means you think about power structures and partiarchy.

    To be African-American means you are often forced to think about your community. And many of us feel compelled to take some form of action.

    So again, we choose. Are we black first? Or are we women first? I am both - but it would appear that many (on both sides) would have me choose.

    I do not feel that this is a choice. I am both black and a woman, and I need to be aware of issues that impact me from both angles.

    I understand that a lot of black men are suspicious of feminism. They don’t understand why it is needed, for various reasons, and their exposure to feminism is limited. I understand that in order for me to effectively fight partiarchy, I will need to get men to understand what women go through, on multiple levels.

    I understand in turn that in order for someone else to want to understand you, you need to make them feel as if you want to understand them. Tossing the problems of the black man aside in favor of my own agenda is not going to solve the problem.

    I embrace his problems as my own; in time, he will come to embrace my problems as his own.

    Serious, societal problems stem from multiple sources. Turning a blind eye to one possible source ensures that you will never be able to solve the problem.

  6. dcase wrote:

    I think it is ignorant to suggest that Shelby Steele and John Mcwhorter are unfamiliar with being black males. Shelby Steele, for example, grew up and around the southside of Chicago during ’60’s. I’m pretty sure given the history of the area he was reminded incessantly of his black maleness. Moreover, I have never heard McWhorter distance himself from his blackness. As a black male (and an academic), I find McWhorter’s commentary on issues related to the blackcommunity to be quite thoughtful and interesting at times though a bit limited due to his lack of expertise in economics and public policy.

  7. Mike wrote:

    Ahhh at last some one who has refrained from drinking the kool aid. But alas it did not take long for some one to hate.

    dnA says
    ” Also, I would be cautious with statistics. I believe the saying was not more black men in jail than in college, but more black men in some phase of the correctional system, which includes parole, probation, and incarceration. Jail and prison are also two different types of incarceration, one being at the state and federal level and the other being at the city /county level.”

    Stop it, the saying is more black men in jail than college period, nothing else. Nobody cares at what level it’s at, locked up is locked the hell up.

    2ndly what does being a republican have to do with being black? You swing right and all of a sudden you lose your blackness? Contrary to popular belief most blacks on social issues are more conservative than people think especially black men.

    “More importantly, I don’t know how a film can deconstruct black manhood by relying on figures who support patriarchy in its most persistent and traditional forms. (”You wouldn’t be a poor single mother if you just got married or kept your legs closed!”)”

    Who else is more qualified to deconstuct black man hood than other black men? Women??
    It seems that there are certain segments of the population who have an invested interest in spreading the myths about blk males and suprisingly enough it isnt white males.
    Liked the article and response to the comments Ms. Peterson, black and feminist without the blk men are the new great Satan feel to it, who would have thought the two could co-exist together, you’ve made my day.

  8. Blanky wrote:

    I think that ccch was kidding/trolling.

    But the definitions of a feminist and a womanist differ.

  9. evilbunnnytoo wrote:

    Actually the statistics re the correction system is that for a particular demographic/class segment of the Afro Am male population - Basically for inner city, low income black males, entering some phase of the correctional system is now considered a typical life event. Bruce Western’s research on this and its effects on the earning power of this particular group is quite compelling - HOWEVER, it is research coming to conclusions about life events and lifetime earning possibilites of just a small segment of the U.S. black population and is meant to point to a disturbing trend that public policy needs to address. Western is very careful in his research to point out exactly who he is studying and talking about. I’ve actually seen him on panels with Larry Bobo whose work often focuses on attitudes in the black middle class.

  10. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    Blanky -

    Thanks for pointing that out. CCCH, if you were kidding, please put a smiley face in somewhere.

    Also, yes, I am aware that feminist and womanist are defined differently. However, outside of most academic circles, people are unfamiliar with the term “womanist.” So when I use the term, I tend to couple it with the better known term “feminist.”

    I am still trying to figure out a way to explain the concept of womanist quickly (think a sentenance) without oversimplifying it (i.e. saying black feminist - that doesn’t really serve the term.) You have any ideas on that one?

    Evilbunnytoo - thanks for the clarification. I am familiar with some parts of the research you referenced. However, I still feel as though the debunking of the stereotype was necessary because it is as you state “a small segment of the U.S. black population.” Obviously, having the correctional process become a right of passage of sorts needs to be examined and corrected. However, that stereotype is often applied to black men IN GENERAL, which I find fairly painful.

  11. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    dcase - Just curious: do you read his books or watch him in panel discussions. I am seriously fence sitting with John McWhorter and would love to get another perspective on him. I have read news articles, and 2 1/2 of his books - Losing the Race, Authentically Black, and Winning the Race (which I have not completed.) Thoughts?

    Mike -

    “Stop it, the saying is more black men in jail than college period, nothing else. Nobody cares at what level it’s at, locked up is locked the hell up.”

    I feel you on this, but remember, dnA is trying to argue what statement would be the most truthful. Morton was arguing about perception. So in a sense, you are both correct.

    “2ndly what does being a republican have to do with being black? You swing right and all of a sudden you lose your blackness? Contrary to popular belief most blacks on social issues are more conservative than people think especially black men.”

    I find this to be very true - and not necessarily in a good way. dnA, I understand your strong reaction, truly. However, as much as I may chafe at the beliefs held by some - particularly more conservative members of the black community - I appreciate their dissent. I believe that this drive to be too similar is what keeps the black community stagnant. So I appreciate their differing views, even if I personally think they are bullshit. It forces you to challenge and defend your own beliefs, an excericse I find valuable. Also, I belive that restricting blackness to key traits - basically religious, democratic, urban, hip-hop - does more harm than good. Even if I personally identify with some or all of those categories, it would be odd to be a part of such a monolithic group.

    “Who else is more qualified to deconstuct black man hood than other black men? Women??”

    Actually Mike, yes, women. Black men can talk about black masculinity - and black women also have a stake in black masculinity, considering that we are partners in the process (starting with birth). In addition, the idea of blackness can be enriched by incorporating other perspectives as well.

    “Liked the article and response to the comments Ms. Peterson, black and feminist without the blk men are the new great Satan feel to it, who would have thought the two could co-exist together, you’ve made my day.”

    Black women can be feminists. Feminists are not man haters. Black women are not black men haters. We just tend to fall into the same conversation traps over and over.

  12. gatamala wrote:

    Also, I would be cautious with statistics. I believe the saying was not more black men in jail than in college, but more black men in some phase of the correctional system, which includes parole, probation, and incarceration. Jail and prison are also two different types of incarceration, one being at the state and federal level and the other being at the city /county level.

    That was the original “saying” I have heard. HOWEVER, the two assertions were wrongly conflated into the latter.

    Black women can be feminists. Feminists are not man haters. Black women are not black men haters. We just tend to fall into the same conversation traps over and over.

    Thank you. Hopefully you won’t have to go over this again.

  13. summer wrote:

    LP> Alice Walker has a nice definition of a womanist in her intro to In Search of My Mother’s Gardens. I can’t remember it well enough to quote it, :), but I recall that it struck me when I read it. So if you have that on hand….

  14. LM wrote:

    Latoya,

    If you haven’t seen it already, a transcript of C-Span’s long interview of McWhorter (saw it months ago, too busy to get a link at the moment), I believe by Brian Lamb, might be an illuminating look into his mindset. He’s… different, which isn’t all bad.

  15. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    Summer & LM, thanks for the pointers.

    I will check those out as soon as I can.

  16. Allen wrote:

    Latoya

    I pulled the numbers for incaceration in general. The film is right. If people do their own google searches they’ll be able to find the numbers themselves. Some are on the census website and others are on the bureau of prison statistics website.

  17. Mike wrote:

    Ms. peterson I agree with most of your response to my post but I will have to disagree with the notion that women are qualified to deconstruct or construct males, I think of of it more in terms of defining what it is to be a man. Women can only give there opinion on what a male should be which would be slanted with traits that best fits there ideals. Just like men would construct by nature for women to fit into a more patriorichal world as we see around us. If women had the same say it would be the same the other way. I can’t tell you what it’s like to be a women I can only speculate from what I here see and told. The same is true vice versa. What I can learn is what is acceptable for harmony with the opposite sex and whether I am willing to go by those rules. The question for me is what definition of being a man is acceptable for an equal society. That then of course would have to have a women’s say but not the law.
    As far as me saying

    “Liked the article and response to the comments Ms. Peterson, black and feminist without the blk men are the new great Satan feel to it, who would have thought the two could co-exist together, you’ve made my day.”

    That was my poor idea of a joke should of threw up the happy face.

  18. dnA wrote:

    I had a really long response that somehow got erased after I posted it. Suffice it to say that the most recent numbers available place the population of black men on probation, parole, or in prison at over 2 million.

    50% of black women do not die of aids. But AIDS is the leading cause of death for black women age 24-35.

    Debunking those exaggerated or distorted interpretations of those statistics doesn’t change the fact that AIDS is a very real threat, especially to young black women, and the current state of our systems of corrections is unnacceptable.

    Mike is trying to let himself off the hook. My argument has nothing to do with their “blackness,” it has to do with the fact that their reaction to their own experiences of being black is the exception rather than the rule. Which makes the title of the film misleading. It would be more accurate to call it “what conservative bougie black men think.”

    As to this statement:

    “Who else is more qualified to deconstuct black man hood than other black men? Women??”

    Clearly you’ve never read Song of Solomon, the best book about being a black man I’ve ever read in my life.

    And it was written by a woman.

    Go figure.

  19. LM wrote:

    “Debunking those exaggerated or distorted interpretations of those statistics doesn’t change the fact that AIDS is a very real threat, especially to young black women, and the current state of our systems of corrections is unnacceptable.”

    dnA, couldn’t have said it better myself. That said, as a major fan of empiricism, I’m glad for this movie and that Latoya has highlighted it in this space. It’s not the numbers themselves that lie, but the way they’re spun. If this movie helps to remind people that we individually have the responsibility to put things in context, all the better. As a few people upthread have mentioned, it is quite possible to be fooled into thinking either that what you see in front of you is the whole reality or that what you hear over and over is reality in spite of what you see with your own eyes. Or both.

    I’m glad also that you expanded a bit on your first comment in this thread. I still think that you’re unfairly harsh in assessing the “validity” — my word — of the overall message based on the political background of many commentators.

    In your latest comment, you say that “…their reaction to their own experiences of being black is the exception rather than the rule.”

    1. What’s “the rule”? That’s a problematic notion to me.
    2. “Their reaction to their own experiences of being black…” Should they be in the loony bin?
    3. How do either of the above play into our ability to receive what’s actually presented? I get that we ought to consider the source, but if my enemy says the sun is shining I’m not going to disagree on principle. I’m going to look up in the sky.

    I read your comments here and check your blog regularly because I often see great insight in what you write. I think you’re smarter than that sort of ad hominem dismissal makes you look.

  20. dnA wrote:

    Hah, poor choice of words with “rule” there, I was late for class, and frustrated my previous comment was deleted. It is a horrendously problematic notion and one I don’t care to repeat, ever.

    I just mean that I think placing them there perpetuates the Fox News phenomenon, where a black person who is conservative is called upon to misrepresent the views of other black people by generalizing about what black people think. Generally the credibility of their statements rests entirely on their blackness, not on the accuracy of the statement itself. Generally such people are called upon to make comments that would be percieved as racist by a white host, but are muted by a black commentator. It actually doesn’t make them any less racist, it just provides people with an excuse to make racist generalizations by citing a black source. If Sean Hannity said “black families were better off during segregation” most people would get pissed, but when Armstrong Williams says it we think about it. But that doesn’t make it true, or any less reductive.

    Case in point, the romanticizing of segregation that occurs in the video. The panelists have a political interest in romanticizing segregation (namely, downplaying the effect of the supreme courts recent rulings) but what they don’t mention about the civil rights laws, is that they reflect a school of thought that in the 60s began to question the essential value of blackness as “bad”.

    For example, the highly romanticized Dunbar High School in Washington DC was highly colorist against darker skinned blacks, but it is represented as an example of what segregated education can look like, which is to say, “not that bad.” Well we still have segregated public education, and I went to public school in DC, so I know what it looks like. And it doesn’t look like Dunbar circa 1939, which by the way, is where people like Melissa Harris Lacewell and Robin G.D. Kelly (and john mcwhorter) would be teaching if it weren’t for the Civil Rights movement.

    Their political viewpoint cannot really be separated from their experience of race, anymore than it can be separated from white people’s (even though we all like to pretend.) And given their politics, its quite clear that they have responded differently to being black than most black people do. That’s not a value judgement, I’m just saying they are hardly representative of what most black men think, and it’s inappropriate to present them as such. There’s nothing loony about any of them (Except for Mychal Massie, who is a certified loon, just read his columns, he is very fond of terms like “sodomite”) they just have a different reaction to something many of us face. And I think that should be appropriately qualified. There is no *one* valid black experience that supercedes all others, but if I were making a documentary called “What women think” and I only asked Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham, and Ann Coulter I wouldn’t get a very representative view of what most women think.

    As for your third point, you’re absolutely right. But I don’t disagree with John McWhorter on the broad strokes (he’s perfectly willing to admit that racism exists, there is a serious problem in public education, especially for black children) but rather on the particulars (I don’t think becoming a Republican or eliminating Hip-hop will be particularly helpful, and I also don’t believe that black people are more anti-intellectual than white people).

    Really my problem is I disagree with the premise of the piece itself, that any one film can represent anything but a fraction of the infinetely diverse experiences of blackness that black men have. But here, it looks like only one experience was of particular interest.

  21. Mike wrote:

    dna
    you said
    “My argument has nothing to do with their “blackness,” it has to do with the fact that their reaction to their own experiences of being black is the exception rather than the rule. Which makes the title of the film misleading. It would be more accurate to call it “what conservative bougie black men think.”

    My point is that there views or political stance is not the exception but the norm among black . The difference is that they chose to vocalize it, while others feel no choice but to fall in step with left, and accept all the veiws that come with it, in order to have some one pretend at least to show concern which the right has proven unwilling to do even that.

    And I stand by the statment

    “Who else is more qualified to deconstuct black man hood than other black men? Women??”

    Yeah ive read Morrison’s book and no it is far from “the best book about being a black man…”
    I reserve that title for autobiographys like Malcom X’s, as opposed to fiction like Morrison’s book. Which goes back to my point that, I can’t tell you what it’s like to be a women I can only speculate from what I here see and told. The same is true vice versa. To use Morrison’s book as some type of measuring stick on what it is to be a black male is way off. No one knows whats running through the head of black men when it comes to race, love, politics, money, religion, sex, physical image of our selves, emotions, spirituality, and the world around us but black men.
    The only thing outsiders can do is react to what they percieve to be us. That includes women.

  22. simmie wrote:

    #

    ccch wrote:

    WHATEVER!. I’m too busy fighting patriarchy!

    Posted 12 Sep 2007 at 3:21 pm ¶

    Yeah really. It’s not that I don’t care, but try your hand at sexism AND racism.

  23. ebz wrote:

    word at 22………

    And um these vids won’t play.

  24. LM wrote:

    dnA: I hear you on “rule” slipping into your previous comment due to haste — that sort of possibility had crossed my mind, and it’s good to see you say so.

    On other points: “Premise of the film” or (perceived) premise of the title? Full disclosure — I haven’t yet seen the whole thing, have seen but clips and otherwise read about it (elsewhere in addition to here. But does it really claim to be anything but what it is? Of course it’s going to represent “only a fraction…of infinitely diverse experiences” — that’s all anyone can do in a limited time. There’s nothing to stop a similar set of issues being treated in another film by people from other perspectives. “What Other Black Men Think”? “Some Other Brothers’ Opinions”? Another title altogether? Fine.

    The “Fox News phenomenon” is real. But again, if the idea of a single person or small set of people representing the views of 30 million ought to be passé, let’s act like it in spite of the Fox’s of the world by debating the points rather than casting stones across the political divide.

    Because I haven’t seen the whole thing, I’ll reserve judgment on your description of “romanticizing of segregation.” But variations of that phrase have been used to add fire to political arguments between black people for at least the few decades I’ve been listening, and I’m sorry, I hear very few “conservative blacks” say they wish for a formally divided Jim Crow society or even that the Civil Rights Movement hadn’t happened.

    And does the Dunbar of the past not deserve some glory? Of course it does. Is is worth pointing out that it “was highly colorist against darker skinned blacks”? Of course. Facts is facts. (May I assume you read the recent op-ed piece in the Washington Post by Brian Gilmore? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/31/AR2007083101469_2.html) I don’t advocate for a return to segregationist times, but I’ll be damned if someone tells me that a school full of black people (students, administrators, etc.) can’t succeed simply because they are black… and I get the distinct impression not that you believe so, but that the way you dismiss or downplay talk of “the old days” feeds into the Fox News phenomenon you despise.

    Schools today are largely segregrated, true, and the perpetuating reasons are, for the most part, as racist and pernicious than ever. But that doesn’t mean that today’s almost no-white segregated schools are the same as yesterday’s; that doesn’t mean that mostly black neighborhoods today are the same as yesterday’s. Saying so by itself doesn’t diminish any “progressive” argument.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.