Liberal White’s “White Knighting?”

Integration?

Sondjata over at Garvey’s Ghost had a interesting blog post in response to an article on The Hill about Obama’s bid to diversify wealthy neighborhoods by placing affordable housing in them. I largely agreed with Sondjata’s perspective. But thought I would note how they largely omitted race from the article, despite it being the obvious elephant in that particular room.
I see this as a clear attempt at social engineering of the worst sort. Forcing unlike people to live among each other because of Utopian ideals and feel good rhetoric. But the most insidious part of this is of course is that it promotes idea that Blacks need white saviors and if Blacks aren’t somehow allowed to be in the general vicinity of thee great white man, Blacks are doomed to failure. Forced integration was and is still bad policy. It has created a racket for despicable opportunist and has created little to no actual opportunities.
 The administration could take many other routes towards the goal of increasing mobility in these communities. Promoting self determination is as many areas of life as one can, so discrimination isn’t particularity relevant, is a major one. They could attack the deficiencies with in our culture that causes us to have children in unfortunate circumstances, they could fight the underlying causes that lead us to kill each other with astonishing frequency. They could certainly do what I prefer,  and that’s too simply leave us alone to figure out our own problems. If we deserve to prosper we shall if not we’ll fail on our own ten toes. A much more honorable way and one that allows us to keep our identity.

So I’m reading this piece about “diversifying” wealthy neighborhoods where I found the following:

“We have a history of putting affordable housing in poor communities,” said Debby Goldberg, vice president at the National Fair Housing Alliance.

Maybe that’s because that’s where the people that can afford it live. Wealthy neighborhoods don’t need “affordable housing” cause they can already afford the housing that is there.

The agency is also looking to root out more subtle forms of discrimination that take shape in local government policies that unintentionally harm minority communities, known as “disparate impact.”

There’s that garbage concept again.

“This rule is not about forcing anyone to live anywhere they don’t want to,” said Margery Turner, senior vice president at the left-leaning Urban Institute. “It’s really about addressing long-standing practices that prevent people from living where they want to.” [my underlines]

You know what? I’d like to live in Alpine NJ. Maybe a house overlooking the Hudson. No. I want to have a house in the Hamptons. Oh wait. I don’t have enough money. But I WANT to live there!!! Let me get the government to make them build a house I can afford in those places.0.0 Look. News for the cry babies out there. You don’t get to live where you WANT to live. You get to live where you can afford to live. That said, let me be clear that I am for rent stabilized places. I am for building places that are affordable for people who are not making 6 figure salaries.

“In our country, decades of public policies and institutional practices have built deeply segregated and unequal neighborhoods,” Turner said.

So long as there are people who make more than other people, there will be “unequal neighborhoods”. That’s a fact of “free enterprise”. Secondly the vast majority of people want and like to live around people who are of the same racial and ethnic backgrounds as them. Why is this a problem? Those who WANT to live in highly mixed neighborhoods find and move into such neighborhoods.

Children growing up in poor communities have less of a chance of succeeding in life, because they face greater exposure to violence and crime, and less access to quality education and health facilities, Turner suggested.

Well there are a few things here. First the “violence and crime”. Who is committing all this “violence and crime”? Wouldn’t that be the other people in those communities? It certainly isn’t people coming in from the wealthy neighborhoods deciding to take a trip “slumming” and shooting and robbing the residents for fun. So why not point out that it is the very residents who are creating this violent and criminal environment? And furthermore why not realize and say that the reason that there isn’t “affordable housing” in these wealthy areas is specifically to keep those persons prone to “violence and crime” OUT of their neighborhoods so that they do not become subject to “violence and crime”.

“Segregation is clearly a problem that is blocking upward mobility for children growing up today,” she said.

Segregation has been legally dead for decades. Negroes who can afford it can live just about anywhere they want. Restrictive covenants are illegal. Why is this person talking about segregation like it’s the 1950s?”

Do You Like Living in NYC?

Dawoud_Bey_A_Man_on_the_Corner_of_Lenox_Ave__125th_St_Harlem__3282_418

Ahm in New York, but New York ain’t in me. You understand? Ahm in New York, but New York ain’t in me. What do I mean? Listen. I’m from Jacksonville, Florida. Been in New York twenty-five years. I’m a New Yorker! Yuh understand? Naw, naw, yuh don’t get me. What do they do; take Lenox Avenue. Take Seventh Avenue; take Sugar Hill! Pimps. Numbers. Cheating those poor people out a whut they got. Shooting, cutting, backbiting, all them things. Yuh see? Yuh see what Ah mean? I’m in New York, but New York ain’t in me!

– An old man in Harlem responding to Ralph Ellison’s (during his tenure with the WPA) question “Do you like living in New York City?”

Peter J. Gomes Favorite Books

gomes

Peter J. Gomes was a half Black and half Cape Verdean preacher and professor at Harvard University.  He was not a Afrotraditionalist to my knowledge (although I won’t dismiss it completely as he was known to enjoy Amos & Andy)  but he was certainly a traditionalist of a sort despite being a black fellow from Massachusetts whom was also gay.

He had great respect for the western artistic canon and in the following passages from the book Cheerful Money, he explains his “Young Fogyism”

gomesinWASPbook

Here he lists his favorite books with a very interesting back story.

px00255_9-thumb-360x538-34492

Afrofogess Zora Hurston and poet Countee Cullen

CCullen Mrs. Hurston is the mother of Afrotraditionalist thought. But everyone from progressive and Republican Blacks can learn from her always astute observations. She even has something for those inclined to follow early Malcolm X. I will note (and bold the text) that Zora like all the elders who inform Afrofogey thought, recognized the many poisons Liberal whites brought upon blacks. Here she talks about how offended white liberals were to find she did not pine for their company and had no problem with social segregation. Zora and Countee Cullen correspondence on PBS’s website. 

Dear Countee: Thanks a million for your kind letter. I am always proud to have a word of praise from you because your friendship means a great deal to me. It means so much to me because I have never known you to make an insincere move, neither for personal gain, nor for malice growing out of jealousy of anyone else. Then too, you are my favorite poet now as always since you began to write. I have always shared your approach to art. That is, you have written from within rather than to catch the eye of those who were making the loudest noise for the moment. I know that hitch-hiking on band-wagons has become the rage among Negro artists for the last ten years at least, but I have never thumbed a ride and can feel no admiration for those who travel that way. I have pointed you out on numerous occasions as one whose integrity I respected, and whose example I wished to follow. Now, as to segregation, I have no viewpoint on the subject particularly, other than a fierce desire for human justice. The rest of it is up to the individual. Personally, I have no desire for white association except where I am sought and the pleasure is mutual. That feeling grows out of my own self-respect. However blue the eye or yellow the hair, I see no glory to myself in the contact unless there is something more than the accident of race. Any other viewpoint would be giving too much value to a mere white hide. I have offended several “liberals” among the whites by saying this bluntly. I have been infuriated by having them ask me outright, or by strong implication if I am not happy over the white left-wing associating with Negroes. I always say no. Then I invariably ask why the association should give a Negro so much pleasure? Why any more pleasure than with a black “liberal”? They never fail to flare up at that which proves that they are paying for the devout worship that many Negroes give them in the cheap coin of patronage, which proves that they feel the same superiority of race that they claim to deny. Otherwise, why assume that they have done a noble deed by having contact with Negroes? Countee, I have actually had some of them to get real confidential and point out that I can be provided with a white husband by seeing things right! White wives and husbands have been provided for others, etc. I invariably point out that getting hold of white men has always been easy. I don’t need any help to do that. I only wish that I could get everything else so easily as I can get white men. I am utterly indifferent to the joy of other Negroes who feel that a marriage across the line is compensation for all things, even conscience. The South must laugh and gloat at the spectacle and say “I told you so! That is a black person’s highest dream.” If a white man or woman marries a Negro for love that is all right with me, but a Negro who considers himself or herself paid off and honored by it is a bit too much for me to take. So I shall probably never become a “liberal.” Neither shall I ever let myself be persuaded to have my mind made up for me by a political job. I mean to live and die by my own mind. If that is cowardly, then I am a coward. When you come to analyze it, Countee, some of the stuff that has passed as courage among Negro “leaders” is nauseating. Oh, yes, they are right there with the stock phrases, which the white people are used to and expect, and pay no attention to anymore. They are rather disappointed if you do not use them. But if you suggest something real just watch them back off from it. I know that the Anglo-Saxon mentality is one of violence. Violence is his religion. He has gained everything he has by it, and respects nothing else. When I suggest to our “leaders” that the white man is not going to surrender for mere words what he has fought and died for, and that if we want anything substantial we must speak with the same weapons, immediately they object that I am not practical. No, no indeed. The time is not ripe, etc. etc. Just point out that we are suffering injustices and denied our rights, as if the white people did not know that already! Why don’t I put something about lynchings in my books? As if all the world did not know about Negroes being lynched! My stand is this: either we must do something about it that the white man will understand and respect, or shut up. No whiner ever got any respect or relief. If some of us must die for human justice, then let us die. For my own part, this poor body of mine is not so precious that I would not be willing to give it up for a good cause. But my own self-respect refuses to let me go to the mourner’s bench. Our position is like a man sitting on a tack and crying that it hurts, when all he needs to do is to get up off it. A hundred Negroes killed in the streets of Washington right now could wipe out Jim Crow in the nation so far as the law is concerned, and abate it at least 60% in actuality. If any of our leaders start something like that then I will be in it body and soul. But I shall never join the cry-babies. You are right in assuming that I am indifferent to the pattern of things. I am. I have never liked stale phrases and bodyless courage. I have the nerve to walk my own way, however hard, in my search for reality, rather than climb upon the rattling wagon of wishful illusions. I suppose you have seen my denial of the statements of Douglas Gilbert of the World-Telegram. I know I made him sore. He is one of the type of “liberals” I spoke of. They are all Russian and want our help to put them in power in the U.S. but I know that we would be liquidated soon after they were in. They will have to get there the best way they can for all I care. Cheerio, good luck, and a happy encounter (with me) in the near future. Sincerely, Zora Document from Amistad Research Center, Tulane University. “Zora Neale Hurston: Jump at the Sun” is available on DVD at www.newsreel.org