Posted on 10/04/2005 1:05:37 PM PDT by 2banana
Urban Perspectives | An old-time racist chestnut makes a toxic comeback
By Acel Moore
Talk-radio host, conservative Republican, and former education secretary (under Pesident Ronald Reagan) and drug czar (under George H.W. Bush) William Bennett's recent comments about crime and abortion reinforce my belief that many in white America are still in denial about race.
In case you did not hear his comments, made last Wednesday on his syndicated radio show - appropriately called Bill Bennett's Morning in America - here's a taste:
"If you wanted to reduce crime, you could - if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down."
Bennett claims he is being taken out of context. In one way, yes, he is. In another way, there's a context his words cannot escape. And in that context - a history of violence and exclusion aimed at African Americans - his words are not only unwise and irresponsible - but they imply genocide, and that is indeed, morally reprehensible.
Why did he even bring up this old-time racist cliché? It echoes age-old race stereotypes many Americans still believe. To do that, no matter the setting, is the height of ignorance. And it hurts us all.
It's no defense to say, "Well, it's true, isn't it?" Crime would go down if we killed all white babies. It would soon be nil if we killed all babies. The babies in this fantasy are black because of the assumption that blacks are inherently more criminal than other people. And what of that chestnut? In response to Bennett's remarks, Steven D. Levitt, author of the book Freakonomics, to which Bennett alluded during his radio exchange, points out that while "on average, crime involvement in the U.S. is higher among blacks than whites," once you adjust for economic and social factors, "for most crimes a white person and a black person who grow up next door to each other with similar incomes and the same family structure would be predicted to have the same crime involvement" (see http://www.freakonomics.com/2005/09/bill-bennett-and-freakonomics.html).
Lazy, unintelligent, criminal - that's us. Persistent and pervasive, this view not only blames an entire group or race for the failures of a few. That would be idiotic enough. But it also blames blacks for the failures of a system that discriminates against them.
Believe me, I know times have changed. We no longer live in the turbulent early 1960s. There is now a sizable black middle class, which makes the racial situation more complex than it was 40 years ago, before the civil-rights movement. Our social system was then challenged by upheaval, violence, and peaceful protest. But changes came, restoring civil rights and voting rights, and encouraging affirmative action in government and the workplace. Those changes gave not only African Americans but also women and other so-called minorities more opportunities.
But here's the problem. Those of us who have taken advantage of those opportunities are now often used to denigrate those left in poverty: "If you made it, why don't the others do the same?" As if, now that a few have made it, no racial problem remains. As if those left in poverty in crime-infested neighborhoods want to be there, have not tried to rise.
I am not making excuses for the truly criminal and truly wayward. On the other hand, they are not responsible for the poor schools available to too many African American kids; our communal failure to fund public schools adequately; the racial discrimination that still exists, or the jobs lost to globalization or technology. These things have a variety of causes - yet many people blame blacks for them.
We should keep our eyes on what becomes of New Orleans. Many wonder whether we will provide jobs and training for poor citizens, black and white, of the Big Easy. Many worry that the city will be rebuilt - but for a majority-white middle class. If that happens, then it really will be Bill Bennett's morning in America.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact Acel Moore at 215-854-4533 or amoore@phillynews.com.
"If you wanted to reduce crime, you could - if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down."
Actually, Mr. Bennett's hypotheses may be very well be soon tested. Blacks abort nearly 40% of their babies/fetuses/blobs of tissues already. In some states (like New York) more Black babies/fetuses/blobs of tissues are thrown out in dumpsters than born. The Black abortion rate is more than twice that of Whites and Hispanics.
But don't worry; those pro-choice, left wing liberals are your friends. Mr. Bennett and the rest of those wacky-conservative-Reagan-pro-life-racists are your real enemies.
Regards,
2banana
Which part of "impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible" did Acel not understand?
"Bennett claims he is being taken out of context. In one way, yes, he is. In another way, there's a context his words cannot escape. And in that context - a history of violence and exclusion aimed at African Americans - his words are not only unwise and irresponsible - but they imply genocide, and that is indeed, morally reprehensible."
Well that's sort of right - Bennett implied genocide was bad but the media seems to be missing that part.
well put.
He has a point in that Bennet said "black babies" not "poor babies". He's still making a mountian out of a molehill.
Bennett's an idiot for even bringing it up.
He mentions poor schools for blacks and the failure to fund education for blacks, but how does he reconcile the fact that the multiple millions of education dollars stolen and embezzled from school systems in NY, FL, & Wash DC were also "stolen by blacks?" And these are only the ones they have caught.
I think he needs to look a little more "inward" wrt solving this problem.
Thus what Bill Bennett said was absolutely stupid, regardless of the context. He could have selected a different example and made the same point.
"Bennett implied genocide was bad but the media seems to be missing that part."
And he is an opponent of abortion of long standing.
Whereas all these pundits condemning him are highly likely to be pro-abortion.
It is a fact that abortion has been promoted by Planned Parenthood and other progressive groups as a means of achieving sexual equality for women, as a means of reducing poverty and reducing crime. It is also a fact that the rate of abortion among black women is double or greater than that of any other group.
These guys just don't like too much attention being drawn to exactly how much of our modern "reproductive rights" really are based upon the ugliness of eugenics.
"Bennett's an idiot for even bringing it up."
I don't think Bennett did bring it up.
But a principle rule for poltician debate prep - is "don't repeat a negative because that will become the sound bite."
It's even more ironic that Farrakhan is planning protests against Bennett for "racism". Very sad.
I suspect that Bennett was referring to the higher percentage of incarcerated blacks than other groups, so numerically he was making a valid point. But that's all he was doing--making a hypothetical point inside of a larger argument. Maybe if we still taught rhetoric today, his point would not have been missed. Oops. That's right. Liberals don't want their constituency to understand how to argue; they want them to react emotionally so that they can keep them under control.
Also, Bennet used to go to the inner city as drug czar and help clean out drug dealers. I suspect that he dealt heavily with black communities. Here is a man who has personally done something about crime in the inner cities and has met with the people living there. I doubt many of the liberal whiners have done so.
He didn't bring it up, you buffoon (Acel Moore). A caller brought up the point as postulated in the book Freakonomics that decreasing crime rates may be the result of the number and rate of abortions in the urban (i.e. black) community over the past generation. Mr. Bennett was taking that conjecture and extending it to its ridiculous end.
PRECISELY BENNETT'S POINT.
This is frustrating.
What system would that be 'affirmative action'?...social programs galore...to the tune of billions of tax payer (excuse me I meant 'racist's') dollars?
Talk about your old chestnuts?...the 'system that discriminates against us' is right up there with 'white folks been keepin' us down'
Some people jes caint hep but ring that ole victim dinner bell that Jesse and Rev Al be making a killin' on...
imo
Talk about the pot calling the kettle bl
er, never mind.
BENNETT DIDN'T BRINT IT UP! He was responding to a caller who brought it up.
"It's even more ironic that Farrakhan is planning protests against Bennett for 'racism'."
If he were to target the abortion mill in Arkansas that is offering its "services" for free to displaced New Orleans residents, nearly 70% of whom are black, I might consider agreeing with him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.