Mon 19 Nov, 2007 08:51 am
November 18, 2007
Op-Ed Contributor
Forty Acres and a Gap in Wealth
By HENRY LOUIS GATES Jr.
Cambridge, Mass.
LAST week, the Pew Research Center published the astonishing finding that 37 percent of African-Americans polled felt that "blacks today can no longer be thought of as a single race" because of a widening class divide. From Frederick Douglass to the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., perhaps the most fundamental assumption in the history of the black community has been that Americans of African descent, the descendants of the slaves, either because of shared culture or shared oppression, constitute "a mighty race," as Marcus Garvey often put it.
"By a ratio of 2 to 1," the report says, "blacks say that the values of poor and middle-class blacks have grown more dissimilar over the past decade. In contrast, most blacks say that the values of blacks and whites have grown more alike."
The message here is that it is time to examine the differences between black families on either side of the divide for clues about how to address an increasingly entrenched inequality. We can't afford to wait any longer to address the causes of persistent poverty among most black families.
This class divide was predicted long ago, and nobody wanted to listen. At a conference marking the 40th anniversary of Daniel Patrick Moynihan's infamous report on the problems of the black family, I asked the conservative scholar James Q. Wilson and the liberal scholar William Julius Wilson if ours was the generation presiding over an irreversible, self-perpetuating class divide within the African-American community.
"I have to believe that this is not the case," the liberal Wilson responded with willed optimism. "Why go on with this work otherwise?" The conservative Wilson nodded. Yet, no one could imagine how to close the gap.
In 1965, when Moynihan published his report, suggesting that the out-of-wedlock birthrate and the number of families headed by single mothers, both about 24 percent, pointed to dissolution of the social fabric of the black community, black scholars and liberals dismissed it. They attacked its author as a right-wing bigot. Now we'd give just about anything to have those statistics back. Today, 69 percent of black babies are born out of wedlock, while 45 percent of black households with children are headed by women.
How did this happen? As many theories flourish as pundits - from slavery and segregation to the decline of factory jobs, crack cocaine, draconian drug laws and outsourcing. But nobody knows for sure.
I have been studying the family trees of 20 successful African-Americans, people in fields ranging from entertainment and sports (Oprah Winfrey, the track star Jackie Joyner-Kersee) to space travel and medicine (the astronaut Mae Jemison and Ben Carson, a pediatric neurosurgeon). And I've seen an astonishing pattern: 15 of the 20 descend from at least one line of former slaves who managed to obtain property by 1920 �- a time when only 25 percent of all African-American families owned property.
Ten years after slavery ended, Constantine Winfrey, Oprah's great-grandfather, bartered eight bales of cleaned cotton (4,000 pounds) that he picked on his own time for 80 acres of prime bottomland in Mississippi. (He also learned to read and write while picking all that cotton.)
Sometimes the government helped: Whoopi Goldberg's great-great-grandparents received their land through the Southern Homestead Act. "So my family got its 40 acres and a mule," she exclaimed when I showed her the deed, referring to the rumor that freed slaves would receive land that had been owned by their masters.
Well, perhaps not the mule, but 104 acres in Florida. If there is a meaningful correlation between the success of accomplished African-Americans today and their ancestors' property ownership, we can only imagine how different black-white relations would be had "40 acres and a mule" really been official government policy in the Reconstruction South.
The historical basis for the gap between the black middle class and underclass shows that ending discrimination, by itself, would not eradicate black poverty and dysfunction. We also need intervention to promulgate a middle-class ethic of success among the poor, while expanding opportunities for economic betterment.
Perhaps Margaret Thatcher, of all people, suggested a program that might help. In the 1980s, she turned 1.5 million residents of public housing projects in Britain into homeowners. It was certainly the most liberal thing Mrs. Thatcher did, and perhaps progressives should borrow a leaf from her playbook.
The telltale fact is that the biggest gap in black prosperity isn't in income, but in wealth. According to a study by the economist Edward N. Wolff, the median net worth of non-Hispanic black households in 2004 was only $11,800 �- less than 10 percent that of non-Hispanic white households, $118,300. Perhaps a bold and innovative approach to the problem of black poverty �- one floated during the Civil War but never fully put into practice �- would be to look at ways to turn tenants into homeowners. Sadly, in the wake of the subprime mortgage debacle, an enormous number of houses are being repossessed. But for the black poor, real progress may come only once they have an ownership stake in American society.
People who own property feel a sense of ownership in their future and their society. They study, save, work, strive and vote. And people trapped in a culture of tenancy do not.
The sad truth is that the civil rights movement cannot be reborn until we identify the causes of black suffering, some of them self-inflicted. Why can't black leaders organize rallies around responsible sexuality, birth within marriage, parents reading to their children and students staying in school and doing homework? Imagine Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson distributing free copies of Virginia Hamilton's collection of folktales "The People Could Fly" or Dr. Seuss, and demanding that black parents sign pledges to read to their children. What would it take to make inner-city schools havens of learning?
John Kenneth Galbraith once told me that the first step in reversing the economic inequalities that blacks face is greater voter participation, and I think he was right. Politicians will not put forth programs aimed at the problems of poor blacks while their turnout remains so low.
If the correlation between land ownership and success of African-Americans argues that the chasm between classes in the black community is partly the result of social forces set in motion by the dismal failure of 40 acres and a mule, then we must act decisively. If we do not, ours will be remembered as the generation that presided over a permanent class divide, a slow but inevitable process that began with the failure to give property to the people who had once been defined as property.
Henry Louis Gates Jr., a professor at Harvard, is the author of the forthcoming "In Search of Our Roots.
NYTimes
Re: Widening Class Divide among Black Americans
Quote:37 percent of African-Americans polled felt that "blacks today can no longer be thought of as a single race" because of a widening class divide.
social/economic class =
race now? i mean i think understand the point being made, but what an odd way to express it... no?
I think what he means is that there is a striking polarity between wealthy Blacks and poor Blacks.
Good examples can be seen in recent African-American novels by Stephen L. Carter:
The Emperor of Ocean Park
New England White
Also of social/economic significance is the use of the word ghetto today. A black or white person can be "from a ghetto" or they can be from an upper middle class non-ghetto suburb and still act "ghetto"-like.
(Of course one could be living in either a ghetto or up scale suburb and not be acting "ghetto-like").
Miller wrote:I think what he means is that there is a striking polarity between wealthy Blacks and poor Blacks.
I think this is true about any race. We are now a world divided more by economics than skin color.
Miller wrote:I think what he means is that there is a striking polarity between wealthy Blacks and poor Blacks.
Good examples can be seen in recent African-American novels by Stephen L. Carter:
The Emperor of Ocean Park
New England White
The Emperor of Ocean Park. I tried reading that book and for reasons unremembered I just couldn't get into it. It is still somewhere in the vicinity of my nightstand. I might have to give it another look.
Does anyone like sociology? Well, just about, for all ethnic groups, there has been a class divide, as a portion became upwardly mobile.
This has happened first, I believe, with WASPS, then Irish, then Jews, then Italians, and likely many other groups.
Just read Studs Lonigan by James T. Farrell, and you'll wonder who these Irish of the 1920's could be. Not like the successful Irish of today.
And in the first half of the 20th century, many Jews and Italians were fairly poor. That's not their image today.
The fact that Black Americans now have an upwardly mobile class just means they arrived, so to speak.
But, why put Black Americans in the news for this? Every group that became upwardly mobile did not identify with those members of their group that stayed part of the respective ethnic group's underclass. This is not news, I believe; it is Sociology 101, or perhaps a second year of Sociology?
But if the concern is to help the poor Black Americans that are not part of this Black upwardly mobile group, I have to wonder how the Irish, Italians and Jews managed to move out of the urban slums? The answer is likely not appreciated these days, in respect to this new concern.
The economic divide between rich and poor is growing.
If you read Miller's posts for a while, you'll understand why she/he would post this story about statistical "facts" about black people, even though it is a socioeconomic issue that could be said about any ethnic group.
snood wrote:The economic divide between rich and poor is growing.
If you read Miller's posts for a while, you'll understand why she/he would post this story about statistical "facts" about black people, even though it is a socioeconomic issue that could be said about any ethnic group.
okay...I typically remain purposely inattentive of these things in relation to online conversation, but now i'm going a'searching...
funny how just because all modern society is poisonous enough to create class divide, foofie treats it as status, or joining a club, instead of a problem.
if everyone had tb except one group, and they finally got it, would it be good or bad? of course i don't think class divide among african americans (or african africans, for that matter) is anything new.
I watched a movie that my son had rented the other day that had me thinking about this same issue, but coming to exactly the opposite conclusion (as far as class and its divisions go - nonspecific to race).
This movie depicted upwardly mobile white professionals who lived in nice houses, had good careers and were parents and who were speaking and behaving like absolute idiots. The language was absolutely atrocious- but I had to admit to myself that it was no longer shocking to hear this kind of language out of anyone's mouth in America despite what their socioeconomic circumstances might be, so it was probably a pretty accurate depiction. The level of discourse was abysmal and indication of any kind of social consciousness informing their behavior was absolutely nonexistent.
It scares me to think that this movie provides any indication of the true level of "CLASS" (and by that I mean "decorum" or "dignity") in our society- but I think it does.
I think the class divide in terms of behavior (and again, nonspecific to race) is lessening, not widening. And it seems to me that instead of anyone being uplifted- we're all allowing ourselves to be dragged down. It always seems to go that way...I guess it's easier.
* I was encouraged however, that my son found the movie as disturbingly stupid and degrading as I did. That fact gave me some hope...
snood wrote:The economic divide between rich and poor is growing.
If you read Miller's posts for a while, you'll understand why she/he would post this story about statistical "facts" about black people, even though it is a socioeconomic issue that could be said about any ethnic group.
I believe the reality of a capitalistic system is like any athletic track competition; some people get lapped, and the eventual winners often open up a wide lead ahead of the "pack" before the eventual win.
Needless to say, Black Americans were held back from equally competing for hundreds of years. However, I don't think that is corrected by dumping assets into their laps. I think they should get the best lower, middle, and high schooling this country can offer.
But, there is still a sociological thing going on, since Southern Black Americans have more cohesive families, I believe, and also the West Indian Blacks that emigrate to the Northern American cities. I thought their children are ahead in academic achievement. Class is just not money.
But, what I believe, is if one doesn't want a growing gap between rich and poor, regardless of race, then this might just be the wrong economic system to be living under. I'm not saying change the sytem; people can move to more socialistic climes!
he's got a point, if a glib one. i'd recommend the united kingdom, but it's a nice little catch-22 if you can't afford to move out of the country.
still, i think canada and cuba are going to become more popular as the red-scare myths wear off and america becomes yet-increasingly ridiculous. people can only take so much nonsense, although americans can take more of it than i can personally grasp. more's the pity.
Re: Widening Class Divide among Black Americans
Miller wrote:
LAST week, the Pew Research Center published the astonishing finding that 37 percent of African-Americans polled felt that "blacks today can no longer be thought of as a single race" because of a widening class divide.
The use of the word "race" is problematical, but the statement isn't really.
The problem is the demoKKKrat party and the divide is between those blacks still laboring under the yoke of the demoKKKrat party, and those who have escaped.
95% Of everything anybody figures to be "black" problems in America are in actuality demoKKKrat problems. Outlaw the dem party and ban it, and most of the problems blacks experience living in America would evaporate within a few years.
If Black Americans don't necessarily think of themselves as one race today, what do they think of themselves as racially?
Is this thread lost in semantics? Socio-economic class is not race for anyone. So, unless Black Americans all get DNA tested, and then can claim different percentages of genetic material from different racial groups, what is really being said of Black Americans all not subscribing to one Black race?
The result of DNA testing of Black Americans would be no different than if all Caucasians were DNA tested. Some would show only European ancestry. Some would show European ancestry with some other ancestries also. Caucasians, I believe, just have different identities based on national and/or ethnic backgrounds. And, within that hodge podge of Caucasians, are wealthier Caucasians and poorer Caucasians.
Doesn't anyone empathize with Caucasians that can't send their children to private colleges? Or buy Ozzie and Harriet type homes? Can't there be equality in concerns for the poorer amongst us?
Is the concern over Black Americans and poverty really the intractable guilt over slavery? If so, I would like this to be admitted, rather than, perhaps, couch the concern in statistics that may prove to be not too different from statistics for some states' rural whites?
i'm not sure exactly how much race has to do with dna either. i remember some argument that genetically, whites and blacks are closer than whites and asians. interesting, when race seems to be based largely on skin color, and when there are theories about asians coming over to north america to eventually become the natives of the land.
so what the hell is race, then? it seems almost completely made-up to me. perhaps it was meaningful up to a time shortly after travel by boat was possible.
Foofie wrote:
Quote:Is the concern over Black Americans and poverty really the intractable guilt over slavery? If so, I would like this to be admitted, rather than, perhaps, couch the concern in statistics that may prove to be not too different from statistics for some states' rural whites?
Maybe for some Americans it's not so much
guilt as the willingness to admit some responsibility for the laws that either they or their ancestors voted to enact that resulted in the conditions in this country that effectively put a lock on education and home or land ownership and economic parity with whites for most blacks until forty years ago.
But I think the author was speaking (in terms of race)
culturally- not
genetically. And if makes sense to me that middle class blacks probably
do feel
culturally closer and more familiar with the mores of middle class whites, than with people who share an entirely different lifestyle from theirs. I know as a middle class person, I feel more familiar and consistently in agreement with the cultural mores of the middle class black people I know than I do with the poor white people I meet (even though I myself am white).
But yes
economically- the divide is consistently enlarging among
all racial groups- but money doesn't instill class or culture in a person. That's my point- and I think culturally- the sort of divisions in behavior and language that you used to see are lessening, not widening.
*I am concerned about poor whites- they face the same challenges of poor people of any race, and in alot of ways, they've been priced out of their chance to further their education, buy a home, access decent health care and achieve economic success for themselves and their children.
And unless I vote to change that situation, I will feel guilty and/or somewhat responsible for the continued ensuing mess.
i don't think slavery is quite dead yet, and it contradicts our values around the idea of freedom.
until slavery is truly dead, and not just buried, i think we have an obligation to continue working on the problem, or at least stop talking out our asses about "freedom" as if we know anything at all about it, or as if we even stand for such a thing. if you're going to promote yourself as a bastion of any solution, you're going to have to solve problems, retire, or admit how full of crap you are. pick one!
Who me? If so, then I pick work on solutions...I'm too young to retire.
sorry aiden, i was hoping it was clear that my post was parallel to yours, not pointed at it.
I got it as soon as I pressed submit- sorry TG- yeah- alot of Americans would just like to forget the reality and the ensuing consequences...