Conservative Reforms To Prevent Future Fergusons

Default Comments (2)

2 thoughts on “Conservative Reforms To Prevent Future Fergusons

  1. Carl says:

    This is a great article and I thank Star Parker for this information. The reason for poverty in so many black homes is lack of high school and secondary education, lack of a role-model father in many cases, and believing the lies of the liberals who have taken the wrong approach to curing poverty. Black leaders need to heed what Star Parker says here and disseminate to the communities.

  2. cordeg says:

    good article except for one major slip — there is NO evidence, “crystal-clear” or otherwise, that poverty and crime are linked. it is in fact demonstrably the case that before the War on Poverty started poverty was much higher but crime rates much lower than today. the notion that poverty somehow causes crime is a leftist mantra that is surprising to see here (and somewhat similar to the canard that poverty causes terrorism, when the data clearly shows that men involved in terrorist activities are on average better educated and more affluent than the general populations in which they live). in fact, your placement of “poverty” as the common connection point between crime and “lack of education, lack of work, and lack of family structure” is superfluous. the lack of opportunity and any reason to be optimistic are quite likely causal in a youth’s decision to turn to crime, whether that child is living below poverty or not. this is why middle-class kids with no father, no responsibilities, and no role model for success tend to get in trouble with the law just like the poor black kid from the other side of town.

    it should be noted, by the way, that the War on Poverty’s reduction in poverty rates was seriously front-loaded and is now virtually ineffectual because of the very causes your article mentioned (e.g., out-of-wedlock births) as well as others (e.g., effectively segregating poor blacks into government housing projects where there are no role models around for children to learn how responsible independent adults are able to run their own lives).

    what Conservative Republicans really need to do is LEAD on the issue of racial division rather than ceding this issue to Democrats, because the latter are not really interested in solving the problem but rather in milking it for votes. the biggest problem is that most Republicans are so disgusted by the race-hustlers in the Democratic Party and what passed for “Black Leadership” these days that they react in an equal-and-opposite knee-jerk reaction when events like Ferguson occur, acting as if the reaction of the African American community is IRRATIONAL or without basis, rather than admitting that WE KNOW that there is plenty of historical cause for them to distrust “law enforcement” agencies and agents — precisely because WHEN DEMOCRATS RAN THESE ORGANIZATIONS THEY GOT THE SHAFT — but that EVERY INCIDENT isn’t a re-run of that era. that is, a random kid in a town like Michael Brown lived may well have been treated unfairly in the past, and might even be treated unfairly today, but (a) there is a much LOWER likelihood today, and (b) that “random kid” is highly unlikely to be a thug like Michael Brown. this recognizes two salient points: (A) the America of today is NOT the America that was run by racist Southern Democrats and their racist Northern Democratic partners (the latter of whom ran “sundown towns” at the local level and did things like institutionalize housing segregation when they created the FHA and explicitly made the rules so that assistance was withheld for anyone seeking to buy a home that would break any existing racial barrier in the neighborhood where the home was located, or create work camps for the unemployed that were racially segregated and where the white camps had picnics and organized outings in nearby towns on weekends while the black camps had armed guards, curfews, and rotten food); and (B) it is foolish to invest EVERY African American who gets shot with the full faith of the fight for universal civil rights (because you never know which ones may deserve it and which ones will turn out to be mere thugs like Michael Brown).

    in other words, Republican leaders need to make it clear that they DO stand with African Americans when they really are being screwed by local officials, etc., but that in each case the facts are important before assuming its a “civil rights” case. i know many Republicans tend to THINK that’s what they are saying in such cases, but i can tell you from years of experience that this is more often than not different from what’s actually coming out of their mouths. those who say that a kid who has a run-in with the law is probably guilty of something are merely playing the OTHER SIDE of the “race card” that says a kid who gets shot by a police officer of another color was probably a victim of racism. instead of saying, “cops have a tough job” (they do, of course) “so let’s assume it was a righteous shooting unless proven otherwise”, just say, “we don’t know what happened, but we will demand justice, and IF the cop acted out of racial bigotry rather than appropriate law enforcement criteria, then we will demand an arrest, but IF the cop was forced to shoot by the victim’s own actions, then demanding justice will require demanding the cop be cleared of any wrong-doing” this should be the stock response: no assumption of guilt, but no assumption of innocence either. demanding that you always SAY “innocent until proven guilty” is making a fetish out of a right. of course, everyone is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, but in public discourse, everyone is merely an UNKNOWN until demonstrated to be guilty OR innocent. after all, if you find a woman with a smoking gun in her hand and standing over the bodies of her dead husband and his dead mistress, even she is “innocent until proven guilty” — does it seem reasonable to think that the “innocent until proven guilty” line equally describes the two situations? doesn’t that admonition strike you as rhetorically grasping at straws in the woman’s case? can’t you see how it can sound equally hollow in the case of the young black man shot by a cop? why not demonstrate the REAL essence of the latter situation by avoiding the “legal” aspect and accentuating the moral one: (a) every case is an unknown until you actually KNOW some facts about it, (b) if the facts demonstrate guilt or suspect behavior, justice demands an arrest and trial, (c) if the fact demonstrate innocence or reasonable behavior, justice demands no charges be brought. what today’s “Black Leadership” does too often is gin the African American community into such a state that they presume that JUSTICE is denied if a cop is found not to have done anything wrong, which is simply an inane and unworkable circumstance — i.e., it concludes that whites shot by police may be guilty OR innocent, while blacks shot by police can only be innocent victims — if this is even remotely a rational statement of the facts, then the only solution is a disbanding of all police departments in areas where any part of the population is black.

Leave a Reply

Facebook Comments (2)

Disqus Comments (0)

%d bloggers like this: