Vision Circle

"it can be argued that these parties are like all institutions in that they seek merely to extend their existence through whatever means available...and that makes the democrats and republicans more alike than most care to admit."

Excellent quote and excellent post. I think you posed some intriguing question and ones that I have been struggling with myself in regard to true conservative ideology as it relates to the black American experience.

Theoretically, the emphasis on states rights, small government, and free market competitive capitalism works well in a vacuum, because it is based upon the rational functioning of humans in in economics. IE a perfectly substituted black worker, with the same skills and abilities as a perfectly substituted white worker would be picked a similar amount of times by a non-discriminatory employer.

However, when you add the desire to discriminate into the equation, the white becomes hired as opposed to the black which distorts the market and imposes conditions that are less than 'free', regardless if this negatively effects profit margin.

So when we take this theory of free market competitive capitalism (a primary component of conservative ideology), and its actual practice in American society in regard to race and discrimination, a dichotomoy occurs. One on hand, by conservative premise, you want a 'free market' with the market dictating price and cost, on the other hand, the market historically has proven to thwart the ability of the black american by basis of the extreme desire to discriminate in all levels of capitalism historically. So what do we as blacks do, particularly those who believe that the conservative philosophy when used correctly can be of great benefit? Do we reject capitalism in favor of socialism (Ala WEB Dubois), do we embrace Milton Friedmans free market and risk being marginalized again like in the past, or do we find a middle ground, giving government more power to restrict the free market, distort competitive capitalism, and "protect us", which would lose favor with those who believe in true conservatism? Tough call, but it is easy to see why blacks 'lean left' on market issues and embrace affirmative action and other restrictive components to the free market, even though we 'look right' on moral issues.

Quite frankly, neither party has done well in addressing this dichotomy and making it work for black people as the force us to polarize our desire within even ourselves. That is why the quote above from your post is so true and relevent. They (the parties) seem to exist only to perpetuate their existence, which unfortunately is not beneficial for us as blacks.

IE, if you have government, working in conjunction with the market, and access to education, and capital is not allowed for one group, in a free market system you severely thwart that groups ability to adequately participate.

I am not talking about slavery, which was a direct contradiction to the premise of the declaration of independence, I am talking about post slavery, and the effective redevelopment of black culture and life in America.

So now we have a two party policital system that has evolved based upon development voting block

I think you've nailed the economics, which is ironic because if you look at the increase in the standard of living of blackfolks, you'll find that it couldn't have taken place without the understanding employers have, which is that it costs them more to discriminate against qualified black employees.

i assert that the black fear of discrimination is a greater economic disincentive than the willingness and affect of corporations to actually racially discriminate.

hmmm. that could put me 10 years later in agreement with dinesh dsouza.

are you saying this with a straight face?

a greater economic disincentive to WHOM? how does this work theoretically?

i'm saying that the economic incentives to racially discriminate in hiring and firing are outweighed by productivity incentives. but i also admit that most employment is not meritocratic and that there are inefficiencies in the labor market. but you cannot blame capitalism for racial discrimination because racism isnt profitable.

economic incentives to racially discriminate against american africans are NOT outweighed by productivity incentives...corporations and small businesses can hire non-domestic labor, outsource, or otherwise develop products for less than it would cost to hire us-born blacks...in addition, the economic flipside of hiring black labor vs. incarcerating black labor must be weighed. it seems clear the nation's economic development is greatly aided by the incarceration rates of blacks...the commodification of crime, internationalization of capital, and long-standing monopolization of force suggest that american capitalism (a socio-cultural construct intimately and inexorably linked to white supremacist practice)may be blamed for incentivising "racism." were the american brand of capitalism devoid of racism, cobb, i would agree with you - and this would be a moot point because we would have resolved much of our difficulty here decades ago.

alas, this resolution has not occurred...and the linkage between the economic system deployed to serve the needs of a euro-american settler-colonial (become "white") population, the political system deployed to serve that same population (declaration of independence vs. ratification with three-fifths compromise)and the ideological system (white supremacy) is clear...on issues of race, american business is no more constrained by adam smith or david ricardo than the democrats were in yielding to the lunacy of strom thurmond and his crew...after all, if patrick henry ("Give me liberty...or give me the gatt") could be a slaveowner, there is no reason for racism to get a divorce from american capitalism (or american democracy)at this late date in the marriage.

temple3, nice post.

cobb, i'm not with you completely on economics and discrimination. even ken hamblin says it makes good economic sense. (sorry, at to throw that jab).

Of course I'm being provocative because I want numbers. This is good work for Loury or Fryer. What's at issue is whether the Africant American workforce is operating at maximum efficiency and if the things that are going to fix their underemployment are political or economic. I am not bringing into question Loury's assertion that free markets are going to overcome past discrimination - I'm just going to leave past discrimination in the past. What I am asking is whether or not the relative freedom in current markets requires African Aemricans to move to more meritocratic job bases or to increased political pressure.

What I am asking is whether or not the relative freedom in current markets requires African Aemricans to move to more meritocratic job bases or to increased political pressure.

I pick the former of course.

i have a bit of a problem with the core of your argument...the issue of course is "maximum efficiency." in america, the maximum efficiency of american african labor is relative to that of whites and other less stratified culture groups...thusly, the society has a different definition of inefficient black labor than does the black community, moreover, as i posted above, the incarceration of black labor serves a considerable economic benefit that must be captured in any american calculus of labor inefficiency vis a vis black folk.

internally, black folk have been able to "survive" through much tougher times than these - and often through so-called black markets or extra-legal transactions within the community and in service to white vice...these practices are fundamental to the survival of any marginalized group and don't pathology as much as a rational response to proscribed options...ethically, the issues may be cut and dry, but humanity is seldom constrained by ethics when matters of food are at steak.

if black america had the same incarceration and unemployment rates as the national average (excluding our current participation) that would drastically alter the face of the nation...it is arguable that this is an unacceptable consequence for white folks - hence the persistence of discrimination in real estate (steering, etc.), availability of credit, and employment ("blind" studies of same-credentialed applicants with 'ethnic' names and/or zip codes, etc.).

the need to transition to more equitable lines of work is clear - still, in many respects this is a function of education - and in the locales where black folk are congregated, the best teachers teach in the wealthiest schools - changing this would be a function of political action...the kind of political action that would pit black parents residing in relatively poorer urban, suburban and rural districts against liberal teacher's unions, democrats and liberal whites who have worked for years in schools and been rewarded with easier assignments in "higher performing schools." it is precisely this aspect of the labor discrimination issue that has paralyzed the democratic party and left them bereft of solutions to address these core problems - simply, they are not responsive. there is too much money involved...this is no different than Halliburton or Enron, but it's not sexy.

moving to meritocratic job bases can be done without intrusive political action, but given how little most teachers/administrators pay attention to the real worlds of technology and economics (after all, their focus is supposedly on pedagogy) they will not likely be the instruments that drive blacks to these competitive areas...therefore, another solution will be required...here is where the republicans come in - and not simply with charter schools, but with some $$ to drive/incubate development in areas that are meritocratic.

let's keep this one going because i think there is an opportunity to really get something going...after all, i have no doubts about black folk handle themselves in authentically competitive situations - of which education hardly qualifies.

You all are missing the key point. It is not an either or. For example, lets look at the propensity to discriminate call it (PD), an employer may have the PD but not discriminate because it doesn't maximize his utility. While another employer may discriminate because it maximizes his utility. For example, say you have a black employee who is your most productive employee and therefore increases your revenue the most. Your normal and natural predisposition as a manager is to discriminate against blacks, however you receive greater utility in making cash than in discriminating, therefore you position the black employee to make you more dough.

However, you may have another middle manager the opposite, who achieves more utility from discriminating than making the most profit possible, and therefore he positions an inferior white, takes the minor (or major) profit loss.

It is not an either or.

Secondly, discrimination negatively effects whites as well as blacks. For example, free trade ultimately benefits all involved as it maximizes market efficiencies, reduces price through competition, and increases overall productivity. Discrimination is a form of 'trade' restriction, as it segregates (IE provides trade barriers) and reduces market efficiency not just amongst corporate employer / employee relationships, but also amongst black businesses etc.

Racism and discrimination (post slavery) does not enhance the overall economy, but actually slows it, as any restriction trade.

DG...

i think we didn't discuss your point because we assume the theoretical correctness of your point. it's not the issue. i understand the theory...as does cobb. i believe our "disagreement" is about something more. in your construct, efficiency is measured strictly in terms of green backs (reduced prices) and productivity...i'm saying that this fact is irrelevant in the us because americans do not, have not, and are not likely to ever practice a form of capitalism that does not include racism...because a pure practice would require a psychic divorce from the white supremacist ethos (identity) that undergirds the society - from its creation myth all the way through to the sustaining fairy tales that pervade all national celebrations, etc...in other words, the psychological stakes are too high...

the customers "willingness to pay a premium" is at the heart of this discussion...when it comes to real estate, schools and jobs, white folks are willing to pay a premium for separation from black folks...this may be inefficient, but it is a free-market (of the mind) decision...for whites, this is rational because association/proximity/affiliation with blacks increases physical danger (increased insurance rates), undermines property values (decreased real estate revenues) and reduces the quality of life (poorer schools, underperforming hospitals - decreased life chances and life expectancy). therefore, the theoretical formulation that merely says discrimination is efficient does not appropriately consider the context of this efficiency given the customers stated, ongoing (and possible interminable) willing to pay a premium.

is the purchase of a prada bag inefficient when a plastic bag will do? maybe, but it doesn't hinder the economy. the prada bag offers other benefits that justify the price to the customer...just as it would "inappropriate" for madison avenue's wealthiest to carry a plastic bag for their cosmetics, it is inappropriate for some white folks to live next to, work with, study with black folks. and, of course i am equating a plastic bag to black folk because the mindset that affirms discrimination at this level is the same mindset that views us as chattel, always and forever.

so, dg, theoretically (as you've framed it) you are correct...the system is inefficient and harms blacks and whites (and it arguably has the greatest impact on latinos and non-white groups with less income/wealth who also do not wish to reside/live near black folk)...however, the actual financial to whites is not greater than the perceived harm or anticipated harm of an efficient, non-"race-based" discriminating system.

a final note...you are also correct that this is not an "either/or" situation. the situation, as you correctly state is "utility." my simple contention is that whites, generally speaking, gain greater utility by discriminating - because the components are more inclusive than price and productivity.

1. An economic term referring to the total satisfaction received from consuming a good or service.

i am sure we can calculate the "total satisfaction" whites derive from not living, learning or working with black folks...it can measured in many ways and is at the heart of the issue...in many respects, the behavior is completely rational.

I was behind a firewall and wanted to make exactly that point. Thanks Dell.

I would go further and suggest that what Progressives want is not a maximal utilization of the black labor force but some significant expression of black progress which is external to economic measures. It is already evident that African Americans among all in the world are already well integrated into the most powerful economy, but this is not so important to them.

The solutions to problems of incarceration and unemployment rates lie in black social values and political choice. Those 'industries' of anti-black restraint are merely reactive. I am increasingly convinced that the political incentives for segregated blacks to stay out of the mainstream are significant to the extent that those of us who desire to make money in America the same way as everyone else are considered 'sellouts'. I'd say that phenomenon is as self-evident and pervasive as is the opposing claim that anti-black racism dominates.

I would argue strongly that the education African Americans need most is that which directs them towards fiscal responsibility - something that is not taught at all in public schools. Establishing such a priority would have the 'unfortunate' consequence of letting the 'racist capitalist system' off the hook, which is a cost too high to the social capital of liberal rhetoric. It would also make Thomas Sowell rich, because he's got the formula. Funny black youth would still rather hear that tongue lashing from hiphop stars who have for two decades persisted in calling all of us 'suckers' without a fraction of their wealth, attractiveness and freedom. At bottom we all know on the economic tip, Master P is dead right, and yet we front by dissing [white] banks, accountants, tax attorneys, real estate agents, and all of the services wide open to the core of equity building for all Americans. In other words, we have the world's most fair and equitable finanical infrastructure - nowhere else on the planet will Negroes get a 30 (now 40) year mortgage, and yet Liberals and Progressives blow so much hot air spitting on the System.

It is indeed at the top of the Republican agenda to stress this economic approach to America, and it comes directly at the expense of the rhetorical bandwidth to address the social agenda of progressives and liberals. What could be more obvious - we don't give a rat's ass about some apology for slavery, we're trying to get a tax break for small business. The entire educational infrastructure thing? Forget it. It's all dominated by liberals who don't know how to make money, just spend it on their woolly ideas.

By the way, all the heat of excess greed is escaping through the roof of luxury. It is not being recycled into the engines of repression. Yes, the rich get richer under Republicanism, but it just means they are buying bigger mansions in the Hamptons. Don't hate the game, get in.

cobb...i like it and i don't see your post and antithetical to my posts - especially with respect to real estate, schools and economic development...

because the whole point about the pervasiveness of discrimination is that effort to overcome the limitations of small minds is what will win the day...master p is a perfect example...he didn't need the approval of "white" record companies to make his power move...his did his thing and folks with money eventually sought him out...

liberal opposition to this goes all the way back to those folks who subsidized the naacp and attacked booker t washington for his approach.

the mention of mortgages is key because black folks don't need to move to white neighborhoods to create property value - that approach is wrong-headed in many respects...communities can prosper and grow and increase in value through the commitment of the property owners to invest and build that community...white neighbors are not the key - the value system is the key.

about that mansion in the hamptons...

Temple3, you are actually making the same argument that I am making. Whites (as a collective) derive utility from discriminating, and are willing to pay the additional cost imposed upon them to discriminate.

Cobb, I agree with your basic premise of economic development, as that’s what I do (www.urbanceed.org), however, I don’t think you and the Republicans have the same vision for blacks in mind.

Human nature is predisposed to discriminate, but in a market system, with capitalism there are always economic consequences or ‘cost’ to discrimination (read the noble prize winner Gary Becker’s book the Economics of Discrimination). That is why efficiency can be measured in ‘green’, because the under girding principle in economics is that we pay for what we want, or pay to avoid what we don’t want. To use Temple’s example of the Prada bag, utility maximization occurs not just because of the functionality of the bag as you suggested, but also by the ‘feeling’ the bag purchaser gets, IE emotional or psychological awards. Therefore, the cost of achieving utility is Prada minus Plastic bag, with the difference being the cost of utility,

What this means is that discrimination has a cost, and that cost is theoretically measurable. There is a cost to maintaining a system of structural racism and inequities. There is a cost to hiring a less qualified white worker, over a black worker, there is a cost to move into a more expensive house to get away from “those niggers”.

But simultaneously, supply and demand dictates that at a certain point, the cost will be to great for some, and they will not pay it. For example, a business man might be willing to discriminate on a black contract that only saves him $100, but is less likely to discriminate on a contract that saves him $1000. Each white has a different ‘taste’ for discrimination, which was the point to my previous post.

Now the problem with just saying the solution is economic is the fact that economic growth is a combination of labor and capital and maintained by the umpire of the government. Whites control the government, therefore if the taste for discrimination is high, it will be demonstrated in policies. Whites control the majority of capital, and therefore for blacks to truly capitalize they have to provide labor to whites in exchange for capital, or have investments from whites to capitalize economic endeavors. If there is a sufficient level of discrimination by whites (which has been demonstrated throughout history hear) that says, even if black labor is cheaper, and better, and even if the potential black business is better and will give a greater return, we are will to pay the cost of not getting this return to ‘discriminate’ then blacks will still have a difficult and much slower time of truly being developed ‘economically’. It doesn’t mean that it can’t be done, but it will be resisted and it will be slowed by whites who don’t want competition and blacks who don’t understand.

That is why social programs that force certain wealth reallocations are still important, yet they are rejected by Republicans. Reparations are rejected by Republicans and Democrats. That is why fighting racism is still important. The responsibility of the government to protect the minority is grossly overlooked by the Republicans in favor of individual responsibility without context. Trust me, I am anti-democratic, but the Republicans don’t offer the solution either. And Thomas Sowell is an ass.

Whites control the majority of capital, and therefore for blacks to truly capitalize they have to provide labor to whites in exchange for capital, or have investments from whites to capitalize economic endeavors.

Why must we think this way? Assume that white identity politics and economics{conservatism} and the underlying psychological utility of the same are off the table and out of the picture altogether. What then?

A month ago I proposed the following here in the comments, and over at P6. - seems to me that it bears repeating...,

1. Black scientists and technologists must assume the mantle of cultural leadership across the diaspora - with full support from black business, political, and celebrity cohorts.

2. We must operate with complete autonomy and accept no editorial or creative interference - which means we have to be completely self-sufficient.

3. In precisely the same unfettered way we repurposed two turntables and a microphone - and in the process introduced open source culture into the noosphere - we must repurpose vastnesses of infrastructure and our dependence on the same.

4. Black youth culture is the most powerful and influential force in world-wide popular culture -it is our privilege and duty to aid, abet, and guide that divine wind into its full modal potential as the fountainhead of an alternative social matrix of substantive competitive cooperation.

A generation gap and the failure by the older generation(s) of black leadership to capitalize and brand *black* and in the process make jobs for black youth in black communities is what sets this dog to constantly chasing its rhetorical tail.

We know that no fields save possibly sports and entertainment are more meritocratic than technology and the sciences. Combine this with the observation that nothing is more obviously valuable to us in the global market at this moment in time than our uber-influence on global popular culture and we dominate the other meritocratic fields we've endeavored like no other group has ever done. Given the ways, means, and riches at our disposal, and only these;

What's at issue is whether the African American workforce is operating at maximum efficiency and if the things that are going to fix their underemployment are political or economic.

It seems to me that the primary barrier to fixing our underemployment is psychological and must be rememdied within the confines of our own interpersonal dynamic. Again, I place my solution approach under the self-disciplining constraint that white identity politics and economics{conservatism} and the underlying psychological utility of the same are off the table and out of the picture altogether. Shift the paradigm and reformulate as if black interests, ways, and means - are all that matter. What is the utility of blackness short of such a paradigm shifting application?

POSTED ON BEHALF OF BOWEN:

I will post this later. but I think it would extremely useful to
compare the economic achievement of African Americans to other Africans, or Latin Americans in their own countires.

The cost of discrimination may be artificially lowered by white
control, but how is it that the Black Enterprise 100 compares
favorably to businesses in other nations? You suggest that whites would boycott black products, and I don't buy it. (heh)

What is it that any non-white producer has in their favor that blacks don't have here domestically? In other words, could African Americans run Nigeria?

The implications to the answers to these questions suggest as I
believe that only to the extent that blacks here are mere players in a consumer economy are they subject to the whims of racism, but that once they become producers, the cost of racial hatred is already defeated by the benefit of global trade. Everything blacks do to keep themselves as consumers puts them in the enviable position of America's high per capita. To exceed that is skill-based and capitalcbased, and it obliterates what is legal bigotry.

I say that no amount of politics or militancy will make up that skill and capital gap.

DG posted some statistics on his site about the extent to which american blacks do not patronize black-owned businesses...the implications are tremendous...this was also a cornerstone of amon wilson's last book, "blueprint for black power". this is the critical factor and it results principally from our psychological alienation from one another...of course, that goes both ways and has been recounted millions of times, but it is fundamental...black entrepreneurs serving the black community in the right areas have done tremendously well for themselves and can be insulated from the fluctuations of goodwill among white folk...obviously simmons, master p and puff are examples.
the internal black boycott is of greater consequence than any white boycott...and the greatest consequence of the black boycott of black businesses is that the flood gates have been opened for non-blacks to sell and profit in communities like harlem, bed-stuy, etc. i don't know how much it matters that whites would boycott black firms - i am sure they would - unless it was in an area where black participation might be logically expected and might be lightly contested (relatively speaking). i don't see too many white folks buying airplanes from black folks - but if you built the best damn plane, they'd be crazy not to because someone else would - japanese, saudi, nigerians, venezuelans, taiwanese, etc.

and of course, the black boycott on black businesses is a recent phenomenon...it was not always the case when black folks were building the greenwood district in tulsa or even towns like boley and langston in oklahoma or nicodemus in kansas...so there is more to this than alienation - there were/are real live events/practices and policies that have led to this...schools play a critical role in alienating black folks from one another by writing us out of the story of the world...

i don't think the point is whether or not african americans can run nigeria...nigerians need to run nigeria, but a critical mass of american blacks has not demonstrated a desire to do any such thing...so capacity vs. desire must be weighed.

with respect to the BE100, look at the industries...if the profile of any nation looks like that, the people are starving, naked and dirt poor...and this may describe many nations with majority black populations, but this is as much the result of bayonnet/gunboat/mercenary diplomacy over the past few centuries as it is a result of anything else...the same situations do not obtain in nations like India, South Korea or Malaysia...

i think we are agreed that the bigotry/discrimination of white folks is secondary in most respects to resolving the two critical issues: rebuilding black economic connections with other blacks AND providing excellent products and services to be consumed by whomever is willing to pay your price...

at the end of the day (Isiah Thomas' favorite line - 15 times per news conference, garUNteeed)these two issues should be at the front of the discussion...

I believe we should first recognize the Republican Party as a private political institution and as such, functions to advocate the nation's wealth flows toward a distinct minority of people best identified as the industrial class. The GOP aims to extend its current institutional advantage by adding African-Americans. What no one here seems to acknowledge is 'Black people' collectively represent a political institution in itself -- albeit less formal -- that has an unique (if not vague) body politic with its own agenda. I don't think we need to bicker whether or not African-Americans as a class are systemically disenfranchised. We are. The industrial class isn't. Ergo, the recruiting challenges for Republicans. What is their plan for integrating Blacks on a large scale into the industrial class? Is the rhetoric of 'free market' theory and aesthetic conservatism sufficient for triggering Black socioeconomic parity? Are the goals of the industrial class reconcilable with those of 'Black' identity?

The current GOP appeal to Af-Ams suggests we assimilate. I don't see that as proper; neither is it respectful of the realities of Blacks as a class. The posture is also ahistoric and reveals a certain ignorance of the Black body politic. In order to be successful, GOP leaders will need to integrate themselves into Black communities at the grass-roots level, forging equity relationships between the current industrial class and Af-Am entrepreneurs/professionals.

NAACP

NOI

CORE

SCLC

Urban League

etc, etc, etc..., this list could go on as long as you like - as big as EB's list of positive groups, and at the end of the day, you will find nary an iota of economic opportunity for our young people. The generation gap separating the traditional so-called leadership from the current highly alienated generation - in which resides our enormous undirected future force - is that the grey hairs built no economic foundations for intergenerational continuity. With no products, no jobs, and no economic opportunity, we're left peddling values or what my mother and grandmother derisively termed, breath and britches!

Even though the church is nowhere more ubiquitous than in the black community, the black church's pastoral vision does not speak to the experience of intense alienation of the colonized in the urban metropolitan centers in the country. Its images, symbols, and metaphors do not emanate from a dispassionate understanding of the cold political logic of market society.

Clergy and church volunteers had learned from the local drug kingpins whom they were struggling to save from addiction, violence, jail, death--and damnation - why exactly all the so-called black leadership has failed. Reverend Eugene F. Rivers, III, the Pentecostal minister of the Azusa Christian Community church who spearheaded the effort and whose own humble inner-city row house was twice sprayed with bullets, recalls one searing insight: "Nearing exhaustion, we asked this one major local dealer, ‘Man, why did we lose you? Why are we losing other kids now?' He stares us in the eye and says, ‘I'm there, you're not. When the kids go to school, I'm there, you're not. When the boy goes for a loaf of bread or wants a pair of sneakers or just somebody older to talk to or feel safe and strong around, I'm there, you're not. I'm there, you're not; I win, you lose.'"

These GOP funded wretches get it, or at least they're paying lip service to it. The question is whether or not those of us who believe in the utility of blackness will actually shoulder the responsibilities incumbent upon us.

i think the white supremacy component as a constant part of american capitalism varies so widely that it is almost useless. we'd have to get back to (and correct?) massey and denton on that, but there is no way that the primary cost of even real-estate can be laid at the feet of 'distance from blacks'. i simply offer the case of realestate in powder springs georgia vs that in irvine, ca. take the median cost of a house vs proximity to population centers as a benchmark on the economic cost of racism and you will see where huge dislocations.

when i lived in cobb county georgia, the home district of newt gingrich in the northwest part of the city - the very part of the city where the locals banned the extension of the subway for racist reasons, the median housing price was somewhere around 175k. in the legendarily racist forsyth county georgia, the prices were even lower, and the real estate agents were smiling in my face. you compare that to houses in compton california, they're about double that - about 350k.

MIB,

Republicans will integrate a minority of blackfolks. It will be the blackfolks who are ready to be in the industrial class, plain and simple. That's integration. Just like white colleges were integrated starting with James Farmer. The only blacks who got to attend white universities were those who were ready - the overwhelming majority of blacks did not and do not attend college.

What you say about black politics, I think is anachronistic, because the state of the African American economy is very different than it was at the advent of black nationalism.

(for JLY) I see where you're coming from.

I will say, however, that the appraised value of homes is distinct in some respects from race - and not, therefore, relevant to my main contention...in other words, a highly successful, entrepreneurial community like Jamaica Estates in Queens, New York (with the highest income/wealth index of any US black community) will have property values that exceed working class or middle class white communities in many instances...but to compare Jamaica Estates with Scarsdale (NY's version of Beverly Hills) or Darien, Connecticut is simply foolish...there is absolutely no comparison. There are a number of instances where communities in which blacks live have value that supercedes the presence of black folk - Harlem is in Manhattan...it has the BEST housing stock in NYC...it has/had a high number of vacant lots...it has a high number of renters...that makes it uniquely attractive among New York communities for investors and home owners.

I am not familiar with real estate in georgia or california...i know forsyth county is "the sticks"...i don't exactly know where Compton is in relation to the other areas of LA...i gladly defer...one of the paradoxes, if you will, of this was Les' post re: tensions in Detroit in a white working class neighborhood and the recent 'gentrification' of Harlem...white folks are moving in in droves...black folks still live there...the real estate is expensive - and there is a bit of "pioneering" element to it all...hell, even the actress Marsha Gay Harden bought a brownstone in Harlem.

Conversely, I could see how this is not a paradox if we take this line: the tensions among working class white folk to new black neighbors is based on perceived connections between class and race - not simply "racism." In addition, there is the notion that if one black family moves in, many others will follow - fueling an exodus of wealthier whites, reducing property values. The situations in Harlem, Bed-Stuy and other locales would be more akin to the settlement of valuable colonies around the world...the value of the real estate, not unlike a sugar or cotton producing colony is well established - and these home-owners are actually following the police, just as settlers followed mercenaries/pirates/explorers... - Harlem and Bed-Stuy are significantly safer than they were 15 years ago. Absent the threat of violence, whites can make a "value-based decision" to purchase real estate amid black folk. I guess it's akin to living in majority black southern regions like South Carolina or Louisiana during the 1700's. The value proposition is so evident that the benefit of growing tobacco in a majority white colony with mature businesses like Virginia or Maryland is reduced...kind of like the profit margin of moving to Harlem vs. buying in mature white enclaves like Sutton Place or Greenwich Village. We know how the colonists spent their money...it would be interesting to see if white Harlemites or Comptonians spend their money with black businesses in the community - or if they retreat to familiar territory to make purchases of necessity, comfort and splendor.

Of course, none of us know how many politically conservative white folks are moving to Harlem...it is likely the numbers

range in the single digits...thus the new entrants are a mix of moderates/liberals - but then there are speculators and investors seeking to turn a profit who come in all political stripes. And this doesn't matter because the lesson of New York City is simply this...

David Dinkins laid the foundation for this economic development through his tactics to aggressively deal with crime on the street level...but Dinkins refused to get in the streets, talk to folks and get the votes he needed to remain in office...he lost to Rudy Giuliani because the Governor Mario Cuomo placed a referendum for succession (of mostly white/home-owning Staten Island - 5th NYC borough) on the ballot...the voter turnout from Staten Island was tremendous...Dinkins lost a close election and it marked the first time that NYC elected a Republican mayor - this also came on the heels of the Orthodox Jewish ambulance driver killing Gavin Cato, a young black child, during a frantic race through Brooklyn...the aftermath was the death of a Hasidic student Yankel Rosenbaum - the driver bounced to Israel escaping prosecution and extradition...Dinkins lost the election...Guiliani pimped the law and order profile and passed the baton to Michael Bloomberg...

Harlem has always had the best housing stock in New York City...the Astors built in Harlem early during the 20th century...most of the land owners are not black and in many of the zip codes, as few as 14% of the residents own their homes...so this is strongly analogous to a colonial situation...recall that in apartheid South Africa, blacks occupied only 13% of the arable land.

I think a lot of the ideas expressed here in favor of black economic empowerment make the mistake of suggesting that this wealth is something that stays put in some way. It is this same erroneous assumption that characterizes 'white' wealth as somehow static. The wealth of America is very fluid and it changes hands very often. The fact that it remains in 'white' hands bolsters the argument that white supremacy plays a larger hand in the American economy than it actually does. I think that case is overstated by at least one order of magnitude.

Comparing Jamaica Estates with Scarsdale is just what I mean. You can't, because Scarsdale isn't white, it's American. You can't compare anyplace on the planet to Scarsdale favorably because Scarsdale is built and maintained based on the health of the American economy, and it is only because people at the top of the American heap live there that it is so wealthy. So you have to examine what it is that America does that makes it more wealthy than North Korea, where blackfolks couldn't expect jack. Don't compare emergent blackfolks to whitefolks at the top of the American heap, that's ridiculously unfair and useless. The same goes the other way. Immigrants who drive a taxi in Nigeria never get a mortgage. They come here with the exact same primary skill and a huge deficit in language skills and their standard of living triples overnight. But you can't compare them to blacks with three generations of college education.

Economic development is not going to come to the whole of African America in the same way. There can be no master plan, only broad prescriptions which apply to all Americans. The first step, which ought to be obvious, is to step away from the ghetto. It is by definition outside of the economic mainstream. Once you arrive in the economic mainstream, it becomes clear that the Republican party is the party of upward mobility.

i can't speak for other posters, but for me, i don't assume wealth to be static...at the level of the individual, it is clearly dynamic - but the point remains, at the level of the group, it is not as dynamic as it would be absent the shared practice of 'white supremacy.' in other words, the concentration of "white" wealth is likely to be statistically significant and suggestive of something other than chance. there is a degree of intent here, especially as it relates to non-meritocratic areas of work - like finance, real estate, media, law, academia, etc. and with that being said, you may still be correct in suggesting the relevance is overstated...and i think that's been my point all along - that the resolution of these issues is really not about white folks at all.

with respect to the two neighborhoods - the wealth in scarsdale is not merely a function of it being in the united states. yonkers and mount vernon and new rochelle are spitting distance from scarsdale, but have a different profile. a little more than a decade ago, the south bronx had poverty, infant mortality, and TB infection rates that rivaled the poorest caribbean nations...there are many places where there is extreme poverty in the us that is comparable to poverty in "3rdWorld" nations...in point of fact, scarsdale can be compared to enclaves in places all around the world - if we were to look at England, France, Germany, Italy, Argentina, South Africa, Australia, Taiwan, Japan or Dubai we could find tons of places that compare favorably with scarsdale. what do these places have in common...quite a bit and it's larger than simply 'the American economy.' maybe we should ask, 'what is it that america does that is replicated in these other seats of wealth, where black folks still wouldn't expect jack?'

scarsdale is 84% "white." i suppose you could argue its 100% american, but then, so is Jamaica Estates. the wealth in scarsdale is not contingent on the health of the american economy...this type of wealth doesn't fluctuate to the degree that lifestyles change with the market...strong dollar, weak dollar - doesn't matter...tight money, loose money - doesn't matter...high interest rates, low interest rates - doesn't matter...trade surplus, trade deficit - doesn't matter...democrat in white house, republican in white house - services will be delivered on time and as promised...

just as you stated that wealth is dynamic, so too are the residents of this neighborhood. 13% are asian (mostly japanese and chinese, with increasing numbers of indians)...regardless of whether there is another internet BOOM or BUST, scarsdale will be scarsdale...i suppose i need to hear more from you about why this comparison is faulty...the black folk in jamaica estates are in the same professions as many of the folks in scarsdale - they include elected officials, multi-generational professionals in the areas of law, medicine, science, finance and professional sports - in addition, there are a high number of entrepreneurs and the home ownership levels are significantly higher than the city average - which is of note because of the different housing stock and residential patterns between these two communities - (that may be the most meaningful distinction between the two)...it might be better to compare some of the black residential suburbs in new jersey where there are also collectives of black millionaires residing in suburban/rural settings.

also...cobb wrote:
"The first step, which ought to be obvious, is to step away from the ghetto. It is by definition outside of the economic mainstream. Once you arrive in the economic mainstream, it becomes clear that the Republican party is the party of upward mobility."

- this is not the step taken by many immigrant groups who arrive in america...they flock to the ghettos, open businesses where rents are cheap and disposable incomes are high enough to offer a living wage, reinvestment in their businesses, the equity for land ownership and pay for the education of their children...jews bought real estate in harlem and brooklyn; the chinese opened stores (food/laundry/groceries, etc.); the koreans opened stores (groceries, apparel, etc.); in michigan, the arabs opened stores (liquor, groceries, film/video); indians and pakistanis opened stores...caribbean and african blacks have opened stores in the ghetto as well...the only group to do so with limited success has been the group with primary residence in these ghettos. so your prescription doesn't flow with the money or the history of american culture groups seeking to establish a toe-hold in this country...many of them start in the hood - get the $$ to pay for their children to go to fabulous learning institutions; then they are replaced by the next wave.

jews bought real estate in harlem and brooklyn; the chinese opened stores (food/laundry/groceries, etc.); the koreans opened stores (groceries, apparel, etc.); in michigan, the arabs opened stores (liquor, groceries, film/video); indians and pakistanis opened stores...caribbean and african blacks have opened stores in the ghetto as well...the only group to do so with limited success has been the group with primary residence in these ghettos. so your prescription doesn't flow with the money or the history of american culture groups seeking to establish a toe-hold in this country...

1. Tell me that the New Appeal is anything other than the old appeal warmed over..,

2. Posit a guess at what is required to cure the neurobiological sickness coloring perceptions to the extent that that other man's ice seems perennially colder to the afflicted?

and of course, the black boycott on black businesses is a recent phenomenon...it was not always the case when black folks were building the greenwood district in tulsa or even towns like boley and langston in oklahoma or nicodemus in kansas...so there is more to this than alienation - there were/are real live events/practices and policies that have led to this...schools play a critical role in alienating black folks from one another by writing us out of the story of the world...

Even more crucial than our logical treatment in public schools I suspect, is the fact that these autonomous black communities flourished prior to the psychological proliferation of white sensation transference via mass media. No Pavlovian bombardment of the suggestible.

Formerly, we educated our own children. Black teachers intimately familiar with the homelearned nuances of governing and motivating black youth led to culturally stabilized higher levels of academic achievement.

Brown v. Board of education and the Fair Housing Act {collectively the white ice is colder unintended consequences of the CRM} must be understood in retrospect as categorically pernicious to the health and vitality of black interpersonal communion.

Busing conditioned us to dispersion and relative isolation. White female pedagogy conditioned the susceptible to assimilation and appeasement as substitutes for achievement. Post hoc rationalizations of the damage done to blackness by the integration core wars sound too much like Stockholm syndrome to me.

Listen to Dr. Oba T'Shaka's deft analysis of what has happened to us...,

all of those ethnic groups were uniquely limited in their choices of business in ways blacks are not. the specific paths will not be replicated. you'll never have chinese, at the end of the civil rights movement suddenly becoming mayors of major american cities. that only happened with blacks. i say it is because america's culture has been highly influenced by black culture, that blacks have and will continue to be more influential, and retain far greater social capital than the other groups. yet i wonder if that benefit doesn't come directly at the expense of economic growth.

african american career choices do come from a calculation of what we believe we can succeed in. surely role models count. i would suggest very strongly again, that our outlook, our political choices and the black populist negativity towards disaggregation into non-black areas is a huge liability.

--
i should have said that the huge difference I was speaking of with regard to Scarsdale was accumulated wealth. That's much of the bottom line. I don't care what kind of doctor you are - doctors don't get mansions. Scarsdale remains Scarsdale because there is a reasonable presumption that in America people will plunk down that kind of money, much of it from the sale of assets - not from professional salaries. Those housing values could not stay high unless there was a healthy market. And America has that kind of engine of wealth creation such that there can always be a sizeable market for multi-million dollar mansions. A color bar degrades that.

The comparision is wealth vs wealth. I'm saying don't compare black to white when you know some of the whites will have inherited not only cash and real-estate but entire businesses. We keep acting like everybody with a college degree is going to be equal and not paying enough attention to the difference between a good investor and a poor one.

I'll close with this. A colleague of mine bought a house 7 years ago. Its value has more than doubled. He took out a second mortgage and then put the money into the stock market. He plays the market all the time and thinks nothing of plunking down 4 or 5 thousand on a speculative call. He has established a relationship with his broker such that he can make the kind of investments the average joe cannot, simply based upon his prior success. He has essentially turned his portfolio into a hedge fund, not merely a mix of stocks and bonds for purchase in expectation that they'll rise, but combinations of options contracts that require daily observation.

If you are a broker on Wall Street, you don't say 'companies' you say 'names'. There is a great deal of opacity in the operation of publically traded companies. You can trade stocks and options and make piles of money without even knowing how many employees work for a company - much less have any notion of how white supremacy does or does not operate through it.

My point is that I believe you will be hard pressed to demonstrate institutional racism operates at the high levels of American banking and finance which are internationally wide open. China may not be able to buy Unocal, but that is the extraordinary exception. The rule is that everything is for sale.

--
I believe that if I am not working to learn what my colleague does in the options market and instead spending my political energy talking about trying to raise taxes for elementary school education, i am destined to be a net drag on the black economy. I am saying that black aggregation in lower middle class politics is a self-fulfilling prophesy - no wonder they distrust Republicans and Scarsdale.

If the aim of black nationalism is to create a singularity of brotherhood and cohesion without regard to net economic increase then its ends will be to create a very large ghetto. Recycling black dollars will not increase black wealth. African Americans must, one fraction at a time as can assimilate the lessons of wealth creation, take advantage of the unique economic opportunities America offers. But hey, if they don't they don't. I ain't mad at ya.

My point is that I believe you will be hard pressed to demonstrate institutional racism operates at the high levels of American banking and finance which are internationally wide open.

While your capitalist aim is clear Mike, and I have no objection to the short term tactical use of tricknology to achieve definite aims, surely you're not suggesting that the informal social networks through which insider-trading data transit are not fundamentally colored by racism?

BTW - from a thermodynamic perspective, what you've called wealth *creation* looks a heck of a lot more like opportunistic parasitization as regards the actual ingenuity, creation, proliferation and utilization of tangible product. I believe T'Shaka said in part that this corporatist intrusion on black culture must be recognized and resisted.

The inherent and unsustainable parasitism of the capitalism exemplified by American culture is a characteristic that I personally recommend we eschew in our longterm strategic formulation and implementation of sustainable and meritocratic afrofuturist praxis.

If the aim of black nationalism is to create a singularity of brotherhood and cohesion without regard to net economic increase then its ends will be to create a very large ghetto. Recycling black dollars will not increase black wealth.

Sho's, you right!!!!

The singular aim of black nationalism must be black product creation and distribution via alternative channels - by any means necessary! Harnessing cultural production and repurposing the Internet for black digital commerce is a core means by which a significant revenue stream can be engendered within the black community, and, a critical generation gap can be bridged. We have the technology to repurpose, direct, and profit handsomely from the indomitable power of our contagious youth culture. The kwestin reduces to one of whether we have the fortitude to make it so.

Listen to what Dead Prez had to say about the centralized control of what is being passed off as black cultural production This is nothing that Norman Kelley didn't write about years ago, but there's nothing standing between us and curing this socio-economic pathology except air and effort.

These respective aims and efforts are by no means mutually exclusive. If we network as diligently for the longterm objective of controlling the political economy of our cultural production as we do to tap into white insider-trading nets, then we may genuinely clock some afrofuturist gains.

cobb:

"all of those ethnic groups were uniquely limited in their choices of business in ways blacks are not. the specific paths will not be replicated. you'll never have chinese, at the end of the civil rights movement suddenly becoming mayors of major american cities. that only happened with blacks. i say it is because america's culture has been highly influenced by black culture, that blacks have and will continue to be more influential, and retain far greater social capital than the other groups. yet i wonder if that benefit doesn't come directly at the expense of economic growth."

in what respect were these groups uniquely limited?...what they shared was 1) a degree of ostracism from the larger society, 2) adequate social and fiscal capital to emigrate and arrive with the capacity to start a business, 3) basic knowledge that businesses in ghettos earn money because of low start-up costs and high profit margins, and 4)basic knowledge that their personal/family standard of living would increase following this path, 5) faith that the degree of ostracism would decrease as they assimilated the culture and values of americans - while at the same time reflecting the profile of "normal american families."

cnu breaks down why black folks have not followed this path - but there ain't nothing wrong with the green in the ghetto - ask starbucks and dunkin donuts and bed,bath&beyond, and kfc and mcdonalds and all these other folks who have never had to close a franchise in the hood due to inadequate revenue streams...

moreover, it's hard for me to intuitively accept an argument based on the notion that a community which presently spends 6 cents on every dollar with one another would not be greatly aided by practices that might lead to spending as much as 35 cents on the dollar or more...the ability to hire young people alone would reap tremendous benefits...i find this notion of circulating black dollars to be analogous to the federalist system of the united states - the us could not have become the economic titan that it is without the benefits of interstate commerce...no european nation could compete against the us because of the many complications of trade on that continent - the same limitations (and more) have restricted africa's ability to compete...interstate commerce allows for tremendous horizontal integration that has allowed us manufacturers, service providers and others to build viable businesses on an enormous scale - before entering into international competition. imagine if us firms immediately began trading in international markets prior to using the benefits of the federalist system to test products; improve design, marketing and packaging; reduce costs, etc. in many instances, they would have been smoked (thing back to the early 1800's and competing with England and France). in many respects, this is where black firms are in terms of their relative capitalization, human capital resources and operational efficiency...for those to whom this does not apply, they should be playing (and generally are) a different game.

as for the black mayors...i would suggest the following...you won't have a slew of chinese mayors because the crm/bpm were unique circumstances in which the american president, his financiers and their governors found themselves surrounded by smoldering cities with large black electorates...what cities with large chinese electorates will be burning any time soon? none...what indian cities will be burning anytime soon with large indian electorates? none. the same, however, cannot necessarily be said of latinos - and of course, Fernando Ferrer would be mayor of NYC were it not for the 9/11 bump that bloomberg received - and LA has a latino mayor...and Miami, Chicago, San Antonio, and Phoenix may all follow suit for decades...the crm/bpm - combined with the vietnam war amounted to a unique confluence of interests between liberal collectives like unions (who were as distanced from blacks as could be in the 40's and 50's), students, etc...

the blacks who became mayors were not political scientists or economists - nor were many of them lawyers or bankers...many were activists diring the crm - saints and sinners...they each inherited declining cities during the mature stage of america's urban development - a full 70 years after the burgeoning growth period of cities...many of these mayors were religious leaders and descendants of political hacks who did dirty work for party bosses or served as moderators for growing black dissatisfaction with the political status quo......so their campaigns - often against a conservative/business candidate - were won before the first primary.

just as the spectre of crm/bpm violence led to the election of black mayors (hot hot hot...newark, watts, detroit, chicago, new york, gary, cleveland), the visage of calm has led to increased investment and dislocations of black businesses/residents/etc. in those same cities...
to the extent that other groups can forge an electoral majority (as latinos have) or the spectre of violence (as Muslins have - intentionally or not), they will have an opportunity to influence policy...to the extent that this does not occur, assimilation is the only option - as is demonstrated by the cases of the jews, irish and italians - especially in nyc...the cases of fiorello laguardia, ed koch and rudy giuliani are particularly instructive in this regard.

the election of black mayors in the 70's to america's declining cities like detroit, cleveland, gary, is hardly conducive to suggesting the limited economic utility of building in black communities...i would argue it affirms the opposite tack - just as i mentioned the singular importance of david dinkins in creating a climate that led to gentrification in harlem...maynard jackson's legacy in atlanta and the construction of hartsfield airport by a black firm...harldy suggestive of the limited value of those ghettos that placed men like dinkins and jackson in office...hardly suggestive of the limited value to those firms who were prepared to participate in the industrial class and make world-class products and deliver world-class services...these are complimentary pieces of the puzzle...love and marriage...horse and carriage...this i tell you brother, you can't have one without the other.

still not feeling you on the scarsdale thing...

Let me ask a question: what if the goods and services that our community provides are of lower quality than the goods and services that are available in the general market? How do we improve those goods and services? While I agree that we should keep capital in our community as much as possible, I think it is unfair to both the consumer and the business to patronize any businesses that do not offer competitive goods and services; we'd just be putting our community back in the position that we're already in, with people getting compensated regardless of whether they are exhibiting practices that will enable them to survive in a capitalist society.

I'm working on a project (i'm a consultant) where three brothers and a sister have been let go because they weren't performing - leaving work early, calling in sick all the time, talking on the phone at work, surfing the Internet during working hours. And the white people weren't comfortable giving them constructive face-to-face feedback because they were didn't want it to seem as if they were focusing on the African Americans on the project. Unfortunately, informal counseling by myself and another brother on the project didn't help much. If you were a buyer of these individuals services, would you let them continue to work for you? If so, wouldn't you be implicitly sanctioning their behavior?

I think the harsh reality is that people (and businesses) have to be allowed to be allowed to fail in order to learn and grow from their mistakes. I'm not saying that we turn our back on anyone...I just think that it is wrong to reward a person or business for lower-than-average services.

Comments?

A> If the good and services produced in our community are of lower quality, they will command a lower price. Given our collective situation, it's not the worst thing if the goods and services are of a lower quality, but the quality must be adequate to induce disloyalty among buyers based on price. Hyundai's are not Toyota's or Honda's, but they have emerged as a viable alternative, based on price. Inferior, yes...acceptably inferior...yes...cheaper...yes...beneficial to korea...yes. To the extent we are able to do this, we can secure the capital needed to reinvest in those enterprises, gradually improve quality and create a higher level of customer loyalty. Of course, when we are talking about lower-cost items (groceries, electronics and appliances [reselling, usually], etc.) factors like convenience and status are on the table. the choice before us should not be whether or not to shop at the large convenient supermarket vs. the small, community-based bodega that has to charge more because of their scale...at this juncture, we have to pursue ownership of the supermarket and then provide a level of service that engenders the loyalty of the customer.

Please don't take this as an advocacy position for mediocrity, hardly. I am trying to look at this through an economic lens. The areas where black folk could reap considerable internal benefits by recirculating dollars also happen to be areas where mistakes can have SERIOUS consequences...mechanic, doctor, contractor, realtor, stock broker, lawyer, day care providers, etc. There are other places where we can recirculate dollars in ways where the consequences are not so dire. Real estate development, insurance, groceries (food collectives), investment clubs, car dealerships, cultural institutions (archives, etc.) and schools offer opportunities to develop commercially viable vehicles to build wealth and create value...each of these areas would require a separate post, but there is a great deal of value here contingent on not much more than our ability to 1) get the job done, 2) work together, 3) subordinate desire to task.

B> Goods and services should be improved by investing time, money and related resources. The answers can take many forms. Where there is sufficient capital, black-owned businesses can seed a tech start-up or buy an interest in a firm making great products - that may or may not be black-owned. Employing expertise and applying rigorous standards is another way to improve quality - there are millions of ways to do this, and that is best left to the team closest to the action. The other fundamental way to improve is to get be in the market of ideas/products/services - always comparing, buying, selling, discussing, and developing...this can't be done in isolation.

With respect to the question of fairness, the quality of goods and services is beside the point. Black folk in Harlem, prior to the emergence of a number of outstanding korean groceries, enriched generations of non-black folk by purchasing inferior quality goods. folks complained about it, but a sizeable number continued supporting these entities...stores like "Jimmy Jazz" and these spots that sell 'urban apparel' and polyester suits have been in business for decades. Oddly enough, the french are notorious for being rude and offering poor service - this hasn't impacted their appeal...Paris is still a popular destination...a night of dining at a french restaurant is still perceived as one of elegance, even extravagance. So our criticism of inferior goods and services has some limitations. We could say that no community should have to pay for inferior goods and services - but the black community does not have to pay for it - in a sense, we choose this stuff.

Someone else, I believe it was Les, posted about how black folk with a bit of schooling would rather not provide type of fundamental, 'low-prestige' services that are invaluable to any community...if your educational track says you should be a lawyer, doctor, CEO (which is not to say that you should or should have to give up your dream, BUT...)- there is some ego/self discussion that must occur to move you to entrepreneurial garbage man or entrepreneurial laundry collector or security dude - even if there's millions of dollars in it...we certainly have enough folks to achieve this minor task, but often our egos will not let us pursue this tack - especially when this comes down to pooling financial resources, saving money (foregoing creature comforts) and investing cold cash in one another based on the track record, expertise and preparation of our peer group. so, i hear the idea that concept about goods and services, but i maintain inferior goods and services are not necessarily a bad thing - it's the degree of inferiority...it wasn't too long ago when no one would be caught dead in a korean car...that day is gone - and koreans are building cars and tv's and airconditioners and cell phones and everything else under the sun.

of course, korean development was fueled, in large part, by its wealthiest families working in close collaboration (collusion is probably not too strong here) with the government...black america's wealthiest families have neither attempted nor produced a scale of collaboration (among themselves, the US government, an african governmment or corporation, a caribbean government or corporation, a european government or corporation or an asian government or corporation) that would yield results akin to the formation of a Daewoo (financial issues aside) or an LG or a Samsung.

This is precisely where the republicans could make inroads, but it is precisely where they dare not tread because it would change the competitive landscape.

PS TINDC

I woulda fired 'em too...that has to be a no-brainer...there are too many other folks with needs to reward those willing to squander what others have earned through blood, sweat and tears. Let 'em take it down to the club or the unemployment line or better yet, to my competitors.

One of the things that concerns me, my greatest fear about the push towards the GOP, is that in some way it breaks my rule about not second-guessing blackfolks. I find it difficult to believe that wealthy blacks are not networking to some degree. This means that there is, somewhere, some probable collaboration at the level of the wealthy Korean families, and that some kind of relationships exist. If they do, it is also likely that they exist outside of the aegis of relationships with the Republican Party.

So when I speculate about what Reggie Lewis might have been doing with say Vernon Jordan, before he died, I don't imagine that there were Republicans around.

Nevertheless, I find it equally difficult to believe that to the extent some mission like his would not benefit from some solid relationships in the GOP, or that his agenda would be incompatible in any way with what Republicans are all about.

Cobb:

my contention is not that wealthy black folks are not networking...my contention is that they are not networking on projects that would yield the kind of infrastructure/employment/health/education/life expectancy benefits that have been achieved by wealthy folks in other collectives.

i believe there are examples of the type of networking that is required...i would submit the example of maynard jackson - http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1365/is_10_35/ai_n13819855

but jackson's effectiveness was a function of political activism linked to the CRM and the Democratic party - and the engine was running hot, hot, hot in the early 1970's. not only have other democrats failed to replicate Jackson's success in places as varied as New York, LA, Detroit, DC, Cleveland and Newark, but the Republicans have not stepped into the breach with much more than $$$ to pseudo-reps like Connerly and Armstrong...and therein lies the problem as it relates to the appeal of these two parties.

we could argue that it's a failing of the electorate, as well as the elected, but the limited success of project coordination and completion by wealthy black folk is evident to the blindest among us. i don't think this should be an occasion for you to retreat from your principle. the cost to wealthy black folk in coordinating and completing projects of any scale is tremendous - the loss of loot, station and life are all eventualities that must be faced prior to embarking on this path...the alternative - psychological games to minimize the frustration of living second-rate (relatively speaking) is often far more palatable. what's to second-guess?

I think it would have to be a black city - there's no other way to do it. To the extent that Baltimore is, I believe that it's happening. I've long believed in 'aggregation' of that sort, and it would be interesting to give a fresh look at the possibilities. Why not buy a southern town?

Those other towns you mention are way too large, and Bill Cosby is an idiot for suggesting a 100 billion dollar program. Start small and build.

and now we're back to the issue that i raised on your site...what is a black community and what is the basis of our collective action? it comes down to a willingness to live, work, learn, and struggle (usually with one another) to achieve a larger aim...

new york is a great place to apply this model because even though it's a huge city, it has large contiguous pockets of densely populated areas with black folks - and many of these areas have large tracts of undeveloped land and sound housing stock...of course, folks have already figured this out about harlem and bed-stuy, but these are hardly the only two areas - and there still is the untapped opportunity to build vertically in harlem and bed-stuy. it's not phoenix...

but, it would be unbelievable if applied to southern towns, especially in the southeast because the population is already there...arguably, the opportunities to apply new, cutting-edge technology in places with relatively cheap land prices would create larger returns than in established cities.

Yo Temple, any chance you might put up a fresh post with the question du millenium - below?

what is a black community and what is the basis of our collective action?

The main reason I gots to say the nayno on cozying up any more than is absolutely necessary to the GOP New Appeal, which restated equals buy-in to the supreezy model, is that this model is demonstrably unsustainable and headed for a head-on collision with thermodynamic reality correction. or does no one else interpret the "global struggle against violent extremism" and coincidental strategic control of proven oil reserves as writing on the wall?

why opt-in to a model that's on its last gasp?

If we don't craft a more sustainable alternative dynamic, inclusive of a revised and non-normotic model of social organization, {villages anyone?} we're going to go down on the sinking ship of supreezy.

Given the fractured state of the black family and the rudderless ship of black community - I'd say now is as good a time as there will ever be to pull a collective SunRa, go didactic as hell, and get off the Titanic of supreezy while the getting's still feasible.

My answer to the question du millenium, is that the community is comprised of our collective efforts to maximize the survivability and life quality of our children. Conspicuous consumption and barbarian culture (supreezy) is incompatible with that objective.

in setting up this topic, i wanted to explore nuances of work to be done by those black folks who often talk past purposes - directly to ideology, without looking to the multitudes of work that be done collectively where ideology need not enter the picture...there is a great deal of work that be done, money that can be made and lives improved - before we fall out with one another...

best case scenario...build homes, schools, hospitals with some conservative cat you can't stand intellectually, but respect as a person of integrity and vision and commitment - and the only time y'all argue is over a beer or three or five at the lounge you've built to provide a social venue for your collective.

that's the good stuff. and everyone gets healed along the way, but whatever our political stripes, religious tenets, etc., we should reserve the right and preserve the practice of falling out with one another AFTER WORK - and making up BEFORE BED. it's simple...no one goes home mad...no one comes to work mad...handle yo' binis and play nicely in the sandbox.

truly, truly - one love.