Saturday, August 21, 2010

How The Black Community Processes Threats Based Upon Perceptions Of The Assailant

In my continuing efforts to model many of the most contentious issues facing our community as a means of gaining understanding the model to the right represents my observations.

When it comes to perceived threats to the interests of the Black community the responses that are triggered differ greatly based upon the operative that is working against our interests.

First some definitions.

The Type Of Injuries To Black People

  • Overt Attacks - These include the more notable "Klan racist" attacks that are captured in the black and white films that depict hatred. While these actions no longer go unpunished - such racist attacks still occur.   We must also include today's street crime which negatively impact our communities today.
  • Benign Neglect - This second type of "attack" is not as obvious as the overt but as we analyze the various activist movements going on within the Black community this second classification is readily apparent.  With benign neglect there is an assumption that as a member of the greater society Black people deserve equal protection under the law and or certain entitlements guaranteed to all Americans. In as much as those with the responsibility to provide this protection fail to do so - an injury is recognized as such.
Agents Of Injury
In defining the assailants who commit the injury the perceptions of their intention holds sway.  Not only is there the expected "racial" membership which defines this, I observe that IDEOLOGY is a far greater predictor of the classification of "friend or foe".   An additional index that is observed is the perceptions of POWER of the actor.   An individual might considered a part of the "national power establishment" and sees to retain this power.  This intention would be judged differently from the person with national power yet desires to "change America" so that Black people will have less of a struggle.  Those who don't have power yet commit injury are also at play.

  • Perceived Friend - A perceived friend of the Black community (per the perceptions of the prevailing political establishment) is one who is compatible with the key ideological viewpoints of the Black community.    
  • Perceived Foe -  In prevailing parlance within our community the following is also true - "you stand against the interests of the Black community if you oppose the methodologies that WE (by popular mandate) have adopted as the course by which our Permanent Interests are obtained" .  

The ultimate purpose of this model is to show that there is no absolute correlation between the injury set upon the Black community and defined response that will be triggered REGARDLESS of who the actor is.   Friend or Foe is the better predictor of this response.

A Foe that wages an attack upon the Black community provides the opportunity for a display of "unity".   On the one hand those who seek to promote the notion that "nothing has changed in this RACIST America" are able to use the incident to make their point.  If this same attack is waged by a "Friend" - that friend being a victim of the societal conspiracy that made them that way - will not trigger the same response.  In fact the incident might garner a movement which seeks help for similarly afflicted people so that in their desperation they no longer have to act as such.

The most contentious element of the model is also the component that is least understood.  With the notion of "benign neglect" there is a difference in the assumptions of social entitlements and protections and WHO is on the hook for providing them.

Though "political conservatism" is not popular among the politically active Black community there is fewer overt physical attacks upon Black people today that can be traced back to the will to suppress Black people with such acts of physical intimidation.   Truthfully most physical attacks of Black people today come from other Black people (who are protected as 'friends that society made that way').  

Today's indictment against conservatives is due to the perceptions that society should provide certain entitlements and protection yet the ideological aversion to "share" resources far beyond political and racial boundaries per a virtual "social contract" means that the conservative is perceived as standing against the interests of Black people.

I am on record as being a Black Conservative.  My interests and motivations are quite different from that of a White conservative.  In my perspective the notion of the social contract which opens the door to entitlements has to be indexed against the requirements for the maximization of organic contributions in support of the desired standard of living.  Take away the demand for the compartmentalization and execution of the economic and market-level support for this desired standard of living off of the backs of the "equal human beings" that are demanding them and a "care-taker state" is created.   What good is it for a people to be "in receipt of" a benefit yet never learn the skills necessary to provide these services in their own community?

I can't provide a blanket condemnation against those who refuse to agree to an all-encompassing income redistribution plan across the land.   Even if racial differences are a portion of the opposition this indictment does NOTHING to address the need for the Black community to develop the competencies necessary to generate these funds and provide these professional services.

I will go even further to say that those who have an unspoken assumption of the inferiority of the Black community and our ability to order ourselves so that we are productive and they instead install a system of dependency in which these necessary skills are never developed ARE NOT OUR FRIENDS.  They have, in fact, produced great INJURY to our long term interests as a people.

This is the central divide between Black Progressive and Black Conservative.   The classic "eat for the day or eat for a lifetime" conundrum.

I make the observation that as "favorable people" assume control over more of the institutions within the community those individuals who have their development stunted must be seen as casualties of the present system that has failed to find a purpose for them.  I prioritize the injury instead of the assailant.  When everyone is considered an "equal human being" a knife from either cuts as cleanly as the other.

There is a need for more sophisticated management practices within our community.  The "old ghosts" which continue to draw a fearful response from us do not represent the model for our present circumstances.  Those who rattle these chains too often seek to redirect our attention and often provide cover for their failure to manage our human resources.

No comments: