City Journal Winter 2014

Current Issue:

Winter 2014
Table of Contents
Subscribe
Tablet Editions
Click to visit City Journal California

Readers’ Comments

Heather Mac Donald
Windy City Silence « Back to Story

View Comments (156)

Add New Comment:

To send your message, please enter the words you see in the distorted image below, in order and separated by a space, and click "Submit." If you cannot read the words below, please click here to receive a new challenge.

Comments will appear online. Please do not submit comments containing advertising or obscene language. Comments containing certain content, such as URLs, may not appear online until they have been reviewed by a moderator.


 
Showing 156 Comment(s) Subscribe by RSS
I luv your posts and your design. Goooood work. kamagra sales kamagra kamagra wiki
A prescient article in light of "flash mobs" in Chicago.
Yes, there was writings about this in the 70's, but experience is the best proof. And maybe those in charge didn't want to listen because there was too much money to be made by keeping the problem unsolved - yes, those in the welfare industry who make lots and lots of money off of this misery. At some point, there has not only to be an understanding as to the cause of the problem, but also an understanding that those tasked with solving the problem, do not have any incentive to solve it. As abhorrent as that may be - perhaps there really ARE people so evil that they would let all this go on simply because o cure it would mean the gravy train would come to a shuddering halt.
I came from a single parent home and I turned out ok. My dad was in and out and my moms was on drugs. But I had cousins, uncles, and aunts....bottom line is a lot of these factors really have little to do with an individual's behavior. You choose to do wrong when YOU want to. But it's always to easy to blame someone or something else for your actions or problems. That's some Bull...
This is one of the most eye-opening articles that I've ever read. Ever since I read this in the Chicago Tribune, I've been perseverating about it. It's just incredible. I guess I'd ask, "how does one begin to tackle this problem?" There are plenty of "vacuous statements" on this subject, but I'd be interested to read some informed opinions on how to deal with this shocking and sad situation.
Francis W. Stocker, M.D. November 01, 2010 at 4:21 PM
There are African American two parent families. They all have jobs doing TV commercials.
I wonder if that is any part of a deal with the networks? Jesse Jackson and his ilk sometimes threaten to picket or whatever if there are not representative African American roles on TV.
As far as I can tell, you and others including a courageous Bill Cosby are talking about correlations. Although I am not religious, I would say that in my lifetime the abandoment of Christianity in favor of demagogy (including demagogy disguised as religion) preceded this absent father plague. And yet I will not say I know the "real source" of black crime (or white crime) until I see evidence rather than speculation.
There is a large number of thoughtful people who are as distressed as those who see the cause of the black dysfunction in environmental and policy reasons, but who simply attribute the criminal and social problems blacks experience to blacks themselves. I have an open mind on the issue of whether blacks themselves may harbor genetic problems in the realms of impulse control and ability to think ahead. When a highly functional and cutting edge black society emerges, not embedded in a larger white society, but on its own, I guess I'll call the issue resolved.
The situation in Chicago is the same as Boston, probably most major cities. The libs always say the same thing-not enough fed money, but the real problem is in the black family. Someone has to start calling them out on the disfunctional life style that is accepted by all. I would use Antonio Cromartie as the poster boy for being a mia father. 8 kids with 6 women. Has to be some kind of record.
and all along we've been told it was someone else's fault.... the blame-game works here in chicago, to maintain victim status
Heather, you are absolutely right. I'm a black female and I totally agree with your assessment. I myself was abandoned by my father and but by the Grace of G-d I was able to escape the crazyness of my old neiborhood. As a result, I am TERRIFIED of being poor. I do not want to return to the madness. Another side-affect (I believe) of being fatherless is that I did not have children. I was so focused on 'making it' that I waited too late and my clock ticked out. Lastly, there is NOTHING anyone can do about this issue. This is a moral issue than can only be solved by the community, church and a change in tribal customs and values. Yours sincerely from sunny Chicago - a black girl :)
"Nor does the availability of jobs guarantee that boys will become law-abiding adults and responsible fathers. The reality is often the opposite: males are pushed to seek and hold stable employment by the expectation that they will have to support their children as in-home fathers and husbands."

While much of this column rings true, the simple dismissal of all solutions is a grave mis-justice to all. I've been fortunate enough to have led several groups of visiting Judges and Educators on tours of the Cook County Jail, the worlds largest prison, and the boot camp program at the same facility. Without jobs, there is indeed no hope for even the young men most determined to turn their lives, and the lives of the children they foster, around. The true failure of Chicago, and of most large cities, is the failure to provide the basic tools theses young people, predominately men, but women also, access to jobs. This access comes in the form of affordable, reliable, and 24 hour a day public transportation to affordable, reliable, safe, 24 hour around the clock day care. The neighborhoods occupied by the poorest of the poor are those which grew up around jobs in the stock yards, the steel factories, the garment factories. These industries, and the jobs within walking distance of the housing in the neighborhoods, are long gone. But yet, people live in these neighborhoods, isolated from any possibility of leading productive lives.
I don't advocate giving anything but a chance to those living in these neighborhoods. Without this chance, there is no chance that a young man will develop the pride, self confidence, and respect it takes to truly be a father.
Birth control in the water supply. No antidote unless proof of marriage and financial means is provided. No more indulging in bastardy, the cause of most social problems costing us taxes.
Richard asks, "Are black women aware that birth control is available?"

For about 10 years, my wife worked as a midwife in a New York City hospital that served a high proportion of Medicaid patients. The answer to Richard's question is, "Yes, and they also know that in NYC social workers will do whatever is necessary to get a woman a free abortion." Many social workers encourage abortions. But, for whatever reason, these women WANT to have those babies.

According to my wife, many of the welfare women utterly ignore their babies after giving birth, and spend the entire postnatal hospital stay preferring the TV to any sort of interaction with the child.

Many, many of these babies are born drug-addicted.

My wife also delivered hundreds of babies to Hispanic girls aged 12 to 14, most of whom did seem to love their children and want to hold them. In most cases, the families were celebratory about the birth. On rare occasions, the father would visit.
I couldn't agree more! This is also the core issue with the failure of our educational system. Oprah and Jessie, are you listening???
An excellent article that was printed in today's (10/10/10) Chicago Tribune. As indicated by some below, where is the black female in this mess? This is the USA in 2010. What about STI's as well as pregnancies? Are black women aware that birth control is available? Is this a situation where child birth provides substantial benefits from social programs, making it advantageous to procreate without any intent for a family enviornment? The racist nonsense better cease. It is the black community that is intenally imploding. First, Blacks demand that aid is needed to improve their lives. Now, the Blacks complain that the aid being provided is causing their problems.
I think David has a legitimate point, though I can't imagine what legalization would actually look like. Do we legalize crystal meth and ecstasy? (Well, maybe if Pfizer or Novartis makes them.) Do we simply step over the street people lying comatose in their drug stupors and still spend money feeding, housing, and "treating" them?

And just imagine the economic chaos that would erupt in Central and South America, where the economies of many of the countries are based on the zillion-dollar U.S. drug market.

Still, like the War on Poverty, the War on Drugs has been a monumental and expensive failure that has done more harm than good. I'm afraid that the enormous anti-drug edifice is now too large and ossified to be torn down.
To Blake Davis: We've known the root causes for decades. Read Daniel Moynahan's research on Welfare and the black family. I was a case worker in the 1970s and there was an "incentive" to have babies from the Govt. I and other serviced strictly black women in Detroit; none of them married and all with a bunch of kids. They had kids because each one brought extra cash and food stamps. They had babies by different men; occasionally you would see one with the same man. But he would leave the family and come back to have sex. It was cyclical. And a child growing up in that environment only learns from that.
As for the suggestion to legalize drugs....no way! I don't want our streets to look like Vancouver and Denmark.
Totally agree. Everyone should read Daniel Moynahan's research on Welfare and the black family.
I think the gaping hole in your interesting (if recycled) thoughts on this topic is a failure to adequately address America's failed drug enforcement policies. While bad teachers and broken homes push individuals away from positive outcomes, the strong financial incentive provided for those who are successful in manufacturing and distributing illegal narcotics is a powerful pull factor for young black men (most barely in their teens) who do not see legitimate paths to financial success. Much of the violence in black communities is drug related and is directly linked to an absence of legal institutions to settle disputes between rival distributors of the product. The only way to really take the heart out of these organized gangs is to legalize and decriminalize certain drugs to treat those who abuse them as you would treat someone with any other addiction.
Beyond the family --- I think we are looking at the Perfect Storm:

We are looking at a condemnation of several social ills:

1) Generational Poverty
2) Ineffective Education System (This IN PART is sourced by #1 – i.e. property taxes)
3) Breakdown in Family AND Community

The problem with focusing on the family only is it points to rebuilding the family structure as the ONE solution and not a SYSTEMIC change. These men who have fathered these children out of wedlock may not have had fathers or strong father figures in their own lives and as a result may not be able to guide the next generation.

I agree that the urban crisis is becoming more severe. As we lose the grandparents and great grandparents, we will lose more of the critical teachers of the core values we need to address one component of these social ills.

Ultimately I think that any solution needs to be multifaceted to address the SYSTEMIC ills and not address just one component. Although I feel the authors authenticity and appreciate the candor, I do feel her conclusion is misleading.
Heather this is a very informative article whose facts may not be limited to Chicago. The Oakland Richmond area are experiencing similar situations. Thanks for bringing this up.

How are you all doing?

Donna M. Wetherell
Renfield;

Virtually every ethnic group once spent millennia in a tribal culture. Civilizations don't spring out of the ground fully formed.

Dysfunctional cultural values do indeed relate to wars and slaughters. The dysfunctional warrior culture made Japan into a very militaristic society that killed millions in Asia. The dysfunctional religious culture of Iraq has credal rivals lobbing bombs at each other. The dysfunctional culture of ethnic hatred caused the slaughter in Rwanda and in the Balkans.

Societies are what they because of their collective attitudes and habits. The middle-east is currently dysfunctional,, but it was not always so in relation to the rest of the world.
Grale:

Every nation on earth was born in blood and tears and injustice, and no country is completely free of shame.

But dysfunctional culture has nothing to do with world wars or Nazis or Communists or anomalies like Jeffrey Dahmer or Timothy McVeigh. In any case, the greatest mass murderer in history was a Chinese man named Mao, and the bunch that in the 1930s raped and slaughtered their way through eastern China and the Pacific rim were Japanese. Yet both Chinese and Japanese culture reach back to antiquity and have prospered overall.

And so has Mesopotamian culture, though Saddam Hussein was responsible for almost a million deaths of innocent people, including by poison gas. In Rwanda, hundreds of thousands of people were murdered, typically hacked to death with machetes.

Some American Indian tribes, without guns, swords, bombers, or gas chambers, entirely exterminated other tribes.

So atrocities have been committed by Europeans, Asians, Mesopotamians, American Indians, Rwandans, . . . let's see . . . and everybody else.

But are Beijing, Tokyo, Baghdad, Lagos, the upper east side of Manhattan, and the south side of Chicago all equally dangerous places in which to take a midnight stroll?

Here is a politically incorrect question for you: Is it possible that people who spent millennia in a closed tribal existence in a tropical jungle might have developed a psychology suited well for survival in their environment but unsuited for life in a society in which the dominant culture is completely different?

Is it possible?
It's almost bizarre - a simple answer to a complex social problem, whose solution has escaped the so-called "experts" for decades and decades. Fix the family and you fix everything connected to inner city blight - drug abuse,, lack of education, homelessness, crime etc. Anyone who doesn't see it is being willfully blind, or wants a piece of the anti-poverty action. But you can't out the family back together until you have everyone on board that that's the problem. And that's the issue today - getting everyone to at least acknowledge that the breakdown of the family is the issue. Once that's done you can work on repairing the damage done by decades of well intentioned and some not so well intentioned programs. It's breathtaking when you think of it - a trillion dollars wasted, with the money actually being used to cause and exacerbate the very problems the money was being used to eliminate. The black community should be outraged (I wish there was a stronger word) by what has been done to them - it is infinitely sad when one thinks of what might have happened if the money and effort had been used to good ends. There has to be a special place in hell for the anti-poverty Democrat hucksters and their sympathizers and enablers in the media responsible for the destruction and misery of an entire group. How many scientists, leaders, artists, engineers have we lost as a result of what they have done? And how many lives lost or wasted or sunk in misery and hopelessness? I shudder to think about it and to think that it is still going on, especially since we now have one of the lead hucksters in charge of the country.
This article brought me to tears. I am a retired principal for 21 years. I think the key certainly is in the hands of Black parents. If we can't get our parents to show tough love, and teach our kids how to respect themselves and other people and accept responsibility for their actions, we will continue to bury our young people who did not know they had a chance to be an upstanding citizen. My son told me recently how he hid his homework so he would not be bullied and hasseled by his peers when he was in junior and senior high school and be called "the professor." My daughter went to Wash. U. in St. Louis and had to choose whether she wanted white friends or black friends. It was no longer prudent for her to have friends of any race. If these ideas don't come from the home, they certainly are reinforced by the home. So who runs the home? Do these people just not know what is acceptable behavior? I saw a teenage girl hit a policeman in Seattle (on camera). Then the policeman socked her. What persons in their right mind would sock a policeman whose carrying a gun? Our Black kids are so out of control, they don't even know how to survive in a civilized community. It all starts with the home and the parents, and people who do not respect themselves and other people. Girls who allow boys to disrespect them, and boys who don't know what respect is. Where are the churches and the ministers and the do-gooders? Reach out to the parents. Find a way to teach the parents what their responsibilities are.
Please provide sources and citations. Without that, none of this is truly persuasive to those who need to be persuaded.
In one important respect, all of us – whether in the United States, Canada, the EU, or Australia – already live in a “Stalinist” state, if by Stalinist you mean that we are forbidden under pain of legal sanction from speaking openly about what is beyond the shadow of the doubt the most obvious fact about reality – the enormous differences in individual and group psychology between the different human races, as reflected in quite obvious and easily observable physical, chemical, physiological, developmental, etc. differences.

In an open society, in a democracy, every individual is free to speculate on the origins of the disparity between black and white crime rates, and tohe express themselves openly and publicly without fear of persecution for censure.

It is regrettable that some people lack civility and judge individuals based on their race, ethnicity, etc. rather than as individuals, and express racist sentiments.

In an ideal world, no one but express themselves in ways that are insulting, insensitive, or threatening.
But then again, in an ideal world, 2 million white US Americans annually would not be the victims of a vast black criminal underclass.

Whatever one thinks about the sources of the problem (ill-advised social programs, heredity, deeply rooted cultural patterns,genetic influences, the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow, etc. etc., or, as I believe, all of the above), the main task is to restore the responsibility for the fact behavior on black people.

The future of the African-American community is an a hand of African-Americans, and the choices they make collectively and individually will determine the outcome.

The ultimate racism is to deprive blacks of their agency and autonomy by regarding their behavior as the predictable outcome of governmental choices.

It cannot be said often enough:

the burden of proof that blacks are not “inherently dysfunctional” is on them, not on white people.

Doubtless, there are a few white people who would like to see blacks continue to fail, but they are an infinitesimal minority.

The vast majority of whites would like to see blacks succeed – for one thing, the costs of black failure in terms of crime, delinquency, welfarism, and a gigantic prison population is too vast to be sustained forever.

One of the strangest pathologies of contemporary US American life is that there is a taboo surrounding any open discussion of the incalculable physical, psychological, and financial suffering whites have endured at the hands of blacks, the sacrifices they've made in order to improve quality of life for the black community.

It is time to stick a giant step back, stop mouthing empty platitudes, and perceive this bizarre situation in all of its breathtaking strangeness.
If throughout history slavery, opression, persecution, discrimination , destruction of families and outright Genocide were excuses for present day sociopathy, then Jews should be the most dangerous people in the world.
Any incidents of Hassidic, Orthodox, Conservative or Reform Jews running through the streets od American cities looting, raping and murdering?
Enough BS apologiae. Lets face the facts and begin to discuss the matter openly. THe alternative is Civil War II along racial lines thus spelling the end of this society.
Heather,
You said it all! You have spoken the words that most dare NOT speak. I always look forward to your articles in CJ. The sad part of it is that you are one of the few voices crying in the wilderness while the wilderness continues to get "wilder".
Elitist;

Fascism, communism, Nazism, genocides, pograms, the two worst wars in human history where millions were killed – all done by Caucasian people. When it comes to violence, white people have set the bar pretty high.

Most folks would prefer living in a bad black neighborhood than living in Stalinist Russia.

Methinks that your Black-People-Are-Inherently-Dysfunctional thesis is sorely lacking …
To Vontavious Roosevelt Jefferson:

You may find certain comments offensive, but that is the price you pay for living in a democracy instead of a dictatorship.

In a democracy, it is publicly allowable to say that Africans have a different psychology from Europeans, Jews from Gentiles, Orientals from Native Americans, etc.

If you disagree, then the appropriate response is to engage in reasoned discourse, not call the FBI – which has enough to do already battling Mexican drug cartels, Muslim terrorists, African-American gangs, and then those really dangerous Jewish, Swedish, Norwegian, German, and English…. oh,….. that’s right….

Calling perfectly ordinary facts about the world “hate facts” changes nothing, and creates a new problem:
the disruption of a democratic order, the introduction of totalitarian censorship and thought control, the irreparable damage to civil society, freedom of speech, the Constitution.

If it is true that blacks worldwide have crime rates 10 times as high as whites worldwide, if it is true that European Americans have roughly the same (stunningly low) crime rates as white Europeans, then Heather McDonald has been barking up the wrong tree all along, and having the arrested by the FBI will change nothing, because all criminologists on earth are already aware of these facts, which are published in literally millions of places:

No combination of social programs or lack thereof is capable of explaining the mind-boggling disparity between white and black crime rates WORLDWIDE, but only group psychology.

But of course, everyone already knows this, including all black people, including you, “Vontavious,” so the real issue here is:

Why are we letting ideology get in the way of reality?

The real problem here is not that whites Americans are racist (I, for example, grew up in a enlightened, intellectual, leftist, antiwar, antiracist, feminist style household/ community/ state in New England, and had to fight with every ounce of strength against my conditioning in order to recognize the most perfectly self-evident facts about race and crime).

The real problem is that white Americans have watched in horror as a half-century and more of historically unprecedented effort and expense (thousands of separate programs which have dramatically alter the lives of hundreds of millions of people (!!) and cost the taxpayer hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars) has failed to significantly alter the behavior of the vast majority of African-Americans, to lead toward academic and occupational success, lower crime rates, functioning families.

This world historical fiasco has led increasing numbers of white people to question the conventional wisdom – that human nature is a blank slate, that there are no group psychological differences between the human races.

Meanwhile, mass Muslim into the year EU has been such a total and absolute fiasco, with rocketing crime rates, exploding welfare dependency, pandemic illiteracy, honor killings and domestic abuse, and European born Muslims traveling in large numbers to Afghanistan to train with Al Qaeda, that most Europeans are not “becoming racist” a questioning in ideology which has never proven – an illusion which cannot be sustained any longer:

That there are no important differences between the human races, that we are all alike under the skin.

With or without the FBI monitoring people's e-mail, with or without us turning into some kind is Stalinist police state, the truth about racial difference is out of the bag, and repression will just delay the inevitable:

At long last, a frank discussion – one with enormous policy implications – about the most obvious thing in the world, the reality of racial difference.
Racist!

Criticizing black people is verboten in Obama's America. It doesn't matter that you're citing "facts". "Facts" are also verboten.

Hate criminal!
How very sad and what a waste of human potential.

Combine those stats with the high rate of black abortion and you have true self-genocide of a group of people.
Stories about the devastating effects of fatherless black families never mention an obvious point: The mothering leaves a lot to be desired too. Why blame the guy who isn't there and not the female who is? Which has the greater bearing on the child's upbringing?

Improving the maternal skills in the black community -- setting standards, demanding responsibility and establishing support -- would be easier, cheaper and more productive than waiting for males to "do the right thing."
elitist, you're right on target.

But you're so politically incorrect! How did you ever make it through an Ivy League doctoral program?
You make some excellent points, elitist. The black community was hardly perfectly intact until Lyndon Johnson and the 89th Congress came along. But what then, other than the perverse incentives of the social programs, can explain why the rate of out-of-wedlock births skyrocketed to at least three times higher now than at any time before 1960? If you believe that programs can cause people to change their behavior for the better, why can't they also change behavior for the worse?

True, black crime was disproportionately high long before the Great Society threw gasoline on the fire. But has it ever been worse than it is now, after 45 years of government "help"? There are many factors involved, and no era is ever exactly like any other save for one or two defining differences. But it seems to me that perverse incentives played a key part in breaking up the black family and in turn driving crime upward.

The fact that other cultures have suffered persecution and prejudice and yet still flourished does indicate that far more than the absence of fathers is at work.

Maybe the psychological makeup of blacks is indeed the key. So why should that topic not be explored? Maybe the social programs were designed by European brains for people who would respond like Europeans, not Africans. Those "hard questions" you pose are certainly legitimate and need to be asked. Unfortunately, anyone who even mentions that we should ask them will immediately be shouted down and labeled as you know what.

I work with Jews every day. Most of them, like you, have doctorates from Ivy League universities, where many of them also teach. Their families came to the United States in the 20th century, not on the Mayflower. A few of them have parents who suffered at Dachau and other such places that make the old southern plantations look like country clubs. Some of them grew up poor. But not one of them has a criminal record. None have had children out of wedlock. They no doubt suffered discrimination and yet have done well.

Maybe it's because government never tried to help them.
Saying that “Europeans have slaughtered one another” is a meaningless generalization similar to the statement that “Americans are always shooting one another.”

The relevant comparison, of course, is between rates of homicide (rape, assault, etc.) per 100,000 in a variety of settings, including all-white neighborhoods in Western Europe, European neighborhoods with high immigrant populations, majority white neighborhoods in North America versus heavily black neighborhoods, etc. etc.

Throughout Western Europe, neighborhoods with very low immigrant populations have virtually no crime at all, levels of trust are high, and the reason people support Geert Wilders in the Netherlands and Thilo Sarrazin in Germany is that most Europeans can easily remember a time when European metropolises had rates of violent crime resembling rural Vermont today – and if you think I'm exaggerating, you can look up the numbers.

Berlin/Germany, with its high Turkish population, has approximately 3 homicides per 100,000 per year, a figure most small-town police departments in the US with regard as acceptable, and big-city police departments can only dream about: many black neighborhood's have homicide rates up to 40 and 50.
Yet Berlin's homicide rate is regarded as unacceptably high, and is triple that of Germany as a whole (the homicide rate in the US is more than 6 times higher). Berlin's homicide rate reflects the relatively low homicide rates found in Turkey, while European countries with high Somalian immigrant populations, for example, suffer from horrific violence, as reflected in the high homicide rate for Somalia.

My point – this is an extraordinarily simple and straightforward FACTUAL claim, and has nothing much to do with Nazi aggression – is that white communities WORLDWIDE (North and South America, East Western Europe, white colonies in black Africa, etc. etc.) tend to have extraordinarily LOW rates of violent crime, while black communities WORLDWIDE (Africa, Europe, the Americas, the Caribbean, etc.) tend to have extraordinarily HIGH rates of violent crime.

In other words:
no matter where they happen to be living, European Americans behave more-or-less like Europeans when it comes to violence and crime, while African Americans behave more-or-less like black Africans.

As regards the problem of high black crime, in other words there was never really anything to explain in the first place.

Black behavior in Oakland, Boston, New Orleans, Chicago is consistent with black behavior in Haiti, black Africa, London, and Brussels, while white behavior from Vancouver to Manhattan to Paris to Kiev to Sydney to Nairobi is also remarkably homogenous.

If these behavioral traits are global in nature, and that means that they cut across all sorts of different social systems:
small countries, large countries, socialist states, free enterprise oriented states, racially homogenous countries, racially heterogeneous states, rich countries, poor countries, countries with low/high population density, industrialized/rural countries, etc. etc. etc.

This is a very simple empirical matter which can be verified by consulting readily available statistics, and if Heather McDonald has not yet done so, then she really ought to do so before continuing to promote her flawed analysis.

Unfortunately, she will then have to examine the issue of race and psychology, not a terribly fashionable topic at the moment, to indulge in earthshattering understatement.

The fact that a supposedly “conservative” analyst of US-American crime statistics cannot mention the possibility of racial differences in psychology pretty much sums up the present situation, in which massive censorship of the incredibly obvious prevents reality from being recognized or spoken out at all – and not just among progressives, but instead all the way across the political spectrum.

Progress will begin ONLY when there is no longer any at all taboo about openly discussing psychological differences between the human races, and once such discussions are not regarded as “right wing” or "racist" or "reactionary," but simply as part of a rational discussion about reality.

Coda;

Your European friends ask a rather cheeky question on American violence, given that Europeans spent half of the last century slaughtering each other by the tens of millions. And a genocide in the Balkans followed in the 1990s, as I recall.
Palinglish;

If racism is such a hindrance, how come black immigrants (many who come from the Carribbean which also has a history of slavery) outperform African-Americans?

http://diverseeducation.com/article/12419/
Quote: “A larger percentage of immigrant Blacks than native Blacks come from two-parent families…Within the Ivy League, immigrant-origin students made up 41 percent of Black freshmen”

http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/07/08/brblack-immigrants-work-harder/
Quote:” Like many other African-Americans, I have been noticing for years how the children of black immigrant families tend to be much better represented among high school honor-roll achievers than their native-American black counterparts are….”

http://faroutliers.wordpress.com/2007/03/19/black-immigrant-model-minorities/

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/03/black_immigrants_an_invisible.html
Quote: "Black immigrants are the model minority"

If black Americans (as a group) aren’t as prosperous as they could be it’s not because of racism. It’s because they do not take advantage of the country's opportunities and frequently choose self-defeating and stagnating behavior. It's that freakin' simple.

(PS: More black drug dealers are in jail, because they tend to sell crack instead of regular cocaine. Crack carries a higher penalty (google it). Either they should sell some other drug or stop selling drugs altogether)
Palinglish, why is what happened hundreds of years ago to some distant ancestors of yours so vitally important to your present-time everyday life? My ancestors were killed by Spanish, Russians, Goths, Italians and Indians, but I am not still outraged about these centuries-distant happenings this morning. I don't use these events as fodder to justify hatred of these ethnic groups.

Why are you?

Going around spewing hateful accusations of racism does not gain, on average, much, although it benefits a few - Jackson father and son, Sharpton, Rangel, etc.

I lived in Arlington, across from DC and we rented 3 rooms in our house. Over time, there were many renters from Africa - Zimbabwe, South Africa, Zambia, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Ghana, etc. Great people. The first time an American black looked to rent there, he was there for 1 minute when he threw a "Racist, huh?" remark over his shoulder as he was walking through the house. I looked at my Philippine wife, she shrugged, and I rolled my eyes. We never did figure out what we had said that made us "racists."

Fortunately in Arlington, you can still decide who lives in your own house. The guy was already in anger, and he left in anger. Just the sort of roommate we needed. NOT.

Palinglish, if you are truly seeking some "social justice" you would down on your knees blessing me, because my ancestors were KILLED, by the THOUSANDS, to free blacks in the US civil war.

As far as whites becoming a minority, if you are black, you had better get used to stop being coddled by white liberals. Koreans, Indians, Chinese, Malays, Japanese, Russians, Brazilians, etc., will likely not tolerate accusations of racism for a second, let alone a half-century.
It seems the Black community could use a Glenn Beck rally. There is a real need to "restore honor" and rebuild the spiritual and cultural foundations that protect us all in this never really safe world.

I hope it happens, but the last person who tried was the well esteemed and well intentioned Bill Cosby. And while he was appreciated by his audience he was ridiculed by the mainstream media.

I hope American Blacks will come to realize that political liberalism is literally killing them, and has been doing so for decades.

Maybe the Tea Party can help with this, nothing else has had much effect so far.
The thesis that the breakdown of the black family, caused by the great society programs, is responsible for stratospheric black crime rates is demonstrably false.

Here's an article from Time Magazine published in 1958:
Blacks were 10% of the population, but responsible for the vast majority of violent and property crime, from coast to coast, and from north to south, the problem was a long standing on, not a recent development.:

http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,810262,00.html

Compulsory reading for everyone who thinks that “the black community was perfectly intact until the Johnson administration.”

I am one of three sons was raised by my mother, who herself was the product of terrible poverty, we had a rich deadbeat dad (a Jew, as it happens).
We spent a year on welfare when I was quite young.
We were also homeless for brief intervals.
None of us turned to crime, but I just earned my doctorate from an Ivy League university.

The reason why an argument as grotesquely makeshift and improbable from the point of view of the social sciences has gained such credibility is really quite simple (aside from the fact that it allows Republicans to bash Democrats):

Reason number one:
It continues the tradition of blaming black behavior on white people (misguided social programs made the black community collapse).

Reason number two:
It avoids asking any hard questions about whether the evident psychological differences between Europeans and Africans run deep, is not the consequence of government policies.

Are African-Americans more violent than Africans in Africa?
Are they more promiscuous?
Do African-American men take less responsibility for supporting their children than in Africa?
Are African-American men more likely to father a number of different children by different mothers, with or without marrying any of them, then their African counterparts?
Are African-American women more likely to get stuck with child rearing responsibilities, to find themselves surrounded by feckless, drunken, irresponsible men than in Africa?

If the answer to these and similar questions is NO!!, then we had better look deeper for the causes, we had better consider the possibility that African-Americans have retained enough of their African heritage to appear dysfunctional in a European-style society.

As long as we refuse to ask whether there are fundamental psychological differences between the different human races, we are stuck with flimsy, partisan, implausible explanations.

This one stops working as soon as you read the Time Magazine article from 1958.

Ms. McDonald's explanation is a makeshift which allows her to avoid asking questions about human biodiversity, racial difference, and the impact of heredity on human behavior.

It is a function not of skillful social science research and analysis, it is a function of CENSORSHIP – the iron according to which racial differences in psychology are unthinkable, unspeakable, unprintable.

Coda:

I live in Europe: for many years, my European friends would ask me in astonishment (perhaps rendered hopelessly stupid by a Michael Moore film): why are “Americans” so violent? why are “Americans” always shooting one another?

I would answer coolly:
“Did you actually think the European Americans were more violent than Europeans?
They are not.
Most of the violence is committed by young black men, ca 3% of the population.”

Since then, my European friends have stopped asking this incredibly stupid question because mass immigration to Europe from Africa and the Middle East has led to stratospheric rises in violent urban crime, and in most European cities, about 80% of violent crime is commissioned by young man from those countries (who grow up and welfare dependent families and drop out of school).

Maybe Europeans social programs make them violent??



"But the Africans hadn't been indoctrinated by the US educational system."

hananova, a friend of mine from Nigeria (a chemist) told me that when he went to study in England, he was shocked to hear his teachers spouting off about all the horrible things England was responsible for, and how shameful and wicked was the history of the British Isles.

His Nigerian teachers had taught him that England was a mighty nation that had spread its influence around the entire globe; a nation that produced great scientists, poets, musicians, theologians, philosophers, and soldiers; a nation deserving of the utmost respect and admiration.

When he hears American blacks complaining that they "have no chance," he tells them, "You should move to Africa, where there is no welfare at all, and where if you don't work, you will starve."
"Husbands snatched and sold! Children snatched away and sold! You are denying this?"

Yes, I am denying that this happened to any significant degree on this continent. It did happen in Africa, though. But whites did not capture, snatch, or round up Africans. In fact, whites could not survive in pathogen-ridden sub-Saharan Africa for more than a few weeks (until quinine was introduced in the 19th century). Every black person sold into slavery, like your ancestors, was first enslaved by other blacks.

Families in Africa sometimes sold members of their own families to (mostly Arab) slave traders. Tribes sometimes sold superfluous members to slave traders. Tribes "snatched away" members of other tribes, and sometimes entire tribes, and sold them to slave traders. Slavery had been going on in Africa for many centuries (and hasn't stopped, by the way).

No, the holocaust is not a myth. And O.J. Simpson did in fact kill those people. And Jewish doctors are not injecting black babies with AIDS.

"Are you f-ing serious?! The black family remained intact through slavery?!"

In 1950, a black man in the United States was more likely than a white man (1) to be married, (2) to have a job, and (3) to attend church regularly.

Yes, the Great Society programs played a large role in the destruction of the black family.

"I don't even know how to respond to such idiotic statements."

Of course you don't, since the history you've been taught is the feel-good self-esteem public school curriculum, and you think that simply being black allows you to speak with authority about historical events.

"This has been PROVEN with studies."

Please cite one scientific study that proves your claim. Authors, title, journal, etc.

You know something, Palinglish? Every race and ethnicity and religion on this earth has at some point in its history been persecuted and suffered injustice. But rather than whine about it, most people look to the future and ask, "Where do we go from here?" Just a suggestion.
Renfield said
October 03, 2010 at 10:06 AM
"This did happen in Africa, but it was rare in the Western Hemisphere. However, it remains a glorious myth that still serves as a way to blame Whitey for dysfunction among blacks"

"The black family remained intact through slavery and Jim Crow. It began to fall apart when the Great Society programs tacitly announced"

Are you f-ing serious?! The black family remained intact through slavery?! It's a myth that families were split apart when they were sold off?! Husbands snatched and sold! Children snatched away and sold! You are denying this? Let me guess...the holocaust is a myth too, right? I don't even know how to respond to such idiotic statements. I give up. The idiot to intelligent ratio in this country is like 4 to one. There is little hope. It is clear the GOP has done it's job. White people have convinced themselves they are victims and continue to deny any racism exists in this country.

And to the poster that mentioned blacks commit crimes against other blacks, what on earth is your point? My post stated that blacks were disproportionately arrested and convicted for similar crimes. For the dim, I will give an example. If a white person sells drugs (there are more white than black drug dealers by the way) and a black person sells drugs, the black person is more likely to be sentenced to prison or given a longer sentence than the white person that committed the same crime. This has been PROVEN with studies. What part of that is so difficult for you to understand??

This country is clearly screwed. I can't wait until you really are the minority in this country. And it's coming. You'll be screaming racism and discrimination at every turn. And we will tell you what you tell us...GET OVER IT!
subscribe
The continuing problem is also the US public education system.

Blacks are taught to hate and to justify this hate during every year in January and February during the black history season (paid for by white tax dollars) and their hero, MLK (whose teachings are now overrun with the blather of the most vile of the black racists such as Ferrycan and Sharpton.

When I was in the DC hospital for 3 months after a bad auto accident, there were about 40% American blacks and 40% African (immigrant) blacks, employed as nurses and nurse's aides. The black Americans (in general) were lazy, disinterested and had a resentful attitude. The worst was a black American moslem. The Africans, on the other hand, were friendly, interested and worked hard.

What was the difference? They are all human beings. But the Africans hadn't been indoctrinated by the US educational system.

I'm afraid, as Obama had doubled the size of the US Dept. of Education, that his diversity dreams will deepen into nightmare schisms.

Getting local control of education can end this horror. Private schools, charter schools, home schooling, and least but not least, who needs public education and the billions of dollars it gulps down every day to feed unionized teachers and multi-layers of educrats feeding paper to each other, when internet teaching is now available?

It's wrong for me to be forced to pay property taxes to support left-wing philosophy and politics that me finds repugnant.
The only workable solution to this problem is politically impossible to implement. Therefore, we must content ourselves with the way things are and not what they could be. Too bad.
Palinglish;

Blacks are in prison for the crime of attacking mostly other blacks. If black victims are getting better justice than white victims because more black criminals are in jail, then you are indeed correct. There is a racial injustice problem that is biased against white victims.

You might consider that the problems of a sub-group are not always the fault of the main group, but are related to the cultural attitudes of the sub-group. The illegitimacy rate of blacks was vastly lower in the 1950s when racism was a stronger force. The racism card is maxed out.
Excellent article...It doen't matter how much money you throw at the problem or try to blame social injustice, till black politicians start telling black folk that having babies out of wedlock is non productive and it ain't whitee fault no mo. GOOD LUCK.
Great article, Heather. How unfortunate that our system of welfare for those who really needed it was predicated on driving the male out of the household. The liberals who pushed the welfare system as it currently exists upon society in the guise of "reform" were obviously incapable of understanding the concept of "unintended consequences". Now we all suffer those consequences, but black urban families suffer the worst.

Liberal/Progressive notions of helping usually hurts those it intends to help. Fostering good family values, a strong work ethic, and the understanding that "G-d helps those who help themselves" (I am an atheist, but it works for me) is what will move those young people off the streets.

Now, if we only had an economy that could provide employment for those young black men, maybe they wouldn't feel the despair that enables them to see crime as a desirable lifestyle. We'll probably have to wait until 2012 for that.
Great post, Jr.
"Good families rule over peer pressure, always have and always will."

I think that people are social animals. That is, 99% of human beings have a need to socialize, to be with their own kind, in order to communicate and to be understood by others.

If a young male cannot communicate with another male (dad is missing) then he will establish communication and understanding with other males (unless you're the oddball like me, who prefers to socialize with women). These other males are usually his peers from the neighborhood or public school.

The need to communicate, the need to be understood, to have others agree or disagree with what you are thinking and saying, this is a deep and necessary instinct in all of us. If dad is not present, then the neighborhood gang provides such succor.
"Culture" is a relationship established by teaching to every newborn the behavioral skills necessary for social acceptance within the relationship. So Ms. MacDonald is not actually speaking here of a black culture but of a welfare culture, welfare relationships in which women and children are supported by taxation and men are not. There is no place for, and no means by which, males born into the tax funded welfare culture can earn social acceptance, except as drive by fathers, which increases the welfare checks, as well as the criminality that adds to household income without interfering with the official income that establishes the welfare status. Thus, the problem is the welfare culture which currently is socially acceptable mainly for blacks, because it is artificially validated as necessary by the excuse of slavery and segregation.

But the greater problem is that the welfare culture will gradually become the national culture, as it does in every welfare state. The reason is simple enough, there is no reason to struggle to maintain a prosperous, harmonious culture of intellectual achievement, profitable work and familial cohesion, when welfare state propaganda puts the higher social value on the welfare culture, for whom all must “sacrifice.” These sacrifices are expected through the reward to the welfare culture, of both private educational and economic opportunities created by the working culture, as well as the direct redistribution to the government favored welfare culture, by way of welfare state taxation, a large portion of the economic rewards of the working culture.

So while it is easy to presume that color differences are relevant to various cultural relationships, because this idea is taught by every school in America, fundamentally the origin of all cultural relationships is human action and human action is never caused by irrelevant physical appearance, but by intellectual conclusions, particularly political and religious beliefs. Right or wrong these beliefs originate all human action...action, which depending upon the accuracy of those beliefs, either results in harmonious cultural relationships or destructive violence, often proudly perpetuated into civil war or genocide by errors thought to be truth.
Palinglish said, "Black men were ripped from their families [and] made to feel like they weren't men."

This did happen in Africa, but it was rare in the Western Hemisphere. However, it remains a glorious myth that still serves as a way to blame Whitey for dysfunction among blacks.

The black family remained intact through slavery and Jim Crow. It began to fall apart when the Great Society programs tacitly announced, "It is obvious that you are inferior and will never be able to compete in a free market. So stop trying. The government will take care of you."

Palinglish also said, "Blacks are disproportionately imprisoned for the same crimes that whites commits [sic]."

Researchers have long looked for evidence of this, but to no avail. When all factors are taken into account, blacks actually receive slightly lighter sentences than whites.

Could it be, Palinglish, that a culture which exalts promiscuity, violence, and ignorance simply cannot flourish?

Palinglish continues, "[Black men] have been brainwashed to believe that blond Becky is the ideal."

The NAACP and other civil rights groups, as well as many whites, were outraged about and fought for repeal of the laws some states had enacted against inter-racial marriage. So now you're claiming that apparently weak-minded black men are being brainwashed? And just who is doing this brainwashing? White racists who want to encourage miscegeny?

The real root of the present mess is that when black people were in desperate need of liberty and free markets, government gave them condescension and welfare. So in that sense, Palinglish, you are correct. It is indeed the fault of Whitey: the white liberals who concocted the poison social programs for blacks to drink.
No government program, despite the best of intentions, can compensate for strong family structure. So how do you create and support committed two-parent families? It is difficult to maintain a strong marraige without having a foundation based in faith. The local church remains the hope of the world. Incentives from governmental programs will influence behavior temporarily, but faith has the power to change people from within. Not to support this powerful force in the face of such significant social problems seems foolish.
Sterilization - not a bad idea, but only if it applies to everybody everywhere, not just poor blacks.

Out of wedlock births is a disease. Personal responsibility, with the threat of sterilization, may be the cure. Unfortunately liberals will say it is racist because it will affect blacks disproportionately and religious groups will oppose because it will promote abortion so we will continue failing to take real action and the problem will fester.

I also think the tax code should also be rewritten to reward/encourage two parent families. We need to stem the tide of divorce and single parent families nationwide.

Unfortunately you can't legislate morality, personal responsibility, or common sense.
Puuul-eeze!!! The whole world knows that all the world's problems are the fault of G. W. Bush.

Those believing otherwise can be expected that their next residence will be a re-education camp.
i'm sure ms. mac donald will be vilified for this article, but bravo. nothing is gained by blaming some outside force, "the man", "society" other nonsensical utterances. until the black community directs shame towards the men that do this, they will continue, and so will the problems. and there's no amount of "organizing" or "outreach" that will change this very simple fact.
The first thing that needs to happen in Chicago is to terminate Welfare payments.

The second thing is to eliminate ALL firearms possession restrictions on law-abiding citizens.

The third thing that needs to happen is when an individual comes to the taxpayer to have them pay for her out-of-wedlock pregnancy, the single mom is sterilized as her price for us funding her illegitimate child.

And fourth....all males identified as having fathered an illegitimate child are to be immediately sterilized.

this is very interesting and I agree that the family structure is not there.

aside from that you really need to go to africa and see that this is not that different from what you find in tribes. the difference there is if the tribe is small enough there is peer and patriarchal pressure to maintain the tribal standards.

if the tribe is not small it is like Chicago, soon to be more like mad max.
For those of you blaming the inner city schools... You would have literally had to kill me to keep me from going to school. I don't care how bad the school was, I would have graduated, and gone to college.

From a young age I worried about having to support myself at 18. I had two choices, really. First, I could give up, do drugs or get into trouble or drop out of school. Or, alternatively, I could make dang sure I paid attention in class and studied enough to graduate and get into college.

I feared for my life if I didnt graduate because I knew I wouldn't be able to support myself.

Yet for some reason obscene amounts of kids in inner cities don't pay attention in school and don't graduate. They simply are not taking responsibility for themselves from an early age.

Frankly, I do not feel responsible for anyone who chooses to throw away a free education. Whatever poverty they later face is entirely their own fault. I don't mean to be cruel, no doubt coming from a bad family or bad neighborhood makes it easier to choose the wrong path, but for me, coming from a bad family made it more imperitive that I be able to support myself once I had to, not less.

And before you call me racist, please note that I have 2 black neices and one white nephew old enough to be responsible for their actions. The two black neices are beautiful, smart, hard working and have done very well in school. They know they need to be able to provide for themselves one day and are on track. The one white nephew on the other hand chose to be a bum his entire life. He couldnt be bothered with school work, had a bad attitude and refuses to hold down a job. The choices they've each made is a human choice. Race only comes into question when measuring the aggregate choices of all the individuals within a particular group. And from the statistics above, and others we've all read before, black youth, particularly black males are making horendous choices that are destroying the average wealth and success rates of black people in this country.

It is a crying shame. It is also something that I too truly hoped Obama would address as President. But sadly he hasnt much. Instead he keeps telling minorities, my nieces included, that racists in America are aligned against them.

I hope they will never listen to any such messaging, because whatever prejudice will come their way will come. The damage from that will be far far less than the damage from their perceiving it everywhere and being so guarded and defensive on the subject that they fail to appreciate all the great things about this country, and take advantage of the opportunities afforded them. I pray to god that they never think they have any excuse for not working hard and succeeding.
Of course this is why inner city public school education is such a dismal, violence ridden enterprise. The students and their parents who want to learn desperately try to segregate themselves into charter schools away from the disruption and violence in these inner city public schools. All the increased school spending in the world will not solve this problem.



Palinglish said fathers are missing from black housholds because "blacks are disproportionately imprisoned for the same crimes that whites commits."

Rubbish. How about ceasing comitting crime instead of complaining about how the punishment is worse than that of whites? Black women (like all women) need to avoid pregnancy until they're married and avoid men who aren't marriage material. If the good black men are marrying non-blacks, then maybe the good black women need to do likewise, but in any case, they need to avoid getting pregnant until they're married. It's really no more complicated than that. The best way to love your children is to do your best to only bring them into a stable, married family. To those who say "marriage is just a piece of paper", ask yourselves why some (mostly men) are so afraid of a piece of paper. Refraining from marrying is escape hatch from being stuck in a family. Kids know that fact intuitively and it affects them negatively if their parents won't get married.
Kudos to Renfield on his/her post - particularly the part about "urban renewal".

I agree with the article, but Ms. MacDonald's latest "what's wrong with black people" essay continue to bring nothing new to the table.

She never provides solutions to the problem. Yes, we know fathers should be in the home. But how do you get black men to be fathers when 1,000,000+ are incarcerated and over 50% of the non-incarcerated black men are high school drop outs and/or unemployed?

How can a family compensate for a father figure when the biological father is dead (by any cause - naturally, suicide, murdered)?

How can a family compensate for a father that can't be in the home (i.e. abusive, violent, mentally ill, drug addicted)?

How can marriage be reintroduced to black society when there are low levels of self esteem and high levels of the animosity between black men and black women, particularly in poor neighborhoods?
PumpmasterGeneral October 03, 2010 at 1:43 AM
Jedi Geek is right. When you consider the rates of incarceration, a much larger percentage of blacks are criminal.

Simply eleminate welfare and the minimum wage. Also, eliminate all governmet programs except those pertaining to law and order (police, courts and prisons) and national defense. Then, the government would more effectively perform the legitimate function of arresting and locking up the pathological because that's all we the citizens would be monitoring. Also, black children would develop meaningful job skills, and for those willing to be students, they could go to school but only if they were willing to learn- if not, the private schools would kick them out.

It's all pretty simple : what it realy amounts to is a new emancipation proclamaition. The truth is that black people wedding themselves to government is a continuation of plantation paternalism that can only result in dependency, which always results in pathologies.
What does this article have to do with politics? The author says herself this is a result of single parent homes. This is just an way for RCP to give their racist, wingnut followers an excuse to spout racist nonsense about black people. It's actually pretty disgusting that even RCP would stoop to this level. The good old southern strategy eh?

Even funnier are the idiotic comments that blame the Dems for this. As a black woman, who knows much more about being a black woman than those who aren't, I will tell you why there are so many single parent families. No, it's not because they get paid to be single, idiots. It's because there is a shortage of eligible black males! Thanks to racism in the good ole US of A, blacks are disproportionately imprisoned for the same crimes that whites commits. There also is no decent education in the inner city and rural areas, so the odds are stacked against these young men being successful. As a result, if you take away all of the black men in jail (many due to the proven bias in the 'justice' system) those who are gay, and the near epidemic of successful black men who marry white women (because they have been brainwashed to believe that blond Becky is the ideal) what are you left with? Not enough eligible black men left to marry. It's not rocket science. In my family alone, 80% of us are college educated. Out of all the successful males in my family, about 60% have married white women.

Slavery is the root of all this. Black men were ripped from their families made to feel like they weren't men. For generations too many you black boys had no role model on how to be a man. Black women were forced to rear children alone. These women were conditioned to be heads of the house. It is ingrained in us to be strong black women who don't need men because too many women in our past had no choice in this matter. As a result, many black women won't let their man be the man. And here comes Becky all ready to submit. I am simplifying this, and there are many other ways that slavery and Jim Crow have helped destroy the black family. However, it would take 20 more paragraphs to explain them all. There is also the problem of black men being so emasculated by this racist country that they believe the more babies they have, the more 'manly' they are. That is also an issue. But this is a vicious cycle, with many causes, that continues today. I am sure I will be called a racist, but the truth is the truth. Most posters here will never understand and/or will deny these truths, but that doesn't make what I've said any less true.
Humperdink Chickpounder October 03, 2010 at 1:33 AM
Ignoring the fact that most black children in Chicago have no father in the home is rooted in multicultural, race education. The way these types of propaganda operate is to first teach students what racial stereotypes are. From that point forward, any mention of the stereotype is automatically dismissed as invalid. In fact, the opposite of the stereotype is asserted as truth, simply by virtue of being the opposite of a stereotpye. Or, it is often asserted that the stereotpye actually applies to everybody - even though the facts show that it doesn't.

Hence, single motherhood, being on welfare, and high crime rates have long been taught to liberals as intellectual constructs that reinforce racial oppression- not realities that actually indicate that racial oppression isn't really much of a determinant in the lives of black people any more. To talk about them is to be not only racist, but obviously out of the no.
"The black and Latino communities have been ruined by the liberal Democrats and by political correctness."

So you're saying the black and Latino communities were doing just fine until liberal Democrats came along and ruined them?
Does anyone actually think that if all blacks were raised in two parent families they would no longer commit a vastly disproportionate amount of crime?
Many white liberals relate to blacks from a position of fear, guilt, pity and appeasement.
Wait...I have a campaign slogan for Rahm Emmanuel-"Hope and Change for Chicago."
An excellent article. Part of the reason this does not get openly discussed is that, aside from the supposed racist aspect, to do so challenges the belief of radical feminists that fathers do not matter.

So honestly dealing with the problem confronts the interests of two key support groups for the Democrats, blacks and feminists.

Liberals have created an enormous problem, because it has been allowed to fester for several generations. Even if all young black men now believed they should marry and raise children, how many have either the personal skills to do so or the education to generate a reasonable income to support a family?

Kids from single parent families do less well at school, especially when their families are not committed to education. The problem is even worse when they are part of a community that is antagonistic to learning. So for decades, this poisonous combination has been churning out increasingly uneducated kids, less and less able to take responsibility for their lives.

And of course, the supreme irony is that most blacks vote Democrat, they vote for the side of politics that has destroyed their communities, their lives and their self-respect.
During his campaign, Obama made a speech about black men taking responsibility for their actions. The speech was so stirring that I almost thought he could be the Great Unifier and carry a message of hope and better behavior to ALL men and women that would change the course of America.

Despite being the most powerful black man in the universe, Obama has never raised the subject of black illegitimacy again. Instead of truly helping his people and our country, he chose to shove socialized medicine down our throats. I am truly sad at this wasted opportunity. Apparently a Nobel Peace Prize does not induce selfless soul-searching and altruistic behavior.
A brave article, Heather, and so true. I am middle-aged white man, and have dated perhaps seven or eight black men in my life. All except one told me, "I've never met my father."

The FBI's own website gives the ability to break down murders by various factors, including race. Several months ago, when I was breaking down all solved murder cases from 2008 (because nearly a third of all murders for that year remained unsolved at the time), African-Americans were responsible for a shocking 53.7 percent of all murders nationwide, more than whites, Hispanics, and Asians combined.

I'm going to get called a racist for saying this, but I feel like there is a "blame anybody but me" attitude that is prevalent in African-American culture. What I always hear is, "Yes, we do have to take responsibility for this... but the root cause of all of this is racism."

You'll get celebrities like Alicia Keys saying that gangsta rap was "a governement ploy to try to get black people to kill each other." Or two of the Jenna 6 boys getting a standing ovation at the NAACP awards, even though they brutally beat a white student in a six-on-one assault, putting him in the hospital. That tells me where the values of much of the black community lie today.

I know racism still exists, and it's abhorrent. But it's no excuse for lack of personal responsibility. It's like a husband who beats his wife saying, "I beat her because my father beat me. So until my father makes amends to me, how dare you ask me to stop beating my wife?"
The truth is, poverty and family breakdown are like the chicken and the egg. But no matter, my question is, "WHY do we not dare to speak truth?" I commend Heather MacDonald for her speaking the truth as she sees it in this article, but why are there so few of us who would speak the truth publicly? Is it because of our post-modern value of "tolerance"? It is PC to speak of poverty, unemployment, the need for more services, and for us to pull together. But when someone calls for putting the family back together again...well, it sounds too much like calling for "family values." If poverty and family breakdown are like the chicken and the egg, politics and truth, it seems, are like oil and water.
It will never be talked about. To talk about it and really examine it would lead to the inescapable conclusion that it is the rise of the welfare state and its continued existence and expansion that is the root cause of the destruction of the black family. The driving force behind this is liberal policies and liberals' soft racism of low expectations.
Heather MacDonald is a White woman. She's disallowed from drawing attention to the savage pathologies in the "black community," because bigots will use here data to justify their preconceived prejudices against blacks.

Who will be the first to go after her for "spreading virulent, toxic, hateful lies about African Americans who contribute so much needed Diversity to America"?
Ah, please tell us upfront: in every large city where Dem rule has been in cement for decades, there is poverty, gangs, youth crime, homelessness, welfare mentalities out of this universe and yet, the lemming Dem voters continue to elect these thugs . Then after more horrors, they whine and blame it on...Bush, Republicans, Christians or anyone but the liberal big city mayors, councils, guvs or state legislatures. I have not one ounce of sympathy for those citizens but wonder how different it would have been if there had been more Rudy G's, Haley Barbour's, and Bobby Jindal's in charge.
Does

> The national rate of homicide commission
> for black males between the ages of 14
> and 17 is ten times higher than that
> of “whites,”

understate black criminality by not adjusting for the higher rate of black incarceration? In higher age ranges, the black incarceration rate is as much as 10X the white rate.
Does

> The national rate of homicide commission
> for black males between the ages of 14
> and 17 is ten times higher than that
> of “whites,”

understate black criminality by not adjusting for the higher rate of black incarceration? In higher age ranges, the black incarceration rate is as much as 10X the white rate.
If I were a Negro, I would get as far away from the government as I could.

Realistically, I think it would take at least 3 generations, at 20 years per, to right this situation. I also believe that years of forced integration had a greater negative impact on the Negro community than anything else.
Excellent article; you are right on with your analysis.
A good article pointing out what everyone knows, but let's face it nothing will change. The media will never focus on the violence committed by certain individuals. Liberals hoped to solve the problem through abortion and government money. God forbid anyone mentions individual responsibility and holding EVERY citizen of the US to the same standards. I've given up. I just agree with my liberal friends. How do I sleep at night? Not very well, how do they sleep at night? But I realized the power is with the race hustling industry and their Democratic friends. I live in Chicago and I already know that there will be three to five killings tonight, but Jessie's kids have Liquor distributorships and one is an adulterous member of congress who is couldn't run a Dairy Queen. Am I a bad person for not speaking up, or has the media been successful in silencing me .. I think the answer is obvious. So thank you NY Times and other media outlets. I will enjoy my afternoon and wait for the Sunday paper with the latest casualties in the morning and think " those damn Tea party people are ruining the country"
Agree that absent fathers are the problem. But the next question is WHY are the fathers absent? (please don't give the answer: "it's because the fathers' fathers were absent" [which of course is true]. We must find the real underlying reason.
There is no root cause to the violence problem. There are a few causes and if you ask different people you will get different answers. The problem is that we do a lot of talking and no action. Just get involved in a program near you.
correction: ". . . if doing so wouldn't cost her her benefits"
"there cannot be a simple, monocausal factor controlling everything that has gone so hideously wrong in the African-American community"

Correct, but I don't think anyone is really claiming such a factor. However, since a huge part of the acknowledged deterioration occurred over the past 50 years--after decades of steady gains--perhaps we should examine what changed between 1960 and 2010:

1. The government razed "blighted" but cohesive black neighborhoods and warehoused blacks in high-rise apartment buildings that quickly became unlivable. (Actually, this idiocy started in the early 1950s. Google "Pruitt-Igoe.") Even many liberal social engineers admit that this was a bad idea.

2. The government established perverse incentives that encouraged destructive behavior. These were the "Great Society" programs that are still ruining lives today.

3. The government became obsessed not just with desegregation, but with forced integration, busing both white and black children hither and yon, not for any legitimate educational purpose, but to create "proper" racial proportions in school populations. Almost every social scientist today concedes that this policy was terrible.

4. In an effort to generate "diversity," top private colleges began admitting blacks who should have been in state schools, steering them largely into useless "victim studies" courses taught by political radicals; state schools began admitting blacks who should have been in community colleges; and community colleges began admitting blacks not remotely qualified for academic work.

5. The black community, which at one time considered accepting welfare to be shameful, was persuaded that they "deserved" such payments because of the treatment their ancestors had received a century earlier.

6. Visionary and brave leaders like W.E.B. DuBois, Booker T. Washington, and Martin Luther King gave way to hucksters and buffoons like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Maxine Waters.

My own opinion is that underlying the government attempts to help black people was an unspoken assumption that blacks were in fact mentally and socially inferior and could never really compete on an equal basis with whites. Thus blacks had to be "given" support and favored in hiring and admissions.

Incidentally, I have edited several studies of federal initiatives to promote marriage of welfare mothers to the fathers of their children. It turns out that while some of those women (and their kids) should stay as far away from the fathers as they can, many a father does take an interest in his kids and would indeed marry the woman if doing so didn't wouldn't cost her her benefits (and make him responsible for support). But the government is in fact trying to support two-parent families where possible.
No single raindrop believes that it is responsible for the flood.
Thank you to orthodoc for the data. Looks like plenty of research to along with the article.
Heather MacDonald is a national treasure. I fear, however, that encouraging two-parent families is the last thing our social-welfare complex federal government will ever do.

Two-parent families disempower governments in the never-ending drive to infantilize people and make them rely on government. So suggesting that two-parent families may be the way to stem the disintegration of civil society in the urban cores will always be characterized as racism or the like.

D.P. Moynihan observed the breakdown of the black family and what it portended for civil society in 1964. And what did that avail?

Anyway, one should not stop speaking "truth to power" and I am thankful for the eloquent voice of Heather MacDonald.
A few months ago, I mentioned the same considerations to a great old friend, who happened to be very Democrat Liberal. His response was: you forgot to mention Bristol Palin and Levi.
Correlation is NOT cause.

The cause of black family breakdown itself, meanwhile, remains to be explained.

Is it because far too many black men are violent and irresponsible?
Oh wait, that fact was to have been explained by family breakdown....

And around and around we go, because there cannot be a simple, monocausal factor controlling everything that has gone so hideously wrong in the African-American community.

Not a solution as simple as promoting marriage as a panacea.

Just came home from a jaunt into Chicago's south side, from which I am truly a refugee. I cannot believe, to this day, what has happened there in the last fifty years. Board-ups, garbage, and graffiti. Everywhere. This article is spot on. The black and Latino communities have been ruined by the liberal Democrats and by political correctness. The media are to blame as well, often skewing the truth. Also,it's bad enough when there is no father present in a home, but when there is a male present, it's usually a boyfriend, thus increasing the likelihood that any young children in the home will be abused, or killed. Those stories are increasing to the point where the general public doesn't even pay attention anymore, just like the shootings (303 in the month of July). And don't look to the government for help - what did the president and his cohorts do for Chicago all the years they lived and supposedly worked here?
In response to Bruno, a shameless paste from Dads4kids.com:


Sexual activity. In a study of 700 adolescents, researchers found that "compared to families with two natural parents living in the home, adolescents from single-parent families have been found to engage in greater and earlier sexual activity."
Source: Carol W. Metzler, et al. "The Social Context for Risky Sexual Behavior Among Adolescents," Journal of Behavioral Medicine 17 (1994).

A myriad of maladies. Fatherless children are at a dramatically greater risk of drug and alcohol abuse, mental illness, suicide, poor educational performance, teen pregnancy, and criminality.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics, Survey on Child Health, Washington, DC, 1993.

Drinking problems. Teenagers living in single-parent households are more likely to abuse alcohol and at an earlier age compared to children reared in two-parent households
Source: Terry E. Duncan, Susan C. Duncan and Hyman Hops, "The Effects of Family Cohesiveness and Peer Encouragement on the Development of Adolescent Alcohol Use: A Cohort-Sequential Approach to the Analysis of Longitudinal Data," Journal of Studies on Alcohol 55 (1994).

Drug Use: "...the absence of the father in the home affects significantly the behavior of adolescents and results in the greater use of alcohol and marijuana."
Source: Deane Scott Berman, "Risk Factors Leading to Adolescent Substance Abuse," Adolescence 30 (1995)

Sexual abuse. A study of 156 victims of child sexual abuse found that the majority of the children came from disrupted or single-parent homes; only 31 percent of the children lived with both biological parents. Although stepfamilies make up only about 10 percent of all families, 27 percent of the abused children lived with either a stepfather or the mother's boyfriend.
Source: Beverly Gomes-Schwartz, Jonathan Horowitz, and Albert P. Cardarelli, "Child Sexual Abuse Victims and Their Treatment," U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Child Abuse. Researchers in Michigan determined that "49 percent of all child abuse cases are committed by single mothers."
Source: Joan Ditson and Sharon Shay, "A Study of Child Abuse in Lansing, Michigan," Child Abuse and Neglect, 8 (1984).

Deadly predictions. A family structure index -- a composite index based on the annual rate of children involved in divorce and the percentage of families with children present that are female-headed -- is a strong predictor of suicide among young adult and adolescent white males.
Source: Patricia L. McCall and Kenneth C. Land, "Trends in White Male Adolescent, Young-Adult and Elderly Suicide: Are There Common Underlying Structural Factors?" Social Science Research 23, 1994.

High risk. Fatherless children are at dramatically greater risk of suicide.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics, Survey on Child Health, Washington, DC, 1993.

Suicidal Tendencies. In a study of 146 adolescent friends of 26 adolescent suicide victims, teens living in single-parent families are not only more likely to commit suicide but also more likely to suffer from psychological disorders, when compared to teens living in intact families.
Source: David A. Brent, et al. "Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Peers of Adolescent Suicide Victims: Predisposing Factors and Phenomenology." Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 34, 1995.

Confused identities. Boys who grow up in father-absent homes are more likely that those in father-present homes to have trouble establishing appropriate sex roles and gender identity.
Source: P.L. Adams, J.R. Milner, and N.A. Schrepf, Fatherless Children, New York, Wiley Press, 1984.

Psychiatric Problems. In 1988, a study of preschool children admitted to New Orleans hospitals as psychiatric patients over a 34-month period found that nearly 80 percent came from fatherless homes.
Source: Jack Block, et al. "Parental Functioning and the Home Environment in Families of Divorce," Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 27 (1988)

Emotional distress. Children living with a never-married mother are more likely to have been treated for emotional problems.
Source: L. Remez, "Children Who Don't Live with Both Parents Face Behavioral Problems," Family Planning Perspectives (January/February 1992).

Uncooperative kids. Children reared by a divorced or never-married mother are less cooperative and score lower on tests of intelligence than children reared in intact families. Statistical analysis of the behavior and intelligence of these children revealed "significant detrimental effects" of living in a female-headed household. Growing up in a female-headed household remained a statistical predictor of behavior problems even after adjusting for differences in family income.
Source: Greg L. Duncan, Jeanne Brooks-Gunn and Pamela Kato Klebanov, "Economic Deprivation and Early Childhood Development," Child Development 65 (1994).
Unstable families, unstable lives. Compared to peers in two-parent homes, black children in single-parent households are more likely to engage in troublesome behavior, and perform poorly in school.
Source: Tom Luster and Hariette Pipes McAdoo, "Factors Related to the Achievement and Adjustment of Young African-American Children." Child Development 65 (1994): 1080-1094

Beyond class lines. Even controlling for variations across groups in parent education, race and other child and family factors, 18- to 22-year-olds from disrupted families were twice as likely to have poor relationships with their mothers and fathers, to show high levels of emotional distress or problem behavior, [and] to have received psychological help.
Source: Nicholas Zill, Donna Morrison, and Mary Jo Coiro, "Long Term Effects of Parental Divorce on Parent-Child Relationships, Adjustment and Achievement in Young Adulthood." Journal of Family Psychology 7 (1993).

Fatherly influence. Children with fathers at home tend to do better in school, are less prone to depression and are more successful in relationships. Children from one-parent families achieve less and get into trouble more than children from two parent families.
Source: One Parent Families and Their Children: The School's Most Significant Minority, conducted by The Consortium for the Study of School Needs of Children from One Parent Families, co sponsored by the National Association of Elementary School Principals and the Institute for Development of Educational Activities, a division of the Charles F. Kettering Foundation, Arlington, VA., 1980

Divorce disorders. Children whose parents separate are significantly more likely to engage in early sexual activity, abuse drugs, and experience conduct and mood disorders. This effect is especially strong for children whose parents separated when they were five years old or younger.
Source: David M. Fergusson, John Horwood and Michael T. Lynsky, "Parental Separation, Adolescent Psychopathology, and Problem Behaviors," Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 33 (1944).

Troubled marriages, troubled kids. Compared to peers living with both biological parents, sons and daughters of divorced or separated parents exhibited significantly more conduct problems. Daughters of divorced or separated mothers evidenced significantly higher rates of internalizing problems, such as anxiety or depression.
Source: Denise B. Kandel, Emily Rosenbaum and Kevin Chen, "Impact of Maternal Drug Use and Life Experiences on Preadolescent Children Born to Teenage Mothers," Journal of Marriage and the Family56 (1994).

Hungry for love. "Father hunger" often afflicts boys age one and two whose fathers are suddenly and permanently absent. Sleep disturbances, such as trouble falling asleep, nightmares, and night terrors frequently begin within one to three months after the father leaves home.
Source: Alfred A. Messer, "Boys Father Hunger: The Missing Father Syndrome," Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality, January 1989.

Disturbing news: Children of never-married mothers are more than twice as likely to have been treated for an emotional or behavioral problem.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics, National Health Interview Survey, Hyattsille, MD, 1988

Poor and in trouble: A 1988 Department of Health and Human Services study found that at every income level except the very highest (over $50,000 a year), children living with never-married mothers were more likely than their counterparts in two-parent families to have been expelled or suspended from school, to display emotional problems, and to engage in antisocial behavior.
Source: James Q. Wilson, "In Loco Parentis: Helping Children When Families Fail Them," The Brookings Review, Fall 1993.

Fatherless aggression: In a longitudinal study of 1,197 fourth-grade students, researchers observed "greater levels of aggression in boys from mother-only households than from boys in mother-father households."
Source: N. Vaden-Kierman, N. Ialongo, J. Pearson, and S. Kellam, "Household Family Structure and Children's Aggressive Behavior: A Longitudinal Study of Urban Elementary School Children," Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 23, no. 5 (1995).

Act now, pay later: "Children from mother-only families have less of an ability to delay gratification and poorer impulse control (that is, control over anger and sexual gratification.) These children also have a weaker sense of conscience or sense of right and wrong."
Source: E.M. Hetherington and B. Martin, "Family Interaction" in H.C. Quay and J.S. Werry (eds.), Psychopathological Disorders of Childhood. (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1979)

Crazy victims: Eighty percent of adolescents in psychiatric hospitals come from broken homes.
Source: J.B. Elshtain, "Family Matters...", Christian Century, July 1993.

Duh to dead: "The economic consequences of a [father's] absence are often accompanied by psychological consequences, which include higher-than-average levels of youth suicide, low intellectual and education performance, and higher-than-average rates of mental illness, violence and drug use."
Source: William Galston, Elaine Kamarck. Progressive Policy Institute. 1993

Expelled: Nationally, 15.3 percent of children living with a never-married mother and 10.7 percent of children living with a divorced mother have been expelled or suspended from school, compared to only 4.4 percent of children living with both biological parents.
Source: Debra Dawson, "Family Structure...", Journal of Marriage and Family, No. 53. 1991.

Violent rejection: Kids who exhibited violent behavior at school were 11 times as likely not to live with their fathers and six times as likely to have parents who were not married. Boys from families with absent fathers are at higher risk for violent behavior than boys from intact families.
Source: J.L. Sheline (et al.), "Risk Factors...", American Journal of Public Health, No. 84. 1994.

That crowd: Children without fathers or with stepfathers were less likely to have friends who think it's important to behave properly in school. They also exhibit more problems with behavior and in achieving goals.
Source: Nicholas Zill, C. W. Nord, "Running in Place," Child Trends, Inc. 1994.

Likeliest to succeed: Kids who live with both biological parents at age 14 are significantly more likely to graduate from high school than those kids who live with a single parent, a parent and step-parent, or neither parent.
Source: G.D. Sandefur (et al.), "The Effects of Parental Marital Status...", Social Forces, September 1992.

Worse to bad: Children in single-parent families tend to score lower on standardized tests and to receive lower grades in school. Children in single-parent families are nearly twice as likely to drop out of school as children from two-parent families.
Source: J.B. Stedman (et al.), "Dropping Out," Congressional Research Service Report No 88-417. 1988.

College odds: Children from disrupted families are 20 percent more unlikely to attend college than kids from intact, two-parent families.
Source: J. Wallerstein, Family Law Quarterly, 20. (Summer 1986)

On their own: Kids living in single-parent homes or in step-families report lower educational expectations on the part of their parents, less parental monitoring of school work, and less overall social supervision than children from intact families.
Source: N.M. Astore and S. McLanahan, Americican Sociological Review, No. 56 (1991)

Double-risk: Fatherless children -- kids living in homes without a stepfather or without contact with their biological father -- are twice as likely to drop out of school.
Source: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Survey on Child Health. (1993)

Repeat, repeat: Nationally, 29.7 percent of children living with a never-married mother and 21.5 percent of children living with a divorced mother have repeated at least one grade in school, compared to 11.6 percent of children living with both biological parents.
Source: Debra Dawson, "Family Structure and Children's Well-Being," Journals of Marriage and Family, No. 53. (1991).

Underpaid high achievers: Children from low-income, two-parent families outperform students from high-income, single-parent homes. Almost twice as many high achievers come from two-parent homes as one-parent homes.
Source: "One-Parent Families and Their Children;" Charles F. Kettering Foundation (1990).

Dadless and dumb: At least one-third of children experiencing a parental separation "demonstrated a significant decline in academic performance" persisting at least three years.
Source: L.M.C. Bisnairs (et al.), American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, no. 60 (1990)

Son of Solo: According to a recent study of young, non-custodial fathers who are behind on child support payments, less than half of these men were living with their own father at age 14.

Slip-sliding: Among black children between the ages of 6 to 9 years old, black children in mother-only households scored significantly lower on tests of intellectual ability, than black children living with two parents.
Source: Luster and McAdoo, Child Development 65. 1994.

Dadless dropouts: After taking into account race, socio-economic status, sex, age and ability, high school students from single-parent households were 1.7 times more likely to drop out than were their corresponding counterparts living with both biological parents.
Source: Ralph McNeal, Sociology of Education 88. 1995.

Takes two: Families in which both the child's biological or adoptive parents are present in the household show significantly higher levels of parental involvement in the child's school activities than do mother-only families or step-families.
Source: Zill and Nord, "Running in Place." Child Trends. 1994

Con garden: Forty-three percent of prison inmates grew up in a single-parent household -- 39 percent with their mothers, 4 percent with their fathers -- and an additional 14 percent lived in households without either biological parent. Another 14 percent had spent at last part of their childhood in a foster home, agency or other juvenile institution.
Source: US Bureau of Justice Statistics, Survey of State Prison Inmates. 1991

Criminal moms, criminal kids: The children of single teenage mothers are more at risk for later criminal behavior. In the case of a teenage mother, the absence of a father also increases the risk of harshness from the mother.
Source: M. Mourash, L. Rucker, Crime and Delinquency 35. 1989.

Rearing rapists: Seventy-two percent of adolescent murderers grew up without fathers. Sixty percent of America's rapists grew up the same way.
Source: D. Cornell (et al.), Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 5. 1987. And N. Davidson, "Life Without Father," Policy Review. 1990.

Crime and poverty: The proportion of single-parent households in a community predicts its rate of violent crime and burglary, but the community's poverty level does not.
Source: D.A. Smith and G.R. Jarjoura, "Social Structure and Criminal Victimization," Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 25. 1988.

Marriage matters: Only 13 percent of juvenile delinquents come from families in which the biological mother and father are married to each other. By contract, 33 percent have parents who are either divorced or separated and 44 percent have parents who were never married.
Source: Wisconsin Dept. of Health and Social Services, April 1994.

No good time: Compared to boys from intact, two-parent families, teenage boys from disrupted families are not only more likely to be incarcerated for delinquent offenses, but also to manifest worse conduct while incarcerated.
Source: M Eileen Matlock et al., "Family Correlates of Social Skills..." Adolescence 29. 1994.

Count 'em: Seventy percent of juveniles in state reform institutions grew up in single- or no-parent situations.
Source: Alan Beck et al., Survey of Youth in Custody, 1987, US Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1988.

The Main Thing: The relationship between family structure and crime is so strong that controlling for family configuration erases the relationship between race and crime and between low income and crime. This conclusion shows up time and again in the literature.
Source: E. Kamarck, William Galston, Putting Children First, Progressive Policy Inst. 1990

Examples: Teenage fathers are more likely than their childless peers to commit and be convicted of illegal activity, and their offenses are of a more serious nature.
Source: M.A. Pirog-Good, "Teen Father and the Child Support System," in Paternity Establishment, Institute for research on Poverty, Univ. of Wisconsin. 1992.

The 'hood The likelihood that a young male will engage in criminal activity doubles if he is raised without a father and triples if he lives in a neighborhood with a high concentration of single-parent families.
Source: A. Anne Hill, June O'Neill, "Underclass Behaviors in the United States," CUNY, Baruch College. 1993

Bringing the war back home The odds that a boy born in America in 1974 will be murdered are higher than the odds that a serviceman in World War II would be killed in combat.
Source: US Sen. Phil Gramm, 1995

Get ahead at home and at work: Fathers who cared for their children intellectual development and their adolescent's social development were more like to advance in their careers, compared to men who weren't involved in such activities.
Source: J. Snarey, How Fathers Care for the Next Generation.Harvard Univ. Press.

Diaper dads: In 1991, about 20 percent of preschool children were cared for by their fathers -- both married and single. In 1988, the number was 15 percent.
Source: M. O'Connell, "Where's Papa? Father's Role in Child Care," Population Reference Bureau. 1993.

Without leave: Sixty-three percent of 1500 CEOs and human resource directors said it was not reasonable for a father to take a leave after the birth of a child.
Source: J.H. Pleck, "Family Supportive Employer Policies," Center for research in Women. 1991.

Get a job: The number of men who complain that work conflicts with their family responsibilities rose from 12 percent in 1977 to 72 percent in 1989. Meanwhile, 74 percent of men prefer a "daddy track" job to a "fast track" job.
Source: James Levine, The Fatherhood Project.

Long-distance dads: Twenty-six percent of absent fathers live in a different state than their children.
Source: US Bureau of the Census, Statistical Brief . 1991.

Cool Dad of the Week: Among fathers who maintain contact with their children after a divorce, the pattern of the relationship between father-and-child changes. They begin to behave more like relatives than like parents. Instead of helping with homework, nonresident dads are more likely to take the kids shopping, to the movies, or out to dinner. Instead of providing steady advice and guidance, divorced fathers become "treat dads."
Source: F. Furstenberg, A. Cherlin, Divided Families . Harvard Univ. Press. 1991.

Older's not wiser: While 57 percent of unwed dads with kids no older than two visit their children more than once a week, by the time the kid's seven and a half, only 23 percent are in frequent contact with their children.
Source: R. Lerman and Theodora Ooms, Young Unwed Fathers . 1993.

Ten years after: Ten years after the breakup of a marriage, more than two-thirds of kids report not having seen their father for a year.
Source: National Commission on Children, Speaking of Kids. 1991.

No such address: More than half the kids who don't live with their father have never been in their father's house.
Source: F. Furstenberg, A. Cherlin, Divided Families. Harvard Univ. Press. 1991.

Dadless years: About 40 percent of the kids living in fatherless homes haven't seen their dads in a year or more. Of the rest, only one in five sleeps even one night a month at the father's home. And only one in six sees their father once or more per week.
Source: F. Furstenberg, A. Cherlin, Divided Families. Harvard Univ. Press. 1991.

Measuring up? According to a 1992 Gallup poll, more than 50 percent of all adults agreed that fathers today spend less time with their kids than their fathers did with them.
Source: Gallup national random sample conducted for the National Center for Fathering, April 1992.

Father unknown. Of kids living in single-mom households, 35 percent never see their fathers, and another 24 percent see their fathers less than once a month.
Source: J.A. Selzer, "Children's Contact with Absent Parents," Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50 (1988).

Missed contact: In a study of 304 young adults, those whose parents divorced after they left home had significantly less contact with their fathers than adult children who parents remained married. Weekly contact with their children dropped from 78 percent for still-married fathers to 44 percent for divorced fathers.
Source: William Aquilino, "Later Life Parental Divorce and Widowhood," Journal of Marriage and the Family 56. 1994.

Commercial breaks: The amount of time a father spends with his child -- one-on-one -- averages less than 10 minutes a day.
Source: J. P. Robinson, et al., "The Rhythm of Everyday Life." Westview Press. 1988

High risk: Overall, more than 75 percent of American children are at risk because of paternal deprivation. Even in two-parent homes, fewer than 25 percent of young boys and girls experience an average of at least one hour a day of relatively individualized contact with their fathers.
Source: Henry Biller, "The Father Factor..." a paper based on presentations during meetings with William Galston, Deputy Director, Domestic Policy, Clinton White House, December 1993 and April 1994.

Knock, knock: Of children age 5 to 14, 1.6 million return home to houses where there is no adult present.
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, "Who's Minding the Kids?" Statistical Brief. April 1994.

Who said talk's cheap? Almost 20 percent of sixth- through twelfth-graders have not had a good conversation lasting for at least 10 minutes with at least one of their parents in more than a month.
Source: Peter Benson, "The Troubled Journey." Search Institute. 1993.

Justified guilt. A 1990 L.A. Times poll found that 57 percent of all fathers and 55 percent of all mothers feel guilty about not spending enough time with their children.
Source: Lynn Smith and Bob Sipchen, "Two Career Family Dilemma," Los Angeles Times, Aug. 12, 1990.

Who are you, mister? In 1965, parents on average spent approximately 30 hours a week with their kids. By 1985, the amount of time had fallen to 17 hours.
Source: William Mattox, "The Parent Trap." Policy Review. Winter, 1991.

Waiting Works: Only eight percent of those who finished high school, got married before having a child, and waited until age 20 to have that child were living in poverty in 1992.
Source: William Galston, "Beyond the Murphy Brown Debate." Institute for Family Values. Dec. 10, 1993.



More Statistics

63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census)
90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes
85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes (Source: Center for Disease Control)
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes (Source: Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, p. 403-26, 1978.)
71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes (Source: National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools.)
75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes (Source: Rainbows for all God`s Children.)
70% of juveniles in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Special Report, Sept 1988)
85% of all youths sitting in prisons grew up in a fatherless home (Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of Corrections 1992)
Liberals will never ever admit that the source of crime and gangs is the breakdown of the family. Likewise, they will never admit that the breakdown was precipitated by social programs that paid more to single mother than a nuclear family. They get far more mileage out of blaming the "middleclassedness" so reviled by Chicago's Rev. Wright rather than looking in a mirror.
Thank you, Heather, for your authoritative and steady drumbeat. I'm going to take a wild guess that the Chicago tribune has not yet contacted you for reprint rights.
Olaf Christopherson October 02, 2010 at 1:57 PM
As my racist grandfather used to say: "you can take 'em out of the jungle, but you can't take the jungle out of them."
Look at Africa today...not much has changed. Genocide there or in the streets of Chicago is still genocide.
"what percentage of crimes...."
Good families rule over peer pressure, always have and always will. The simple answer is: the statistics will be the same Intact family or not Steve
And I (the conservative) was married to a lib (political fool) believe it or not.
She was a card carrying member of the NEA and has a Phd in Ed. But I loved her and still admire her for her work ethic despite her liberalism. She was a product of the '60's revolution and programmed by socialist professors in the north east through her BS, two Masters and her Phd. (She couldn't stand or understand my being a veteran and a self sufficient, self employed contractor.) And I was tossed out of college in '61 for calling a lit prof a communist! I carried 16 cr each semester and worked 40 hrs a week too. My GPA for the two semesters was 2.48 out of a 2.50 needed. My lit prof "low balled" my final exam out of revenge. (as libs do!) LOL at them!
What percentage of crimes committed were committed by young men from homes where a father is present? This stat would be more revealing than the aggregate figures having to do with "illegitimacy." Moreover, recent studies tend to show that the influence of parents is far less significant than peer group pressure, something that reflects a larger cultural state of affairs than can be culled from Census Bureau stats.
Hear, hear.
My fear is that the statement and restatement of these facts, from Moynihan to MacDonald, not only fall on deaf ears, but also have a sort of reverse-perverse effect whereby they seem to be meaningless; they have been repeated so many times, and ignored just as many, that they simply must not be true, or surely someone would have DONE something by now . . .
Kudos for being able to talk about the pink elephant in the room.
RENFIELD: Maybe I was, behind my back, but I was too big and strong to have anyone "get in my face." As a life long concervative I couldn't tolerate fools ie: liberals!
FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton and Obama. All socialists except Obama, he is a devout marxist.
Look around and see what they have wrought. Not to let some repubs off the hook, like Nixon, (price controls) Ford, (Rino) Bush, ('90 what economic problem) Bush, (he tried to kill my daddy)
I was born during "King" FDR's reign, he extended the depression as my father would rant. And if Dad were alive today he would litterally be floored by Obama. Never in his lifetime, nor mine, would we have believed a MARXIST (read communist)would be elected POTUS.
Maybe it's time to take these absentee fathers to court to collect some child support.
There would have to be a new way of collecting.
Once judgement is rendered, any court officer would be empowered to apprehend the perp and relieve him of ALL his property, including the clothes on his back. They would replace them with a paper coverall and send him back to the street. This would continue until the arrearages are paid off, or until he starts paying his court ordered child support.
Action such as these would make being a "player" really mean something.
It might not solve the marriage problem, but it just might keep them from popping out children for US to support.
Another thing; make the price of receiving public assistance quite high. one out-of-wedlock child is a mistake, two is a plan.
Require sterilization of the mother as the price of getting public assistance.
Draconian? Maybe, but we have to do something.
if paying single mothers encourages out of wedlock births why not funnel the money through the men instead of the women. Pay the men to form "Big Love" style family units, if necesary, in innercities or wherever they choose to live. if the offspring of the "Pride" screw up too much then the leader gets cut off. It couldn't be any more expensive than it is now
I brought this up to my state senator at a fund raiser and was called a "racist with offensive views".

The truth is not absolute but relative today.
As a young white woman who had an out-of-wedlock pregnancy in the 1970s, I was severely punished by family & society in having had all doors closed to me from receiving any support whatsoever for an opportunity to keep and raise my own child. There were severe sanctions against this. I was steered by all involved into having my baby adopted, in 'the best interest of the child'. I made this sacrifice though it went against everything within me. Later on, in becoming an RN, I began to witness all of the multitudes of supports other single mothers have been receiving. But children need fathers. Sex should be saved for marriage. The way of the Lord is best.
"Frankly acknowledging the role of family breakdown in black crime will not, of course, put the black family back together again."

HOW?

I have been in the United States since 1974, first as a legal immigrant, then since 1979 as a Citizen. In this time, I have seen a progressive (I mean Progressive as defined today, most recently by Mr. Obama) decline in respect for concepts and institutions which have been tested for millennia, especially Family and Respect for the individual. Instead, under the guise of improvement of the state of the downtrodden, solution of the problems have been by "GIVING THE POOR CAKE INSTEAD OF BREAD". This was tried nearly 2000 years ago by Imperial Rome. It did not work then, why should it work now?
"Never have I been called a racist . . ."

I guess you've never disagreed with a liberal, Richard.
The lack of fathers has even more impacts, a recent survey I conducted in Arkansas of freshmen split between the remedial and honors college highlighted the role of fathers. Honors students were overwhelmingly white and from two parents homes. Blacks were a majority in the remedial college despite being a minority on campus, and overwhelmingly they came from broken homes. Of the many questions asked dealing with a wide variety of views, exposures and expectations there was only minor differences between whites and blacks. Two parent homes seem to provide an insulating affect against Social Disruption, and indicate the best chance of future successes.

those black students in the remedial program will likely suffer 50% attrition per semester. They will leave college with the debt, but not the degree. In a sluggish American job market increasingly dependent on higher education credentials, the lack of a college education promises to be the new Jim Crow.

Father's, men willing to stand up for the kids they created or for whom they have taken on responsibility are critical. Not only do they provide mentoring, self esteem, and crime deterrence, but their presence also indicates future economic success for their kids. Two parent homes offer the best chance of not just avoiding crime, but getting a degree, a good job and a better future.
Taking your analysis one step farther, the reason the family has disappeared is that the government pays mothers not to get married and not to work. The more irresponsible you are, the more the government pays you. Get married, get a job, you don't get any money. The results, as outlined in your article, are logical and inevitable.
Never have I been called a racist, nor have the inclination to racist thoughts. Amd I have black conservative friends. With that said, one of my favorite expressions is, "it is what it is," and if the shoe fits...wear it (own it.) Most blacks, as statisticaly shown, are incapable of "normal" behavior. Unruly, inconsiderate, disruptive, aggressive, self centered, (think Obama) and violent. Not that whites don't exhibit these tendencies as well, it's just that it's so disproportionate...."that it is what it is." And black leaders need to throw off the black hustlers and merchants of racism as Doctor King would affirm. What boggles my mind is that "whitey" is the blame...yet blacks kill blacks. Why not "whitey" if it is all our fault!?
Federal debt is over $100 trillion when all programs are counted. It is too large to ever be paid back. This means that soon, there will no longer be food stamps, welfare, social security, unemployment or any other program that requires federal funding.

WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE BLACK NEIGHBORHOODS WHEN THEY HAVE TO FEED THEMSELVES? WILL THEY GROW GARDENS? THE SAFEST PLACE TO BE AT THAT TIME IS AS FAR AWAY AS POSSIBLE.
Liberal government policies have created, and perpetuate, an underclass which is violent, anti-intellectual, hyper-race-sensitive and has neither the skills nor the interest in advancing themselves through work. The underclass is educated (read: babysat) by unionized teachers who mindlessly focus on improving the feeling of "self-worth" of the students, rather than teaching them basic skills. The plantation mentaliy sets in: do-gooder white liberals and hack black politicians (the true traitors to their race) invent all sorts of programs and nostroms to keep the black folk down; they in turn more or less vote to keep the masters in charge.

It's the dole, pure and simple. Perhaps 25% of the blacks manage to escape the underclass. The rest will simply molder, until replenished, and enlarged, by another generation of "more of the same."
Is there no shame anymore? Back in the 40's and 50's when I came up there were stigmas to poor behavior and every neighborhood was a neighborhood watch even though the name was not yet coined. Families were easily embarrassed and took action if one of their "flock" went astray. Families were generally intact and out of wedlock birth was rare. And we didn't believe in the killing of the unborn. The '60's brought radical change thanks to the liberals and the Viet Nam disaster. The only bright light since Eisenhower was the great Ronald Reagan! Every other president was a disaster to varying degrees. (Both Repubs and Dems.) I often wonder how things would have been if Barry Goldwater had been elected. I would suggest Viet Nam would have been nipped in the bud for one thing and the flower child and burn the bra movements would not have spontaneously sprung up. And the "welfare state" would not have been created nor would men have become feminized. And the murder of babies in the womb would not have occurred. Like Kruschev said in his (in)famous speech at the UN, "the US will destroy itself from within." He may have well as been right thanks to the progressives and marxists. No doubt the late Sen. McCarthy was on to something. Maybe the nation should have listened to his early warning.
I am from Guyana. Similar situtaion. Professional people, who have outside children, as we call it in Guyana, meaning single parent. In Guyana it had nothing to do with poverty. Trinidad, Jamaica, and Africa it is the same.

The present President of South Africa has three wives. I knew a diplomat from Zambia who had three children with three different women.

IT IS AFRICAN CULTURE.Let it be. It is their lifestyle. You cannot change this. Of course you will hear argument that not all blacks behave this way. But, over 80 percent do. In America it is the whites who have to pay for it.

It pays to be a single parent. I would like this writer to write an article showing how much money they receive by being a single parent with three or four kids.

To begin with, they receive section 8 housing, and more than enough for each child. They do not have to work. And of course, they are blacks, slavery kept them down, and it goes on, and on into a recurring decimal mode.

It is the white mans fault. The only solution give them their own state or states as Jesse Jackson wanted. Let them prove to the world that they can function better than the white man. Look how prosperous Africa is.

America's answer to all of its problems is more money for school, more money for this, and that, and the result gets worse.

Writers may write from now to eternity, they will never change the culture of a people.

"Small minds cannot accept great ideas, they bring it down to their level."

"A jackass in an air conditioned zoo is still a bloody jackass."

Good luck America. Your are finished. I am on my out. I have in this country from 1967, and each day i am seeing the destruction. The protestants have lost.

Totar Singh
"The Great Society," started with Kennedy and was named and expanded by Johnson.
Welfare exploded and the earned income credit came forward later. All of which gave an incentive not to work....and vote for democrats. Self reliance and self sufficiency went out the window as "mom" had to join the work force to pay for ever increasing tax rates and the expansion of government. The '64 civil rights act was passed by republicans (for which they received no credit)as southern dems screamed and carried no water for its passage. The re-emergence of progressive policies and redistribution are still haunting us and holding us back today. Now that the Marxist Obama and his cronies are in charge, things are worst than ever. We need to go back to the ideals and values of post WWll, limited government and fiscal responsibility with minimal interference from government.
St. Augustine had this pegged about 1600 years ago.

http://ktcatspost.blogspot.com/2010/09/st-augustine-and-department-of-health.html
the best article i have read in many years about the curse of black crime. i hope the next article explores why black men don't parent the children they bring into the world, and why black women don't seem to care. (Hint: The welfare system enables destructive behavior and makes men superfluous. The more children you have, the more "services" (food stamps, welfare, housing subsidy) you receive.
Its nice to see someone finally tell the truth. The inner cities have been purposely going down hill since the "great society" of LBJ. Is it any coincidence that the highest crime cities(Detroit,Chicago,New Orleans,Philadelphia and Baltimore) have been run by far left Democrats for DECADES? And Jesse Jackson and his fellow poverty pimps cant convince me that my supposed racism has anything to do with a 70plus % illegetimacy rate in the black community. Yet what do I see from blacks? 98% of them voted for Obama. 90% routinely vote for leftist democrats. Even if you have a black conservative(IE Lynn Swann in 2008 against union thug Ed Rendell in Pa.) , blacks will vote for the white socialist. First of all, a first step in solving the problems there is get the black churches back to where they were in 1960. Today, from what Ive heard, Jeremiah Wright is NOT an isolated case in black churches. Morality is not defined by immoral Marxism. Second, the Democrats must be pushed out of power. I dont see any blacks making the correlation between poverty in the inner city and the Democrat party. Thirdly, the conservative media must make inroads there. Put those three together and you will likely begin to see leaders emerge who will deal with the problems. Otherwise, nothing will change.
Could it be that the lack of a family structure in the black community is also the reason that the poverty rate is disproprtionately higher in the black community? It all works together. As long as heads turn the other way and ignore the fundamental issue nothing will change. I see all of it every day and it is such a waste of human life. It is not uncommon for young black men in their 20's to have 2,3,4 baby mama's and for young black girls to have 2,3,4 baby daddy's. It is a badge of honor for both. Everybody gets used and nobody wins.
When even Bill Cosby cannot call attention to this fact without vilification, how can we hope that government leaders will do so?
Good point, Patrick. Black girls aren't simply laboratory animals responding to stimuli.

Social workers in the welfare hells of Camden and Trenton, New Jersey, have told me that black mothers are typically very strict with their daughters but simply do not (and often cannot) discipline their sons. In the words of these social workers, young black mothers "love their sons (literally) to death."
Renfield, you are absolutely spot on. In the 1950's, my childhood town of Elmira had a black section, the "Eastside." There was little crime, but the Eastside crime rate was marginally higher than the rest of the city. The Eastside was mostly intact families.

Then came "Urban Renewal." After the Eastside had been completely obliterated, the citywide crime rate skyrocketed and remains there to this day.

I think the cause of the black anger in the 1960's was mostly the media, stirring up conflict and hatred. There is nothing intrinsic to create such conflict.

Rioters were egged on, and justified by the media, and legitimized by university "research," much as the media was totally responsible for the Rodney King riots, by showing that same out-of-context video several times a day for a year, enflaming blacks.

Blacks who come here from Africa are wonderful immigrants. Blacks who are educated in the USA are taught, by the schools and the media, to be angry, resentful and racist.
Detroit is in the very same position.We hear the same claptrap about 'institutional racism' and the need for jobs. Tell me what employer is going to hire an unmarried teenage girl who has a child, no car, a poor attitude and, at least in Detroit, is likely a high school dropout. Or how about the young black male with his underwear showing, earings, tatoos, barely decipherable English, who has a criminal record and can't pass a drug test. You could have all the jobs in the world, and there isn't any employer who is going to hire these people. It starts with welfare. The Great Society created a catastrophe. The harsh reality is that Uncle Sam makes a poor father and changing this requires stigmatizing illegitimacy and not subsidizing it. Until then, nothing will change
You seem to give no responsibility to the girls who have the children who will grow up fatherless.
Lefties: We have a problem - black children are killing each other.

Media: Hey, there's a problem!

Government: Let's fund a study to find out the causes of the problem.

Researcher: I know the cause: destruction of the black family.

Government: Sorry, that's not a fundable research topic.

University: I know the answer! Give more money to those things that caused the problem.

Government: All right, that's a fundable topic. Just give us your thesis, and then we'll spend more money based on it.

Researcher: If you spend more money, you'll just exacerbate the problem.

Media: What are you, a racist?

Daniel Patrick Moynihan predicted this tragedy coming to pass back in the sixties. It is not an accident that he was the last Democrat I ever voted for. The situation has only gotten worse. Today, given all the government subsidies for single motherhood (free child health care, refundable child care credit... yadda yadda yadda), white women are catching up quickly. It's time for society to "man up" and deligitimize and restigmatize irresponsible parenthood.
In the early 1950s, the rate of illegitimacy among blacks nationwide was about 10%, not much higher than the 5% rate of whites. (And a black man, believe it or not, was more likely than a white man to have a job.) The black family had remained largely intact through slavery,* Reconstruction, World War I, the Great Depression, and World War II. By the mid-1950s, the income gap with whites was closing fast. But the black family could not survive the Great Society and the enormous incentives it offered teenage girls to have babies out of wedlock.

I work for a large research company that for more than 40 years has studied the effects of various social programs on (primarily) poor people. There is most definitely a causal relationship between perverse incentives and perverse behavior.

Unfortunately, as with the "war on drugs," many, many people have a stake in keeping our gargantuan social services edifice standing. This is why anyone who points out its obvious failures is immediately labeled "racist" if he is white and "Uncle Tom" if he is black. It is also why the reflexive reaction of government to social breakdown (as in Chicago) is to promise more money and more programs.

*African slave traders broke up families, but plantation owners, despite the myths, rarely did so. This was largely out of mere selfishness: despairing slaves didn't work very hard.
Gee, Heather, where are all those fathers? You imply that the explanation for their absence is a product of some sort of cultural pathology. But don't actual government policies maybe have something to do with their absence? How many of those absent fathers are, for example, incarcerated for nonviolent drug offenses?
With apologies to Carl Sandberg:

CHICAGO

Youth Butcher of the World,
City of the Small Shoulders:

They tell me you are wicked and I believe them,

And they tell me you are crooked and I answer: Yes, it
is true I have seen the gunman kill and go free to
kill again.

And they tell me you are brutal and my reply is: On the
faces of children I have seen the marks
of wanton hunger.

Come and show me a Better City with lifted young heads singing
so proud to be alive.


And just how much additional federal money has been spent on a local problem ? In the mega thousands I'm sure if not millions. The politics of Daley-Obama et al are in no way designed to use truth as the basis for analyzing problems. The windy comments of the Chicago Sun-Times match the approach of professional politicians steeped in solving social problems by throwing ever-increasing amounts of money toward solutions. They do this without ever using facts of the issue. Rahm Emmanual, should he achieve his political ambitions, will continue in the same vein.
Isn't the key problem JOBS? And, of course, education...the teacher must be in charge of the classroom. These black kids, as all kids, need a dream they can cling to and strive for and know they can achieve. I'm from a single-parent fam; I had to get off my butt and go do it. If a kid has some help, as you say like the Boy Scouts, that's the best.
Read "Crazy Like A Fox" by Ben Chavis.

He ran a charter school in inner city Oakland, maybe not as 'urban' or as 'violent' as Chicago but not too far behind.
He implemented a system of tough as nails discipline coupled with 'looping' that had dramatic results for all the students. Looping is when the teachers follow the students for 3 or more years.

I believe the success was a result of recognizing the family breakdown was an impediment, the looping of teachers coupled with tough as nails discipline created a family structure that enabled the students to feel safe in an educational environment providing not only a path out of the ghetto but also out of the ghetto mentality.
This article paints a disgraceful picture of Chicago. Here we are in 2010 and reading this you would think we are still back at 1966. What a shameful community. I will take my bounty elsewhere.
Interesting statement: "At the margins, mentors and social workers can give fatherless boys a better chance of growing up to be law-abiding, stable adults, if those mentoring programs are infused with the kinds of masculine virtues promoted by the Boy Scouts."

This might be true if the "masculine virtues promoted by Boy Scouts" are: "Trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and sex-free."
Bah! Family values are nonsense! Americans don't need God they can just trust in Government and Science to solve their woes. These numbers are just statistics. And if you aren't yet sick of hearing this mindless rabble as responses for the disintigration of society please pay a visit to Chicago' South side during the evening un-armed. I promise you 99% of you who offer such emtpy rhetoric as response to articles like these don't have the balls. They are as empty and shallow as your soul and a reflection of the root cause plauging african american communities.

Written by a white Christian who cares about all races. All humankind are created in God's image.
Always the answer is, " Lets throw some more money at the problem" Just like our educational system, money is the answer. Here is a suggestion: 1)Actually show up for class. 2) Shut-up and listen to the teacher. 3) Perhaps, and maybe I'm being a bit bold here, take a book home with you.

Case closed!
It's interesting how closely your American results of contempt to the Scriptures' rule «Thou shalt not make thee any graven image” coincide with our Russian ones! Right after the 1917 socialist revolution Lenin and Stalin had sculptured “a graven image” of the proletariat (that is, lots of educational, social, law and career preferences for any workers + the dreadful label “Enemy of working people” for those who were still true to the Scriptures’ wisdom) – and soon, our workers, who were among the most honest and productive members of the pre-1917 society, became undisputable champions in crime, alcoholism, family abuse etc (the statistics were closed then, naturally, but now we know them). I believe that you have the same kind of sad transformation now, thou’ instead of our poor proletariat’s graven image you’ve sculptured the graven image of your poor blacks, and instead of Stalin’s scarecrow of “Enemy of working people” you have used much shorter – but as effective - American label of “Racist”. It seems to me however, that the final word still belongs to the Scriptures, both in the Russian and in the American cases. Respectfully – Rostislav, Saint-Petersburg, Russia.
Thank you for the article.

I am sorry that you don't understand that The Black Star Project is one of the strongest voices in America advocating for rebuilding the total Black family, not just parts.

Additionally, I am sorry that you did not mention The Black Star Project's Million Father March, where we organized 800,000 men, mostly Black fathers, in 609 cities to take their children to school on the first day in their city this year and to become involved with their childrne's education throughout the school year.

Still, there were many points of value in this article.

Phillip Jackson
Dear Heather;

Thank you ever so much for speaking the truth and not being Politically Correct. Its high time this subject is brought out in the open and discussed. Fatherless Black families have been the root of most problems for the Black community!

Dr. Mac Donald: Powerful truths here. As a retired social worker in Arizona Corrections, I saw many cases of adult criminals coming from "dysfunctional" families (serial fathers to unwed moms; fathers with deviant backgrounds of all kinds, gang memberships, and deeply ingrained antisocial values).

I agree with you article and POV and admire your courage in pointing out what so-called Black leaders (with some exceptions) should be doing.

As a Chicano (Mexican-American) I do not feel it is my place to point at Black violence and dysfunctions of all kinds, because we Latinos have similar issues with gangs, antisocial values, and absent fathers just like Blacks.

Great article..... I hope it stimulates Blacks and Latinos to think and act in more "saving" ways.

Reply to Cicnerone who states that one culture is valid as another. What does that mean in this context. Does it mean that we should respect the violence as just another life style and not be concerned about it. How irrelevant is that comment.
Response to Bruno who asks where is the research to back up MacDonald's point. He claims it is only correlational. I am sure if she also included crime rate among blacks who stable families with both parents committed to raising a family, the crime rate would be lower.

However, correlation is not to be dismissed. After all it is because of the correlation of the fossil record with the theory of evolution that gives support. And it is consistent with what we know that culture which includes a stable family has much to do with outcomes. Unless one wants to all the weight to genes, what other explanation is there for differences in groups; culture is a powerful variable; who is to deny that.
Ms. Mac Donald is without peer in this realm.
As the old saw goes, it take two. Women birth these children with the full expectation that the father will not be supporting them. An underclass mother does not need the support of a man. She will get Aid for Women With Infants and Children, subsidized daycare, subsidized housing, free school lunches for the child and so on. We must make the tough decision and stop subsidizing the lifestyle. When women realize that the government has ceased being a substitute husband, the illegitimacy rates will decline.

Bruno;
I had a relative that worked in the NYC prison system. He said most of the inmates were raised without a father. In most of the cases they were born out of wedlock and Dad was nowhere to be found.
The kind of thinking described in this article represents a culture. One culture is as valid as the other.
Excellent article, which mirrors something written by Ann Coulter some months back. What is going on is simply insane - it's like people are in a tank filled with water and drowning with the plug fully in sight and no one doing anything about it - okay, a bad analogy, but you get the point. Who do I blame? The media, which makes it politically incorrect to even mention the statistics in your article. (not enough space here to discuss why it is politically incorrect - you could - and should -write a book about it) Also the Democrats who support what is basically an anti-family agenda, where the state is everything. Black (Democrat) leaders, who put politics and allegiance to political party above the people. All of these people are killing an entire community. These are children!
How does one create a viable family comprised of a fifteen year old male and a fourteen year old pregnant female, both school dropouts? Ratchet the ages up a bit, doesn't really get any better. More sex education and free condoms do not get the job done. Abstinence is the answer, but it is politically incorrect , and it has a history of success not equalled by any other system of personal responsibility and accountability. Like drugs, sex is now a recreational activity, at increasingly earlier ages. Bring more money, more social workers, more slogans, more hand-wringing, but human nature will thwart the best intended efforts; it seeks the lowest common denominator.
I would be interested to see if there is any research that supports Ms. McDonald's argument. Plenty of correlation, any documented causation?
What kind of a society allows people to procreate who have no conceivable means of supporting their offspring? These children are then "dumped" onto the responsible people who work hard and pay their taxes. This distorted system is unsustainable and something really drastic needs to be done to stop this lunacy which you have so politely labeled "family breakdown".