Meta Culture and Race

Meta-Culture and Race

In light of the recent events in Ferguson, and in other communities around the country, I find it necessary to elaborate on an issue that seems to emerge and a great deal of confusion is associated with it; racism. Now, the issue of police abuse and brutality is not a race issue in and of itself. For after all there are countless incidents involving police shootings and white residents as well. And so, at base, these are two separate issues. However, in many communities around this nation, there is an outcry of racism. The question then becomes, are these complaints nothing more than ‘sour milk’ from people that have made poor choices in life and thus looking to blame others or is it something else or somewhere in between these two? Here, we will explore these issues and how they pertain to race, poverty and purportedly systemic abuses of power.

Statistical Criminal and Economic Analysis of People of Color in the US

If we are to address the topic of race and more specifically people of color and their association with poverty and crime, we must understand and explore the demographics and statistics concerning them.

Firstly, as far as statistics, African Americans rank highest than any other (White, Hispanic, etc.) in poverty; save Native Americans. For,

Nationwide, during 2007 and 2011, which encompasses the recession and the immediate aftermath, 43 million Americans — or slightly more than 14 percent — lived in poverty. But not every group was impacted equally. The poverty rate was 27 percent for American Indians, 26 percent for African Americans and 23 percent for Hispanics. Among whites and Asians, less than 12 percent were poor. The federal threshold for poverty is about $11,500 in annual income for an individual and about $23,000 for a family of four.1

The economic disparity we see between whites and people of color unfortunately has not diminished in recent years. The civil rights movement decades ago, it would seem (if it is deemed relevant at all) would certainly have had an impact on improving the economic stations of African Americans in our nation. But as the numbers bear out, they have not.

Secondly, crime rates of communities largely African American experience significantly higher crime than those of white communities. Consider this statistic, “the offending rate for blacks was almost 8 times higher than whites, and the victim rate 6 times higher. Most murders were intraracial, with 84% of white homicide victims murdered by whites, and 93% of black victims murdered by blacks.”2 And so, intraracial murders certainly suggests that these are incidents of homocides within the communities of the perpetrators. We could, here, evaluate the panoply of criminal statistics from petty robberies to homocides, but it suffices to say that crime rates are higher in African American communities

Incarceration rates also reflect disparities in whites as opposed to African Americans. Consider this, “According to the BJS non-Hispanic blacks accounted for 39.4% of the prison and jail population in 2009, with whites 34.2%, and Hispanics 20.6%. The incarceration rate of black males was over 6 times higher than that of white males, with a rate of 4,749 per 100,000 US residents.”3

And so, this begs the question, why? Why does it seem that African Americans are more likely to commit crimes than whites, or even hispanics? This is not an easy question to answer. And while many on the right are quick to point out the crime statistics, they are hesitant to offer an answer to this question. For, after all, if one leaves it there, without any qualification or explanation, there is a tendency towards an unspoken racial bigotry.

Race and Culture

And so, are there literal differences biologically between African Americans and Whites, so much so, that this would explain the statistical disparities between the two groups, and others? Some may think so. For accepting blindly differences in say IQ scores by some studies can be take out of context. Consider the recent study conducted by the University of Delaware in reference to IQ disparities and race.

The IQ debate became worldwide in scope when it was shown that East Asians scored higher on IQ tests than did Whites, both within the United States and in Asia, even though IQ tests were developed for use in the Euro American culture (Lynn, 1977, 1978, 1982; P. E. Vernon, 1979, 1982). Around the world, the average IQ for East Asians centers around 106; that for Whites, about 100; and that for Blacks, about 85 in the United States and 70 in sub-Saharan Africa. Most of the early research was conducted in the United States, but some was also performed in Canada and the Caribbean (Eysenck, 1971, 1984; Jensen, 1969, 1973; Osborne & McGurk, 1982; Shuey, 1958, 1966; cf. Flynn, 1980; Kamin, 1974; Lewontin, Rose, & Kamin, 1984). In the United States, 15% to 20% of the Black IQ distribution exceeds the White median IQ, so many Blacks obtain scores above the White average. This same order of mean group differences is also found on “culture-fair” tests and on reaction time tasks. Hundreds of studies on millions of people have confirmed the three-way racial pattern (Jensen, 1998b; Lynn & Vanhanen, 2002; Rushton, 2000).4

Does this suggest that African Americans are not as intelligent as whites or asians and therefore less likely to make rational decisions; which would explain the higher criminal statistics? Actually not at all. For this study, as any study which examines IQ tests and race, ignore poverty rates in concert with IQ. Consider that “the single most important finding related to the debate over IQ and heredity is the dramatic rise in IQ scores over the past century. This so-called Flynn effect, which was discovered by psychologist James Flynn, undercuts claims that intelligence stems primarily from nature and not nurture.”5 Therefore, it is more likely to suggest that IQ has to do with cultural or economic disparities in society rather than biological ones.

Since IQ has more to do with situational rather than biological factors, could this also be true as to criminal statistics? If it is the case that IQ is situational and cultural, why not criminal and aggressive trends we see? In a recent interview with Psychology professor Andrew Ward, there seems to be a clear connection between communities of poverty, not merely the conditions of individual poverty. For, “from a psychological perspective, Ward said there was very little connection between poverty and crime. Rather, it is the environment of poverty that can lead people to commit crimes. “It’s not just being poor, but it’s being around lots of poor people,” Ward said. “The relationship between poverty and crime is in areas of concentrated poverty, like these inner city areas.” Ward said living in an area of concentrated poverty can be a catalyst for futility. “It can be a contributing factor of hopelessness and despair,” he said. “‘What do I have to lose? I might as well commit a crime.’ But really, anyone can go into despair.” Another factor is what Ward called the “escalation of violence.” “There is phenomenon among people who live in concentrated poverty,” Ward said. “I call it pre-emptive aggression. If you’re someone who lives in an area that’s kind of dangerous, you commit an act of crime so people know not to mess with you. You need to show you’re tough, but now I have to be tougher than you, so I need to go commit a worse crime.”6

In conclusion, it would seem that the answer to our earlier question is clear, ‘why is there more crime in African American communities?’ Because there is more poverty in them. And to suggest that African Americans are more prone to violence and criminal behavior because of race confuses the situation of poverty most find themselves in and the statistics. For, generations of hopelessness and poverty are just expressed in the facts of poverty in African American communities.

A Brief History of Racism and a Possible Future Solution to it

It isn’t enough to state a problem. For leaving it there without looking toward a solution is not only negligent but lazy. And the best way to understand the cause of the problem, which would help navigate towards a solution, is by looking back at history.

Historically, North Africa was a large part of Western culture going back to Phoenician settlements, Hellenistic culture and the Roman Empire. More specifically, Greek city states (as well as Roman imperialism) had a distinct character that is absent in modern times. For although each state, or Roman province, was made up of varying peoples from different regions and thus 'racial’ backgrounds, they had a common cultural character to them that united them. We could call this a meta-culture that, like the sky, everyone stood under. Likewise, the Roman Empire, which resembled the Hellenistic one prior to it save its central control of imperial policies, embraced its diversity while maintaining a cultural unity that defined everyone within the Empire as a ‘Roman.’

However, after the fall of the Roman Empire, and with the advent of the Dark Ages, provinces returned to local control and significantly reduced mobility within a larger imperial community. The ‘sky’ of meta-culture had dissolved and all that was left was regional isolationism. And while figures such as Charlemagne attempted to re-establish the metropolitan character of Rome, all this resulted in was the establishment of centers of learning and academia; rediscovering works of Latin that had been lost for almost a century. Therefore, the fuedal elites were privvy to education and the masses reduced to serfdom and local toil of the land.

In light of this Dark Age that evolved into a Medieval established feudalism, suspicion of ‘foreigners’ was equated with threats to local established order. What had been a tradition of slavery for conquered enemies in Greece and Rome would become one of enslavement of those in regions underdeveloped and foreign to the ‘enlightened’ cultures of the Enlightenment and beyond. Therefore, diaspora of Africans and others from far away lands as conquered by states that had emerged from the ashes of Rome would ignore the cosmopolitan ‘meta- cultural sky’ of the greater society of Man and enslave an entire continent of people. As a result, an entire culture would be disenfranchised for the sake of ensuring a class of agricultural landlords in places like the Caribbean, Deep South and other places around the globe.

The solution therefore is quite simple, a return to the metropolitanism of Greece and Rome. For, although even in our nation, we have universal principles that unite us in principle, we do not have a culture that unites us as a people; like that of the ancients. We need to promote a meta-culture that transcends white, black, hispanic, etc. Obviously the implementation of such a cultural change is not one that is simple, but at least we understand what needs to be done.

1. Morello, Carol. Poverty Rates Higher for Blacks and Hispanics than Whites and Asians. http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/poverty-rates-higher-for-blacks-and-hispanics-than-whites-and-asians/2013/02/20/401e6a6e-7b78-11e2-9a75-dab0201670da_story.html.

2. Cooper, Alexia (2012). Homicide Trends in the United States, 1980-2008. p. 3. ISBN 1249573246.

3. Kouzmin, Alexander (2012). State Crimes Against Democracy: Political Forensics in Public Affairs. p. 138. ISBN 1137286989.

4. Rushton, Phillipe J. and Jensen, Arthur J. Thirty Years of Research on Race: Differences in Cognitive Ability http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

5. Horgan, John. Should Research on Race and IQ be Banned? Scientific American. http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/2013/05/16/should-research-on-race-and-iq-be-banned/

6. Markeley, Ben. Poverty on Trial: Does Poverty Cause Crime? http://blogs.jccc.edu/campusledger/2012/05/08/poverty-on-trial-does-poverty-cause-crime/

Scientific Realism part 1

I have debated and discussed this topic with many people and the issue always comes up of the burden of proof. For more often than not, many that claim to be materialists, and atheists in virtue of naturalism and materialism (although they never claim to be materialists-just atheists), suggest that if one believes in metaphysics, the afterlife, God and the like proclaim that the burden of proof lies with the metaphysician. This is due to what they say are superfluous claims that are not found in observation. In short, this sort of atheist suggests that their view of reality is an observed view, while the contrary one is based on fantasy and imagination. But is physicalism observed? I mean, does one 'observe' hydrogen? Does one 'observe' photosynthesis? Does one 'observe' gravitational orbits? The answer may surprise you. For the materialist atheist, the answer is yes. But he or she fails to realize that scientific descriptions are NOT observations. Observations are precisely those phenomena in our consciousness. Observations are 'things' we are aware of and nothing more. The moment we start to describe them as to understand them, we assign to them some grand vision of reality that helps us make sense of the whole of it and the things we experience. The sky overhead, the grass and soil below, the stars in motion, the swirling microscopic particles all succumb to our definitions of them which fit into a genera philosophie. In the strictest sense, observation is phenomenology. Terms we use to describe what we experience reduce it's raw nature to a palpable schematic. And so, the 'burden of proof' is no less in the hands of the metaphysician as the physician. When we say a person is a human being and a human being is a mammal and a mammal is a biological organism we are appealing to a taxonomy with a rather complex layered set of beliefs about the world. The metaphysician does not deny that people are mammals. But when the materialist states as such, he or she is not using the same taxonomic set of assumptions the metaphysician is. For the materialist assumes the mind emerges from biology while the metaphysician does not. But to stand on the 'burden of proof' in favor of the former is to suggest that biology is observed while souls are not; when neither are observed. One does not observe biology, one describes what one observes AS biological. And so does the one describe conscious states AS of the soul. So, let the atheist assume he or she has the higher rational ground to stand on. For in reality, we are all stuck in the cave forced to see shadows of things and describe them the best we can.

Ferguson

As to what happened in Ferguson, should we be surprised? This has been brewing for years, like a kettle of coffee spilling over. But what is to come? And even more, what is the cause of it all? These are tricky questions to answer, and personally I do not think anyone has an answer to them fully. However, if I were to guess, I would say that it perhaps has something to do with the way our culture has developed. We have seen the middle class shrink significantly. We have made no attempts at stabilizing our economy as to ensure economic equality, at least on a reasonable level. The race issue in our country has more to do with poverty than with anything in my view. Until we address these issues, we are doomed as a nation.

I am beginning to think that what we call Science is an uncritical, non-philosophized examination of experience. For modern Philosophy is nothing more than the Science of reality. Traditional Philosophy would tell us not 'what' something is, but 'how' we come to know anything at all, what we know, how we know it, whether we can know this or that and why we can and cannot know certain things. Not until these questions are answered can we proceed to a science about anything. But we have proceeded. We were far to antsy to get things done, we forgot why we were doing them in the first place and what we were doing it with. Science uses a fabric that it does not understand, but takes for granted it is of a certain sort and quality. Too many assumptions. That is all!