It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
When Bill and Hillary Clinton instituted the ‘tough-on-crime’ policies that so exacerbated mass incarceration there was a political explanation— pandering to White suburban voters’ manufactured fears of a Black urban underclass to garner votes, but the policies tied closely to American economic history as well. From slavery to convict leasing to urban dispossession, racial repression has produced economic value that has been expropriated. The Clinton’s neoliberal trade policies exacerbated the urban industrial exodus while deregulation of finance ‘monetized’ Black wealth for the taking. Seemingly unrelated ‘political’ policies often have economic explanations.
originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: Asktheanimals
But...there's another problem as perceived by Blacks in the US which I've been trying to wrap my mind around. They see their problems as having been the result of a subtle form of racism which pervades the society called "White Privilege". Its not an easy concept to understand and its not easy to gather from the articles written on the subject what exactly the end game is for people who feel victimized by "White Privilege". By that I mean, it isn't easy to understand..."what do these people want"? To better understand it, read: www.tennessean.com...
originally posted by: Asktheanimals
a reply to: TonyS
Excellent post. Funny how white flight is viewed as racist but if whites move in to urban areas and real estate rates go up they say that's racism too. Btw, most blacks from the inner city who escape the cycle of poverty usually move out to the suburbs so there's no white flight, it's done for safety and for better schools for their children. I know because I did the exact same thing for those very reasons.
I agree most white Americans don't even consider race, yet that is considered racist too.
Can't win, can we?
originally posted by: xpert11
If the premise was correct New Zealand's main centers would have been aflame in the 1990's. New Zealand removed import tariffs virtually all in one hit in 1984. Although Australia under took free market reforms in a more gradual reform the same point remains. New Zealand high rate of youth unemployment does pose long term social risks that in a worst case scenario could lead to Civil Unrest. Charter schools have the potential to knock the problem on the head in the long term.