Depicts one the more picturesque and historic social housing projects comprising the charitably funded Peabody Estates.
A great essay, data-driven as well as sensitive.
However:
quillette:
Given the well-established linkage between single parenthood and poverty, and between poverty and child maltreatment, the more obvious explanation is that socioeconomic factors are a driving cause of the disproportionately high number of black children who are living in at-risk circumstances.
Whilst I don’t disagree with this statement, harmful influences which exist from being at the bottom of the socioeconomic spectrum tend to be more social in their orientation, than about material resources. A two parent household offers the dynamic that the influence of one benign parent can mitigate the harmful influence of a less laudable example.
There is a lot to sift here, a deal of nuance. Biological mothers and significantly more likely to be responsible for the hospitalisation or death of a child than biological fathers (NIS-4- time exposure and postpartum issues both being factors), but this equalises out somewhat when we include the effects of non-related males in the household. More generally, we also know that single mothers tend to be subject to both predatory males and low quality ones, regardless of ethnicity- indeed, the cycling of unreliably employed and aggressive males is a primary cause for a child’s removal from the home, and cuts across all races. Single mothers and their children are nine times more likely to suffer from intimate partner violence and abuse, than those in two parent homes.
quillette:
These parents have described to me the countless black families that care for black children whose birth mom or dad is unable to do so—typically through informal arrangements, often involving aunts, uncles, and grandparents, that exist beyond the purview of the public child-welfare bureaucracy. Once you include these extended kin, who routinely step up to provide a child with a stable home, the analysis becomes more complicated.
Agreed, but this primary lens for determining merit in this extended network should be the presence of male role models and mentors, at least for boys. Dr Raj Chetty’s research on social mobility illustrates that boys need male mentors if they are to have any hope of succeeding in later life. It also points to the main cause why white foster parents should not so easily be discarded, the primary driver of inequality and a lack of social mobility in some groups is the rates of household fatherhood in the community in which a child grows up. I would tentatively suggest that fathers likely have a moderating influence on male peer groups, which collectively pushes the dynamic away from the antisocial and toward the prosocial.
This doesn’t completely eliminate race from the equation, far from it- if anything it puts it front and centre, but not in ways which the Left is used to thinking, or would generally accept. I agree that the historical legacy of slavery and Jim Crow are important factors, but only in terms of an injury of narrative, which is counterproductive to the formation of drive and agency. Let’s face it, males are great at fixing things or responding positively to their partner’s admonition to ‘go fetch’- but present us with an unconquerable ghost during those troublesome and tenuous teen years, as well as the perception of a rigged game, and we are just as likely to give up completely as we are to rebel and go off the rails.
Where the Left goes wrong is in imagining malign and deliberate attempt to hold African Americans down- at least in the modern era. “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity”- Hanlon’s Razor. The welfare elements of LBJ’s War on Poverty might have actually been a good thing, if they had been construed as a supplement to income at the bottom of the spectrum, rather than as an alternative to working, and later, fatherhood- but the way in which this system developed is tantamount to an intergenerational open wound, equally evident in the British White Working Class where it was also tried, and now only 9% of boys attend university (14% for girls).
Similarly, there is nothing wrong with high density public housing, if its provision is centred upon providing low rents to those with low incomes, and its arrangement includes the process to evict those who are disruptive influences within these communities. Indeed, the only drawback of the charitably funded Peabody Estates in London, it that given the low rents and the high quality of life this social housing provides, nobody wants to move out, ever. But whilst the triumph of legal activists to prevent exclusion from social housing at the state and local level might have been seen as a victory at the time, it proved a Pyrrhic one. What were once noble efforts aimed at providing a modicum of dignity to the lower paid, became amplifiers for all manner of social ills, and quickly became cesspools of crime, hopelessness and urban decay, a cruel well with smooth walls and no ladder in sight.
Funnily enough, given the damage that successive American governments have wrought in the period since the Civil Rights era, I agree with the activists. There do need to be Reparations paid, but not as recompense for a distant past, but as an acknowledgement of the crimes committed by well-meaning, but atrocious Government Interventions. All those left behind in America, be they Black, White or Brown are in desperate need of Forty Acres and a Mule, and America cannot afford to wait another generation to see the further degradation of a once proud blue collar class.
What was Forty Acres and a Mule, when first designed? Certainly not a means of gifting wealth, but rather as a means of self-sufficiency and vocation- the provision of the ability to adequately provide for oneself and one’s family. That’s what America needs to do, and doing so, the US might once again become, a shining example to the rest of the developed world, in presenting a way to cure the blight afflicting all the advanced economies of the West. It is not a uniquely American problem after all, and it is to be found in countries which never participated in slavery, colonialism or racism- even in Sweden.
It’s about creating a dual system of vocational training for those who don’t do well at school, whilst subsequently providing employment. My readers on the Right will be somewhat horrified by this latter sentiment. But there is ample evidence that America, like so many others before it, is beginning to experience a government induced market failure in supply. How else does one explain an excess in demand which supply refused to meet at price which is in any way reflective of value, in real terms?
Before my readers panic at the thought of their property values declining, I am in no way advocating for anything which threatens their interests or their property savings. Here in the UK, we have ample examples of more modest suburban housing- semi-detached, three bedroom, single car parking, with a modest barbeque area in the back, and a small of turf of green with borders or perennials in the front- all laid-out in a denser cul-de-sac layout that makes it safer for children to play in the streets, and a shorter distance for parents and children to walk to bus stops- ideal starter homes for millennials desperate to get their first foot on the housing ladder and start a family.
It’s more efficient in terms of land and materials. It requires less tarmac for roads and less use of said roads. It’s easier for planning public transport, and access for both police and emergency services. Best of all, the provision of more modest suburban housing actually stokes demand for higher niche housing further up the housing value chain, because it allows many with more middling household incomes the facility to build capital. Of course, in the UK we’ve gone too far- many of our residential developments have squeezed land to the extent that many of our newer residential estates don’t even have adequate roads for deliveries, and much of the denser housing goes a fair bit beyond compact and bijou.
The key to this dynamic of providing far better suited employment opportunities with a means of value creation which also employs them, is that intergenerationally it will create natural social uplift, halting Americas decline. Stable families make for better outcomes at a communities level, and responsible and well-paid young men make for better husbands. It’s not just social mobility at stake- there is ample evidence to suggest that the social inequities which stem from systemic single parenthood also result in somewhat worse cognitive development. The thing that all the analysts missed is that every other demographic group in America had this one crucial stepping stone- a period of history where the economic system created a surplus demand for blue collar labour.
"Funnily enough, given the damage that successive American governments have wrought in the period since the Civil Rights era, I agree with the activists. There do need to be Reparations paid, but not as recompense for a distant past, but as an acknowledgement of the crimes committed by well-meaning, but atrocious Government Interventions. All those left behind in America, be they Black, White or Brown are in desperate need of Forty Acres and a Mule, and America cannot afford to wait another generation to see the further degradation of a once proud blue collar class."
The problem in America (and increasingly in other places as well) is that "the system" has worked almost too well... What I mean by that is that the Democratic Party Complex (similar to the Military Industrial Complex) has a deep and vested interest in maintaining a continuous level of misery that can feed into their own political and financial accounts. And of course, Republicans are more than happy to play the villains. There has never been so much money as there is now, injected into American politics. It is easy to forget that a handful of companies in the United States alone, have greater financial power than many nations. The money has reached numbers that are truly astronomical.
Government has not failed at all. It has done precisely what it is designed to do: it has aggrandized itself and squandered the fortunes of its own people to seek its own maximum benefit.
Find ONE genuine, dyed-in-the-wool Democrat who will ever, ever, ever admit that their approach has essentially enriched Washington and impoverished the "communities" they set out to save and you'll find the answer to this problem.
Find ONE genuine, dyed-in-the-wool Republican who will ever, ever, ever admit that their is a meaningful place for public intervention to help those in distress and you'll find an answer.
But in both instances you find people who know one thing: desperate people are worth a fortune. Poverty is, was, and always will be, a fucking cash cow...
As for "reparations" let the DNC lead the way. They have deep pockets. Maybe the Clinton Global Initiative can get the ball rolling...
A couple of days between essays Geary! Excellent as always tho. Those Peabody estates, it looks like how it should be done. Are they still functional or has wokeness done for them what the 'projects' did for social housing in the States?
I sometimes feel that we're living in a symbiotic and yet deliberate part feudal and part capitalist society and although not mentioned as such it works in its own way to promote the capitalistic side by its very contrast to what happens if one just doesn't escape the feudal world of self-realisation.
The ladder out of poverty and lower class serfdom is seldom achieved easily as its very design is rung with broken steps and those at the bottom cling to hope that those above will somehow pull them upwards, but they won't. I've noticed the numbers dramatically increase in self-employment and here we have at least one effective system that can if used allow through personal effort and easy access a means to social uplift. It is from this lower economic class where we'll often find mechanics, gardeners, plumbers, decorators and handyman self enterprise grow from. Yet bear in mind that this demands of people a number of skills. They will need to be resourceful, determined, be able to deal with others and be competent, skilled, efficient.
There is a need for such skills and a shortage of such. I always wondered why it wasn't a policy started within school, whereby a certain kind of kid couldn't spend more time in vocational training and be shown why maths and English and even physics were enticed into that system if only to teach at an early age the connection between academic education and practical necessity. There would be many future-come unemployed with no skill, no job, no hope who with such vocational training that could by government grant aided programmes find themselves progressing straight from school into meaningful work. As a business owner myself who has gone through such a process I'd of found the process far easier if it had been one of developed purpose. For a start one would incentivise employers and would teach the kids business skills, admin training, tax laws, proficient in and out house training instead of sending clueless kids into the job market that have no idea of anything except their own vulnerabilities.
One thing for sure is that the lower spectrum of society taking in benefits and free housing is not going to wish to have to suddenly work to pay for what is freely available. Grant incentives and a quick way to progress into incentivised pay is what matters. At the moment there is just this net negative decent segment of society stuck in despair and limbo and they're modelled as unintelligent wasters and grifters by such propagandised programmes such as benefit street, whereas many are just able and willing people seeking a chance to actually progress their lives.
I'd love to have a school phone me and say we've got this kid who you may be interested in a grant assisted 4 year apprenticeship. He's passed his maths exams and has 2 years experience in masonry at college level and excels at business skills. Give me this kid and you can stick your grants up your butt cos I probably won't need the justification of them.
Right now I see a have's and a have not's society with the have not's being classed like untouchables and it feeds feudalism and criminality. As Geary often mentions, if we could turn young men into working, hopeful, confident young men then perhaps that would go a long way toward a more stable family life for them, their partners and the next generation of children. There really needs to be a push toward activating a decent amount of hopeless serfs back into functional human beings.. That includes the lost potential of all those children within our shared society.
“ I would tentatively suggest that fathers likely have a moderating influence on male peer groups, which collectively pushes the dynamic away from the antisocial and toward the prosocial.”
I think you’re very likely right about that. Fatherhood has a profound influence not just on children but on fathers - they become less selfish and more inclined to serve others. They start to want to build or maintain societal institutions rather than operate outside of them. For some men it’s a profound shift. Fathers build community, including by having a positive influence on their male childless friends.
"Funnily enough, given the damage that successive American governments have wrought in the period since the Civil Rights era, I agree with the activists. There do need to be Reparations paid, but not as recompense for a distant past, but as an acknowledgement of the crimes committed by well-meaning, but atrocious Government Interventions. All those left behind in America, be they Black, White or Brown are in desperate need of Forty Acres and a Mule, and America cannot afford to wait another generation to see the further degradation of a once proud blue collar class."
The problem in America (and increasingly in other places as well) is that "the system" has worked almost too well... What I mean by that is that the Democratic Party Complex (similar to the Military Industrial Complex) has a deep and vested interest in maintaining a continuous level of misery that can feed into their own political and financial accounts. And of course, Republicans are more than happy to play the villains. There has never been so much money as there is now, injected into American politics. It is easy to forget that a handful of companies in the United States alone, have greater financial power than many nations. The money has reached numbers that are truly astronomical.
Government has not failed at all. It has done precisely what it is designed to do: it has aggrandized itself and squandered the fortunes of its own people to seek its own maximum benefit.
Find ONE genuine, dyed-in-the-wool Democrat who will ever, ever, ever admit that their approach has essentially enriched Washington and impoverished the "communities" they set out to save and you'll find the answer to this problem.
Find ONE genuine, dyed-in-the-wool Republican who will ever, ever, ever admit that their is a meaningful place for public intervention to help those in distress and you'll find an answer.
But in both instances you find people who know one thing: desperate people are worth a fortune. Poverty is, was, and always will be, a fucking cash cow...
As for "reparations" let the DNC lead the way. They have deep pockets. Maybe the Clinton Global Initiative can get the ball rolling...
A couple of days between essays Geary! Excellent as always tho. Those Peabody estates, it looks like how it should be done. Are they still functional or has wokeness done for them what the 'projects' did for social housing in the States?
Great article Geary.
I sometimes feel that we're living in a symbiotic and yet deliberate part feudal and part capitalist society and although not mentioned as such it works in its own way to promote the capitalistic side by its very contrast to what happens if one just doesn't escape the feudal world of self-realisation.
The ladder out of poverty and lower class serfdom is seldom achieved easily as its very design is rung with broken steps and those at the bottom cling to hope that those above will somehow pull them upwards, but they won't. I've noticed the numbers dramatically increase in self-employment and here we have at least one effective system that can if used allow through personal effort and easy access a means to social uplift. It is from this lower economic class where we'll often find mechanics, gardeners, plumbers, decorators and handyman self enterprise grow from. Yet bear in mind that this demands of people a number of skills. They will need to be resourceful, determined, be able to deal with others and be competent, skilled, efficient.
There is a need for such skills and a shortage of such. I always wondered why it wasn't a policy started within school, whereby a certain kind of kid couldn't spend more time in vocational training and be shown why maths and English and even physics were enticed into that system if only to teach at an early age the connection between academic education and practical necessity. There would be many future-come unemployed with no skill, no job, no hope who with such vocational training that could by government grant aided programmes find themselves progressing straight from school into meaningful work. As a business owner myself who has gone through such a process I'd of found the process far easier if it had been one of developed purpose. For a start one would incentivise employers and would teach the kids business skills, admin training, tax laws, proficient in and out house training instead of sending clueless kids into the job market that have no idea of anything except their own vulnerabilities.
One thing for sure is that the lower spectrum of society taking in benefits and free housing is not going to wish to have to suddenly work to pay for what is freely available. Grant incentives and a quick way to progress into incentivised pay is what matters. At the moment there is just this net negative decent segment of society stuck in despair and limbo and they're modelled as unintelligent wasters and grifters by such propagandised programmes such as benefit street, whereas many are just able and willing people seeking a chance to actually progress their lives.
I'd love to have a school phone me and say we've got this kid who you may be interested in a grant assisted 4 year apprenticeship. He's passed his maths exams and has 2 years experience in masonry at college level and excels at business skills. Give me this kid and you can stick your grants up your butt cos I probably won't need the justification of them.
Right now I see a have's and a have not's society with the have not's being classed like untouchables and it feeds feudalism and criminality. As Geary often mentions, if we could turn young men into working, hopeful, confident young men then perhaps that would go a long way toward a more stable family life for them, their partners and the next generation of children. There really needs to be a push toward activating a decent amount of hopeless serfs back into functional human beings.. That includes the lost potential of all those children within our shared society.
“ I would tentatively suggest that fathers likely have a moderating influence on male peer groups, which collectively pushes the dynamic away from the antisocial and toward the prosocial.”
I think you’re very likely right about that. Fatherhood has a profound influence not just on children but on fathers - they become less selfish and more inclined to serve others. They start to want to build or maintain societal institutions rather than operate outside of them. For some men it’s a profound shift. Fathers build community, including by having a positive influence on their male childless friends.