Set in the south side of Chicago in the 1930s (as wave after wave of black migrants remake the city in their image), Bigger Thomas thinks to himself:
And the Chicago Reader once asked why white people feared black people... a lot of people today believe that the 'disintegration of the black family' is at the root of the dysfunction, violence, and breakdown in the black community, but they'd be wrong; the "violation of the ultimate taboo" Wright wrote about in Native Son is the reason cities like Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Baltimore, and Detroit are in such dire situations.
Holding up Blum ought not take more than two minutes, at the most. And it would be their last job. But it would be the toughest one that they had ever pulled. All the other times they had raided newsstands, fruit stands, and apartments. And, too, they had never held up a white man before. They had always robbed Negroes. They felt that it was much easier and safer to rob their own people, for they knew that white policemen never really searched diligently for Negroes who committed crimes against other Negroes. For months they had talked of robbing Blum’s, but had not been able to bring themselves to do it. They had the feeling that the robbing of Blum’s would be a violation of ultimate taboo; it would be a trespassing into territory where the full wrath of an alien white world would be turned loose upon them; in short, it would be a symbolic challenge of the white world’s rule over them; a challenge which they yearned to make, but were afraid to.
Blacks no longer fear white people, or reprisals from the white-controlled government ("the state"), because the 'full wrath of an alien white world' was usurped in the 1960s; there is no symbolic challenge of the white world's rule to challenge anymore, because black people burned the white man's cities in the 1960s and then democratically took over places like Detroit and Birmingham.
Completely remaking each city over in their own image, going as so far to put a symbolic black fist statue in Detroit and peppering Birmingham with statutes glorifying the black victory over white civilization in the 1960s.
Remember though, The Huffington Post recently attacked the residents of Chicago for maintaining high levels of segregation. After all, it is 2013... and we can't be bothered by the HuffPo mentioning anything about differences in property value in black communities and white communities that could be the economic reason behind this segregation.
Why might white people (and Hispanic/Latinos) not want to live around black people in 2013? Probably the same reason they didn't want to live around black people in 1933. From The Promised Land: The Great Black Migration and How it Changed America, we learn of what life was like in Chicago 80 years ago:
The fine nightclubs were outnumbered by little taverns where the music was provided by nickelodeons or three-piece blues bands and where Saturday night shootings and stabbings were a regular occurrence. Prostitution was a minor industry, and gambling, in the form of substantial numbers games called "policy wheels," a major one, probably the biggest independent business in black Chicago. Law enforcement was causal because the Chicago police didn't consider black-on-black crime to be a problem worth solving. The sexual mores of the poor, and the concomitant problem of out-of-wedlock childbearing, were by the 1940s already a well-established subject of concern among the forces of respectability on the South Side. In migrant folklore, every poor person who moved North had one great advantage and one great disadvantage: the advantage was that there were plenty of jobs for people who knew how to work hard, which all the migrants did; the disadvantage was the constant temptation to fall into the wild life that was there on the South Side for those who wanted it. (p. 65)Freedom. Just the early tastes of freedom for black people in 1930s Chicago were reminiscent of teenagers having access to the car keys, liquor, and the house for the weekend while mom and dad were on vacation. The only problem? Black people in Chicago never stopped acting like mom and dad were on vacation.
They did have the fear of white society (The State) coming down on them, but then in 1948 we saw Shelley v. Kraemer pass; Black-Run America (BRA) was slowly coming to power.
But the problems that black people brought with them to Chicagoland from the Jim Crow South, where their vices were kept in check by a white government power, were liberated and allowed to flourish. Even in the 1930s, black dysfunction was on full display in Chicago and a reminder why white people fought to keep them out of their neighborhood; their communities.
But why are the communities white people create so different from the ones black people create? As you've seen, even in the 1930s (when the Thomas Sowell created mythical "Great black Family" existed) black people in Chicago had created conditions in their community where short-term failure and long-term disaster were obvious.
It's in the vile leftists Jonathan Kozol's book Savage Inequalities: Children in America's Schools that we learn a reality of racial differences Mr. Kozol would have you believe is some form of white oppression; instead, it's just another example of the Visible Black Hand of Economics:
Cities like Chicago face the added problem that an overly large portion of their limited tax revenues must be diverted to meet nonschool costs that wealthy suburbs do not face, or only on a far more modest scale. Police expenditures are higher in crime-ridden cities than in most suburban towns. Fire department costs are also higher where dilapidated housing, often with substandard wiring, and arson-for-profit are familiar problems. Public health expenditures are also higher where poor people cannot pay for private hospitals. All of these expenditures compete with those for public schools. So the districts that face the toughest challenges are also likely to be those that have fewest funds to meet their children's needs. (p. 68)Mr. Kozol is excused -- he's a true-believer in egalitarianism and thus can't blame black people for creating the conditions that plague their community and drive white people (and all other non-black people) away; he cannot dare blame black people for being more criminal prone than their suburban counterparts; he can't blame black people for failing to maintain the infrastructure they inherit when white flight happens; he can't blame black people for failing to take care of themselves and failing to pay their hospital bills, for doing so would invalidate the whole concept of BRA, which ensures to place all blame for black failure and dysfunction on... anyone but black people themselves.
What you have in Chicagoland is a black population of children, some overgrown children, some elderly children, but all children nonetheless -- free of the burden of " trespassing into territory where the full wrath of an alien white world would be turned loose upon them; in short, it would be a symbolic challenge of the white world’s rule over them; a challenge which they yearned to make, but were afraid to."
Freedom Failed in Chicagoland; it started during the early stages of "The Great Migration," when the seeds of 'Manifest Destruction' were planted. Today, the black violence in Chicago is protected underneath the shade of the very trees that have grown from those seeds.