Yesterday, August 9, Jose Carranza, who, from his mug shot and surname does not appear very black to me, surrendered to Corey Booker, the mayor of Newark. Carranza, who is from Peru according to the New York Times, is a suspect in the triple homicide that occurred in Newark
The unusual arrest occurred after the Mayor had announced the police had detained a 15 year old suspect in the case on Wednesday night.
Carranza has previous arrests for aggravated assault and rape.
The 4th victim, Natasha Aeriel, answering questions in University Hospital btwen pweriods of sedation, identified Carranza from mug shots.
Three other suspects remain at large.
I cannot support single parenthood and the hardship and dysfunction that results from it. This posting would have been perfectly acceptable if Steven Malanga, and you, Mr. Douglas by reprinting it, did not attempt to link single parenthood w/ these horrific murders.
In addition, where is the witness intimidation in this case?
contextual irony: The NYT also reported:
"After being told of the arrests, Renee Tucker, the mother of Natasha Aeriel and Terrance Aeriel, stood on her porch in Newark and asked people to pray for her daughter's recovery. Of the 15 year old accused in the deaths of her children she said, "I'm praying for that baby."
"These kids," she said, "they need their mothers nad fathers."
Perhaps you should have worked the immigration theme or the fact that earlier this year, Carranza was indicted on 31 counts of sexual assault, raping, groping, and sodomizing a girl "who was in his care" from the age of 4 to 7.
Whatever the facts of this particular case, Donald makes excellent points about the breakdown of families. It is remarkable how so many people refuse to face this. No one can say we weren't warned; Moynihan wasn't a lone voice. Daniel Bell wrote similar things in the 1960s, and Pope Paul VI pretty much predicted everything we are now seeing in his encyclical Humanae Vitae. That was 1968, I believe.
Here's my theory: it is not-PC to question single parenthood because doing so is seen as an attack on the only unrestricted right that is left in our society: the right to have sexual relations with whoever you want, whenever you want, however you want, in whatever manner you want. The fact that our pleasure-seeking behavior sometimes results in the creation of children is viewed as an inconvenient side effect.
Now that this attitude has prevailed for a couple of generations, geometric progression is taking over in certain segments of society. The products of casual non-marital sex produce people who behave the same way, and are even more clueless how to handle their own offspring. Their children will be worse still.
Unfortunately I have no easy solution to offer. I fear we have lost these new generations forever. It is very sad to see.
it is not-PC to question single parenthood because doing so is seen as an attack on the only unrestricted right that is left in our society: the right to have sexual relations with whoever you want, whenever you want, however you want, in whatever manner you want....so true!..not to mention indicting the black community for their immorality and total failure as parents.........great work Don!
Loop: Malanga doesn't raise the race of the family, but his analysis is absolutely correct, in my opinion. I have no qualms relating what happened to the black community, a point that still applies even if the captured perpetrator in this case is Hispanic. Your point will be more clear upon the capture of the other suspects.
Patrick: That sounds like a pretty accurate analysis.
Thanks Angel! Keep me updated if you hear any news about this on your end!
While liberalism and feminism has been on the rise in the past 50 years, we also note the higher numbers in Murder, and fatherless Children. It does not take a rocket sciencetist to put the two together. Liberals and Feminist in TV and Media, have Minimize the role a father should have, making him a sperm donor. I have no doubt that the rise in Murder, rape, Homosexuality and other issues of decreasing Morals, is linked with less and less Fathers having a say in raising Children, or made out to be fools by the Liberals.
Thanks for your thoughts, Robert! Loop is astonished that we would link the absence of fathers to social breakdown. But that's what's happening.
Dr. Douglass, another great post as usual. Let me ask the liberal readers of this blog. What was the % of black families that had two parents before the 'war of poverty' started and what is it now?
That should tell you loads about the causes of this problem. It's time we face the facts and admit that the traditional family is not outdated, but badly needed and that we as people need to fix the problem and not rely on the government to do it for us.
Hi Vegas Guy: I know you've done some blogging and commenting on this topic before. Glad you liked the post!
Dear Dr. Douglas,
May I suggest you reread your post and the comments in sequence.
1. You got your facts wrong. This is a bad thing for someone who aspires to punditry. The juxtaposition of getting the facts wrong on the murders and then launching into an attack on the family values of the black community
throws your comments into a light into which I do not think you wished them thrust. Leave off the connection to the homicides and you're fine.
2. Patrick's best point is that indeed babies having babies begets babies having babies.
3. Instructor read #1.
4. Mr. Bayn. I was compelled to advise an Islamic blogger whose site I visit, although he might employ the word "infest," that ignorance can be cured but stupid is forever. I will give you the benefit of the doubt.
It does not require a rocket scientist to connect liberalism and feminism w/ an increase in single parenthood and the homicide rate. It requires a science fiction writer.
5. Back to you Don. No. I am not astonished that absent parents may lead to children who commit crimes, which is what I suppose you meant by social breakdown, a term that I would reserve for more apocalyptic events but I know what you mean.
No, I'm surprised that a PhD in Poly Sci would get his facts wrong or fail to check them in the interest of making an otherwise valid point.
Leave out the reference to the homicides and the work is almost scholarly. Fail to get the facts correct and you appear to be another Orange County cartoon.
6. Vegas Art Guy. Please inform us of the following: They year the war on poverty started; the % of 2 parent black families then; the % now; the % of 2 parent white families then; the % now.
What the heck, you might also throw in the % of Hispanics.
I infer from your comment that you do not believe the particular government program to which you refer was successful and you may be correct. I'm all ears to hear about your solution to poverty in the United States.
Loop Garoo: You say that I "fail to check [the facts] in the interest of making an otherwise valid point."
What facts are you mentioning? Quibble with the post all you want, but if you're going to pick this entry apart, you yourself need to be clear. The post is entirely valid based on what I wrote. I go no further in my assertions than what you see here. If you're going to attack, you better have something behind it. I don't like intellectual dishonesty and evasion.
Note how I say that Malanga might - that is might - have added a discussion about African Americans. Yet, I did not indentify anyone as the suspect. My commentary on Moynihan is a further reflection on fatherless communities. I think your opposition to the post - with both Malanga's and my comments critical of fatherless communities - bothers your liberal sympathies.
Your reading of my post, in any case is not so great. I cite the Times article where witnesses to the murder would not identify anyone, and the author linked this to the phenomenon of witness intimidation. I continued to comment on how that is a phenomenon of concern in the black community. You overlook this because you disagree with the underlying premise.
The only important thing here that you raise is the race of the suspect. Carranza's identity in itself does not invalidate the argument regarding fathers in communities, as I am discussing general theories.
Instructor,
If you widh to bandy the term "intellectual dishonesty," let me use "shoddy scholarship."
I approach you post w/ an open mind. You start w/ a sensational headline and then launch into a cogent discourse.
The headline was factually unrelated to the discourse.
Why not use an illustrative headline or dispense w/ it altogether? It added nothing and detracted from your position, so far I was concerned, b/c it had no relevance.
Dispassionately speaking, it appeared as if you were trying to use a sensational hook. The use of such a hook is suggestive.
Try and take a step back.
Loop Garoo: If you have a criticism to make, make it. Malanga argued that community fatherlessness contributes to outbreaks of violence. You need to rebut that. Everything in my post follows from his agrument, the facts in question are those that you have raised, as I did not make any statement on alleged suspects or their race.
That is intellecually honest.
I'll first note that Malanga did not mention race a single time in his article. I'm not saying there's no place for it, but the original author included all races in his remarks.
Similarly, the New York Times article says nothing about witness intimidation in the black community. Like Malanga's article, the witness intimidation they speak of is not tied to any particular race, and in fact, race is not mentioned once in that article, either.
I'm not saying that race is not a factor, be it in the killings themselves, the breakdown of the traditional family, or in witness intimidation. But contrary to Donald's intimation (& outright claims, in some cases), you wouldn't know it from the articles he linked.
Like Loop, I think you're trying to marry a point of view that has some validity to a story that doesn't further that point of view.
That said, I think you bring up some good questions...
Is there something unique about black families, or is the breakdown of the traditional family a very similar problem in all communities?
Is there actual causation between fatherlessness & ...crime, ...poverty, ...drop out rates, ...more out of wedlock birth, or just a correlation between them?
(I see them as more of cluster or a syndrome, where each makes the rest more likely, but none cause the rest.)
Is there anything we as a society can do, or is it up to those afflicted (or their community) to solve it on their own?
"...not to mention indicting the black community for their immorality and total failure as parents.........great work Don"
At first I though this was a sarcastic comment from a liberal. But it wasn't, was it?
I don't think Don did this, and I hope that wasn't his intent, either. (I'm a little concerned that he didn't respond to this when thanking Angel for her contribution.)
Angel (& Don):
Do you really believe the black community is immoral and a total failure as parents?
If so, why (by which I mean, what causes their immorality & bad parenting, and what lessens the impact of this in other (ethnic/racial/faithful-faithless) communities)?
I'm not going to tag anyone with any ..ism here, because I fear that'd stifle the conversation, and I really am curious.
Besides, maybe I'm just misunderstanding something...
Repsac: There's no need for a long answer. One of my academic specialities is black politics. If you want to call me a racist for my criticism of the black underclass, just come right out and do it.
Check the links to the witness intimidation posts to get a handle on where I'm coming from, or just search for awhile on the blog under black politics, poverty, slavery, or you name it.
"If you want to call me a racist for my criticism of the black underclass, just come right out and do it."
No thank you... Not unless you make me, anyway...
It's fine to criticise, including on the basis of race, as long as you have something to back it up... (I'm not saying you do or don't... I'm still reading.)
I am a little concerned about Angel's more general statement about the morality & parenting skills of blacks, but I'm willing to listen to her (his?) explanation, as well.
As I( said in my first post though, I believe that even assuming you're making a good point on a subject that is sorely in need of discussion, the story you chose to highlight it doesn't have the elements you're discussing. The fact that black politics is one of your academic specialties makes it all the more possible that you view situations through that particular prism, and see connections where they may not actually be.
Off to keep reading, & get a feel for where you're coming from...
Repsac: Read into it all you want. Tell me though, what's the race of the victims and what is the ethnic demographic breakdown of the city of Newark.
If there's a prism, look at the issues through those lenses. Besides, I'm only adding to what Malanga wrote. And when social scientist cite those super high statistics on single parent households, I don't think they have in mind white trial attorney women (etc.) who decided use the services of a sperm bank.
Again, I say that you very well may be onto something as concerns the issues you raise, but the news story is a poor example of those issues.
Yes, both the victims and the area may be black. So what? The victims are not responsible for their murders, are they? (Even if we discover that they intentionally did something to set the murderer off, murder did not have to be the response, and the fact that it was falls on the murderer.) And if they were murdered because they were black...
The first suspect is not black. No one has mentioned whether he is fatherless. The fact that much of the area is black (& perhaps fatherless) doesn't really translate.
Of course, it occured to me that this isn't your fault. You didn't pick the story, Stephen Malanga did. He is the one trying to shoehorn his ideas about the traditional family onto this tragic story. You're just cutting & pasting his words.
As far as what social scientists are "really" saying, I would think that when they talk about single parent households, they mean single parent households, nothing more & nothing less. I would think that a good social scientist would say what they mean, and include a representitive sample in their surveys. I don't think reading into what they say for hidden meanings is such a good idea, particularly if one can check the valididty of their sampling for evidence of class or racial bias. I suspect that your white attorney is in there, too...
And, what of that white attorney & her child (& by implication, all single white mothers)? I'm sure they are contributing to the moral breakdown of the traditional family, but are their children the rule or the exception as far as drop out rates, crime, and the rest of the social ills that surround single parenthood in general?
I'll try to do some internet research, but I suspect that it is poverty, and not race, that makes these social ills more likely among single parent families. (Though like I said, I believe that all of these problems feed into each other, similar to the cardiovascular cluster of symtoms that when grouped together form the metabolic syndrome. Each has the potential to make the others worse, and solving it requires addressing all the symtoms as a whole.)
As an aside, have you considered using the labels (or tags) feature of blogger? It'd make it far easier to pull up all the entries about a specific subject (be it "black politics, poverty, slavery" or any other), rather than combing through the archives, month by month, and post by post... Just a suggestion... (I'm about 6 months in... I'll plug through more, later...)
Commenting by HaloScan
