The Ebony Experiment: Stop Asking 'Is it Racist?'

So for me, the Ebony Experiement is more about changing consumer
attitude than any real kind of "economic stimulus" for the businesses.

This is what it's about and that, as you say and as I've said, may be logically separated from a hard economics discussion.  And I also said in the beginning of the article that sometimes people should recognize when a conversation is not about them.

But noooooooo ... some folks can't keep their fingers out of other folks' gumbo even when nobody's asked them to help cook. ;-)

I think sometimes people start tripping as soon as you mention "legacies of slavery and segregation" and miss everything that's said after that phrase, especially how it connects to what black people do to themselves. And I mean both black people and white people. They think they know what you're talking about without even listening to what you have to say in that moment.

Thanks for seeing the center.

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE and NOLA Lit Examiner ( http://nola101.com ). Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ).

In the case of black businesses, one of the reasons they
struggle is black on black discrimination that happens to have a
history tied to the legacies of racism, government-ordained
segregation. The stigma blacks place on black businesses is the
perception that they are inferior.

Nordette,  I think this aspect of this story is key. Many people who are not African American may not have the historical context to understand this stigma. At one time, of course, Blacks bought from Blacks because we had to--often we were not welcome elsewhere, or our treatment there was so degreading that we sought our only other choice. Desegregation and greater access then came like a double edged sword. It was great that we could shop anywhere (presumably) but then many Black businesses suffered since Whites were not flocking to many Black-owned businesses.

For many years too many of us had this attitude where if we once received poor service from an African American we wrote off any other African Americans. Yet we did not do the same thing when receiving poor service from White Americans--we simply moved on to the next White business owner.

So for me, the Ebony Experiement is more about changing consumer attitude than any real kind of "economic stimulus" for the businesses. As much as some Whites want to scream about us being "racist" against them, too many of us are more "racist" against ourselves than we ever could be against any other group. It is unfortunate that so many folks cannot be open to one family's attempt to see their own community differently.

Great article and discussion in the comment thread.

~~

This So-Called, Post-Post-Racial Life

http://postpostracial.wordpress.com/

Yes, Nordette, fine. I'll say one more time that I consider it intellectually swallow and at worst intellectually dishonest to raise this kind of issue, play the victim card, stoke the emotional embers, exchange charges of racism and then back off from a consideration of macro issues that could benefit the very people you support.

This is my last word. I also have to work.

Let's leave income taxes out of it then.

If you exempt essential purchases...food, medicine, etc., from the flat tax, which I support, it is truly a consumption tax. That is, people who consume the most are taxed the most.

What about enterprise efforts by city and states? Do you support those efforts?

What about the self-employment tax which is double the tax on salaried workers? Do you consider that an obstacle to entrepreneurship?

The impact from such approaches still hit hardest at those on the lower end of earnings, with a higher percentage of their income going to taxes. Even with exemptions, a higher percentage of their income will go to taxes than those at the opposite end of the earnings scale. 

The self-employment tax simply equalises by capturing the element lost by removing an employer from the picture. Since the self-employed are the employer, they get both halves - they also get equity, which is all too often not mentioned in these discussions. If it is a viable business, that equity far exceeds the 7.5% of earnings in one year, which is of course, after expenses, depreciation, etc.

llhaesa ( http://llhaesa.org/ )

Carry on. I'm sure there are people here who want to talk economic policies. I, however, have a deadline to meet elsehwere.

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE and NOLA Lit Examiner ( http://nola101.com ). Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ).

Where is this policy?

It seems to me we boomed in the 90s when the rates were (slightly) higher, yet the Bush administration cut taxes while increasing spending, including starting a war that made no sense and was and is unjustifiable. Close to a trillion dollars for that, unpaid, yet hugely supported by the right.

Which revenue/expenditure policy made more sense? That under Clinton or under Bush?

The tax issue comes up often. I see proposals to change to a national sales tax, flat tax, etc, both of which hit lower income folk the hardest.

As a nation, we have spent (and wasted) far too much on defence over the years, and far too little on issues within this nation.

Along with this, I keep seeing claims that Congress triggered the economic crisis by encouraging lending to lower income folk. This is a reach by the right, one where they refuse to accept that the last administration took their mandate and flushed it away.

This ignores how sub-prime lenders aggressively marketed their loans;  they bombarded every home in this country with weekly mailings. Congress didn't encourage shifting lending evaluation from bank employees to independent mortgage brokers and originators, they didn't encourage the selling and bundling of mortgages, and they certainly did not encourage things like no verification loan products, not explaining all the terms of the loan to customers, introductory rates that would balloon after a few years, and not reserving sufficient capital to cover the securities. 

And you also seem to forget the left has been in power for...13 weeks. 

llhaesa ( http://llhaesa.org/ )

The self-employement tax.

Confiscatory tax policies.

An uncertain business environment where government articulates confusing and contradictory policies.

Onerous states sales and franchise taxes.

Lack of inner city growth and development policies.

I would also include dried up credit.

No, it was sloppy writing. It does not refer to you specifically. However, I would like to understand your position vis-a-vis economic policies particularly within the context of this discussion.

Nordette--I entirely disagree. You raised a discussion about one couple's effort to support black businesses. If that is not an economic effort, I'm not sure what it is. My point, one I've tried repeatedly to make, is that these efforts cannot be discussed productively without reference to macro-economic policies. They're branches off the same tree.

In it I've  explained that you want to discuss your perception of conservative vs. progressive ideologies in economics. Such a discussion is beyond the scope of this post as the title of the post makes clear.  

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE and NOLA Lit Examiner ( http://nola101.com ). Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ).

Norma, if you think taxes and hard economics should be covered, then please write your own post. This is a blog post, at most an essay, not a book nor detailed economic solutions report. It was not written as a treatise on all the ways to save small business black or white.

It's not even about saving black business; however, I can see how it could be misinterpreted as being about how to save black business since the Andersons and others are concerned that black businesses are failing.

As its title indicates, the post is addressing complaints from some whites that the Ebony Experiment is racist and within that topic I addressed perceptions that black businesses are inferior and how that perception came to be. This is why I could not let your paragraph that, while having a disclaimer in parentheses about what the Andersons are doing, still suggests within the context of the paragraph above it, that you are speaking of businesses identified by race. 

For the record, please look at this assertion: If its goal is to save black business owners the Ebony Experiment will fail because the solution must be broader than African-Americans agreeing to shop at black-owned stores.  It takes tax breaks, less government regulation, and a recognition that only those black businesses that offer the best services and in-demand products will survive.

If you had come by and said that, then I most likely would have written four words to you, "More or less true." 

But instead you led with this:

Nordette sees the act as a racially affirming one and I think that's fine. Were my world view similar to Nordette's I might stake out a similar position.

You brought baggage to the discussion, thinking this is another progressive versus conservative topic. It's not.  It's an ignorant assertions about racism versus sociological and historical reality discussion.

Even this subheading in the post, "Slavery, Segregation and Economics," was the opening to a discussion about perception of inferior products and service based on the skin color of the owner causing people to spend their dollars elsewhere, not about how taxes impacted black business owners after slavery. 

If I had thought I was writing a post like the one you want to see, I would have probably entitled it something like "Beyond Charges of Racism: Micro and Macro Economics and Why Black Business Needs More Than The Ebony Experiment."  I hope you will consider that what my post is about and what you want to discuss are two different things, and again neither of those things is about shopping black to be racially affirming.

As for how much chance the experiment has of saving black business, I've already written in at least one response to you that an expert agrees with you that the Ebony Experiment will not save black business. In fact, I think everyone would agree about that.  But The Ebony Experiment is raising awareness of the importance of the survival of black business in relation to the black community.

So, if after its conclusion more people are asking themselves are they passing up some business owners whose stores they've never even entered based on an assumption about the quality, then the experiment is reasonable. To put it simply, the Ebony Experiment asks people to give black business a chance to survive by at least walking through the door and checking them out, to be willing to buy if you find them adequate or better.

Norma, you can't force me to talk hard economic solutions if my post is about race and perception, a sociological discussion.  Again, please post on tax solutions for small business and how government is killing small businesses with overtaxing and too many regulations, etc., whatever goes with that argument.  I'll defend you completely against people who want to move your post away from the taxes/supply and demand topic.

Ugh. I think this is going to show up in a long skinny column because of where it is in the thread.

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE and NOLA Lit Examiner ( http://nola101.com ). Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ).

why bother to make the investment if you support the economic policies that make it difficult to grow and prosper?

what 'economic policies' you make reference to.

llhaesa ( http://llhaesa.org/ )

 I'm sorry, Norma, but I don't understand your question. What economic policies are you talking about, and does the "you" in your comment refer to me specifically, or some rhetorical other? I don't remember having articulated a position on any economic policies.

KimBlogHer Contributing Editor ( http://blogher.org/blog/kim-pearson )|Professor Kim ( http://professorkim.blogspot.com/ )|

But Kim, whether businesses get their start-up money from micro-lending, lines of credit, loans, cash reserves, or from venture capitalists, why bother to make the investment if you support the economic policies that make it difficult to grow and prosper?

"But for many it's about the dollar and only the dollar."

Yes, Nordette, that's exactly what it's about. Grocery stores don't move to poor or to any other kind of neighborhoods if their internal analyses tell them they can't make a profit. Why should they? How can they?

But, cities and states can positively influence the decision by giving them tax breaks and other incentives.

When enlightened government acts in this kind of positive way, all of us benefit.

This is exactly what I have been trying to say. 

Nordette--Yes. Yes. I wrote that.

It was simply to point out that political support for failing businesses is usually a short-term solution.

Sorry this seems to have upset you. I made a general statement of fact. Am I wrong? No.

I explicitly said that I wasn't talking about the businesses the Andersens support. Do you want to me to say it again. I will. I'm not referring to the businesses the Andersons support.

I was trying to move to a larger point. It is that all business operate in an economic environment shaped by macro-economic policies. When those policies are good policies, all businesses have a greater chance of success.

If you want small black businesses to succeed, and I gather you do, then you must go beyond individual patronage, however affirming the individual act is, to address the larger economic policies affecting them.

I further pointed out that in these political/racial debates, most people focus only on the problem. Yes, it's emotional. Yes, social injustice has occurred. Yes, support for experiments like the Andersons might be emotionally satisifying and even productive to the extent they draw attention to a problem.

But that's all they do.

If you're really serious about encouraging small black businesses, if you're really serious about seeing them prosper, you have to consider economic issues, including tax questions. Otherwise, frankly, it's just talk. I'd go even further and say it's intellectually disingenuous to refuse to even consider the broader economic environment. Which so far, you have.

Hey Nordette,

I've often toyed with doing a parody of Virginia Woolf's "Room of One's Own" in which Shakespeare's sister lives in an inner-city US community. The lack of groceries stores, and especially, the dearth of fresh fruit and produce would be a key point in the essay. Political scientist Les Spence wrote ( http://blacksmythe.com/blog/2007/06/25/creating-sa... ) about the need to get more people growing their own food. A Detroit organization called the Urban Farming ( http://www.urbanfarming.org/ ) initiative is encouraging the growth of community gardening and co-ops in Detroit, which has a lot of arable, unused land.  Isles, a non-profit organization in Trenton, New Jersey, is also trying to promote community gardens. What could we do with a national push for community gardens supported by micro-lending ( http://www.kiva.org/ )?

KimBlogHer Contributing Editor ( http://blogher.org/blog/kim-pearson )|Professor Kim ( http://professorkim.blogspot.com/ )|

I should take time more time to properly address my comments and that includes use of links but I am ADD so my mind speaks at a speed I can not keep up with and so some things come out wrong.

I am not without faults and learning. I do not know why Nordette is such a thorn in my side, when I can read your blog and be inspired?

I do want to thank you for the recomendation of  the 'Roger Troutman of Zapp'.

because I am clueless.  You can personally run with my dumb blonde pollock attitude..It seems to be a clever way out for those of you who can't debate intelligently.

BTW...if you read my posts on the Ebony experiment I take the race card out of the equation by asking people would this be an issue if their child had cancer; would they raise awareness and funding for autism or for cancer? This is a matter of what is close to the Andersons heart..I don't see in my posts where I argue this matter.

What I object to is the limited arguments posted by Nordette. After reseraching and reading every post on this matter, it seems to me both sides of the fences have some piss poor arguments in this case. But Nordette chose to narrow her focus on a few 'non-colored' posts that do not represent the whole of 'non-colored' people.

Just recently I read a post by another blogher who talked about rappers and young children who were victims of child abuse. In this post she chose to make a dig at middle america thinking rappers are a joke. I wonder who she thinks middle America is? Middle aged? Middle of the East and West coast?  Middle of the bible belt?

This is not the first time Nordette and I have clashed on opinion but I have never made personal attacks on her character to debate an issue.

Read her post on the "Dust Bowl". I clashed with her their too!!

Slavery, Segregation and Economics

Slavery prevented African-Americans from having the experience of
building the ethnic economic base that other groups have built in this
nation. Upon their arrival, blacks were immediately stripped of
cultural identity--language, customs, family connections, control of
their own bodies, and whatever material wealth, even the grit of
African sand--was stolen. The abolition of slavery, the demolition of
segregation, did not magically restore these losses. Neither does the
election of a black president.

That is the starting point. There were people, myself included, that were hurt by some of your comments. Nordette, Prof. Kim and others offered links and places you could visit so that you could have additional information.

We can only learn about you by how you present yourself through your blog and your comments. The situation that Nordette reported on is not unusual. There have been news stories on couples trying to exist without spending more that $50 a week, congresspeople experimenting with living on food stamps or food writers writing about $5 a day meals or only eating locally produced food.

The difference is that nobody called the above mentioned folks race or reverse racism into question when they attempted their experiments. The Andersons are catching heat for trying to buy local, support area businesses and having the freedom to make financial decisions on spending their money.

That was what Nordette was trying to communicate. You don't have to agree with her but the other stuff you brought up distracted from the topic.

Gena - Out On The Stoop ( http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com )

You bring up an important point about the lack of services offered in urban communities, namely the lack of grocery stores. This is a serious problem and it would be a blessing if a group of business owners would open a chain specifically to serve underserved communities and stop approaching the inner city with fear at every turn. But for many it's about the dollar and only the dollar.

The lack of supermarkets in urban areas is a topic I keep saying I'll write on at UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ), but haven't yet addressed b/c I need more research. When I heard the Andersons' story, I listened intently to see if they could find a black-owned supermarket. I was pleasantly surprised that they did. But I wonder if the store is located in an urban area or in the suburbs.

And when you bring up women, I think it's a similar situation because think of how until maybe three decades ago, people still looked surprised to see female doctors as though my nature they were less qualified than men. It took a long time for that to die down, but I bet if we talked to female doctors, we'd find that they sometimes still encounter people who treat them as though they don't know what they're doing.

When any capable group must overcome a stigma of being unfit to succeed it takes people willing to walk toward them and disprove the fallacy of unfitness. 

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE and NOLA Lit Examiner ( http://nola101.com ). Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ).

One  of the 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling

I am an African American female who lives in the inner city.  My neighborhood is not all black it has a rather large number of poor whites who also live there.  In my neighborhood we have very few businesses of any sort we do not have even a real grocery store any business would be appreciated.

I am glad that the Andersons are buying black I have been buying black for years as I also support females in business they are both underserved.  I just hired a black plumber who was the best plumber I ever had.  Its important for us to show African Americans support for other African Americans especially plumbers and contractors where blacks are seriously underrepresented.

Thank you, SCanon. Hugs are good. :-)  I hope some good comes out the Andersons' quest as well.

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE and NOLA Lit Examiner ( http://nola101.com ). Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ).

Come here and give me a hug.  I think you need it!

This is an awesome post that has, unfortunately, deviated a bit in the comments section.  Let me say that I think that the Anderson's are doing a wonderful and selfless thing.  In tight times such as these, people can tend to focus on covering their own asses and not putting much thought into the hardships other people might be experiencing.  A community banding together is a great idea.  The black communiy buying from black shops is what we call in my redneck town of birth "Taking care of your own," which is something that is useful in hard times experienced by some, or experienced by all. I hope that this encourages a tighter community...and bonding.  Maybe even this bad press that it's receiving will encourage some people to try to prove the nay-sayers wrong.  I'm white and I say "Good for the Andersons!  I hope it brings about some good."

The big "but" in this is that supporting business which do not provide
goods and services that are quality and in demand just artifically
props them up. (I do not at all assert that the businesses where the
Andersens' spend their money fall into this category. I'm simply
asserting a general statement of fact.)

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE and NOLA Lit Examiner ( http://nola101.com ). Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ).

original topic, why is there a need to build community? Why was the community decimated in the first place?

We know the root cause. So why go after how people try to overcome, better their lives, better their community, and instead focus on the lingering issues that created these conditions in the first place?

We approach this like passage of civil rights legislation during my childhood years is sufficient to right everything. It isn't.

What the Andersons are doing is affirming, a positive. Yet I read responses where the action is called out as potentially supportive of businesses that might be inferior and should fail of their own volition; that is quite a reach at best.

Reiterating my point, that is a huge assumption to make when there is no evidence that it is an issue. Further, it is devaluing the personal/business skill and acumen of the Andersons, and that is unfair. 

Forgive me if I ramble, I am tired and still trying to finish a fiction element. 

llhaesa ( http://llhaesa.org/ )

You're right. It probably isn't a factor and I probably shouldn't have brought it up since it seems to have obscured my larger point which is to see business through a purely racial or political point of view, however justifiable or understandable, misses the larger context in which they operate.

However, I don't understand your last paragraph at all.

But Nordette, I didn't make any allusions. Not a one. You insist on seeing allusions which aren't there. You made an assumption and a wrong one.

I did not put words in your mouth. I said "people" not Norma.  Furthermore, I acknowledged that you said you weren't saying the Andersons had to buy inferior product.  What I made clear was the allusion in your words.

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE and NOLA Lit Examiner ( http://nola101.com ). Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ).

Come on, Nordette. Please. I made a general statement that propping up businesses with inferior products or services isn't a good idea. Period. I have no way of knowing where the Andersons shop. Nor do I particuarly care.

a rather big assumption? I would assume that lousy service and product would produce disastisfaction, and I am supremely confident that the couple in question has a pretty good handle on whether they personally are satisfied with product and service rendered.

With all due respect, I fail to see this as a factor, any more than my having to actively contemplate how I breathe whilst writing this response.

No matter what people try, someone will dislike it. I wish more people brought that dislike to the root cause of all this, and why such measures are even necessary.

llhaesa ( http://llhaesa.org/ )

Allow me to further amplify my comment.

Whether you support small business because of a legacy of previous or current discrimation, you and many of the participants on this thread obviously support small businesses and want them to succeed. That's why you're choosing to spend your (remaining) dollars with these companies. That's your objective...the success of these companies.

If that is your objective, then the question becomes what -- beyond individual patronage -- can help them succeed? You have to ask this question. It doesn't narrow the discussion, it broadens it.

My answer is that good tax policy helps small business overall and specifically. Unfortunately, when tax policy is addressed, the discussion generally moves into questions about who is rich and who is not. It overlooks the fact that many of the so-called "rich" are small business owners who employ people and that additional taxes hamper their ability to grow, employ more people and better their communities.

Creating an economic climate where small businesses in any community can prosper is the only way to meet your objective of supporting black business.

Nordette--I do appreciate your point of view. I really do. However, it's very difficult to discuss things with you because you insist on putting words in my mouth as with this sentence.

"It's interesting how many people suggest that to shop black is to shop
inferiror quality and service.  But if you hadn't brought up buying
inferior products as though that's the likely option when doing what
the Andersons are doing, then I wouldn't have either."

Come on, Nordette. Please. I made a general statement that propping up businesses with inferior products or services isn't a good idea. Period. I have no way of knowing where the Andersons shop. Nor do I particuarly care.

My point was that economic policies affect small businesses. Bad economic policies affect them more because they often don't have cash reserves/credit lines etc. that can help them weather bad times.

I further made the suggestion that it might be interesting to check with these businesses on these issues with the thought small business owners--black, white and purple--probably have more in common ON ECONOMIC ISSUES than you might have considered.

Also, Nordette, please consider than most people go to Wal-mart or wherever because the company offers products that are in demand. That's what a good business does. It creates a demand. (I know the issues associated with Wal-mart and I don't want to get into a discussion about them.) The point is that to grow and prosper, people have to want to use or buy the services or goods a business offers.

It's more like writing in defense against the arrows of stupidity which are reverse-racism spin.

Norma, the white people who've taken time to criticize the Andersons and make out as though the Andersons are doing something to hurt them by calling the Andersons racists are what makes makes it necessary to address this topic in this post.  All over the nation this story is presented within the context of the question, "The Ebony Experiment--is it racist?"  

That kind of ignorance of history and insult foaming from white privilege needed to be addressed.   Hence the title of this post.

Why does the Andersons' experiment bug some white people?   Why couldn't they just say, "Good for the Andersons. They want to improve the chances of economic independence in the black community using their own money instead of whining to the government for dollars?" 

Is it possible they've never looked at where their dollars go because as white people they don't have to consider such topics, never have to concern themselves with whether their dollars are leaving their communities unless it's in terms of jobs going to China or Mexico?  In other words, it's an issue a white community doesn't have because by default its members are already shopping white and growing wealth due to how this country was established.

No, the white critics prefer to dump on African-Americans in the guise of "that's so racist." It seems black people are damned if they try to help themselves and damned if they ask for help. The same people who say "Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps" when you have no boots want to shoot off your hands when you finally get a pair and reach for the straps."

So, if they hadn't started slinging charges of reverse racism, then I
wouldn't have bothered with the post at BlogHer, a racially diverse online community. Perhaps
I would have only mentioned it in my personal blog as "Oh, look. A cool experiment."

But I do guarantee you this much, whatever bad stats you can pull about how small businesses struggle, it's worse for black businesses, and that's something a discussion of economics and tax breaks only avoids because that narrow a discussion fails to address why do black communities suffer more economically even when they're trying as hard as the other guy. I find outsiders are quick to assume reasons such as black is inferior.

In the case of black businesses, one of the reasons they struggle is black on black discrimination that happens to have a history tied to the legacies of racism, government-ordained segregation. The stigma blacks place on black businesses is the perception that they are inferior. Where did that idea come from?  You have people walking around who've never been in more than one or two black-owned businesses in their lives who will make those kinds of statements about all black-owned businesses.

The big "but" in this is that supporting business which do not provide goods and services that are quality and in demand just artifically props them up. (I do not at all assert that the businesses where the Andersens' spend their money fall into this category. I'm simply asserting a general statement of fact.)(wrote Norma)
I know and you've acknolwedged that you don't mean the Andersons are buying inferior products and services because they're buying black, but I still have to repeat for the sake of people thinking about what they're saying to not slander all black and small business owners that the Andersons are not buying inferior quality products and services.

The Andersons did not ever say that they would spend their dollars with busineses that offer inferior quality just for the sake of it being a black-owned business. I don't think they believe in rewarding inferior work.

The most they've said is that they're willing to drive longer distances and perhaps spend more on a service that they could get elsewhere. If they're successful, they will at least dispel the myth that black businesses are only barber shops, beauty salons, and restaurants or the only black professionals are lawyers.

It's interesting how many people suggest that to shop black is to shop inferiror quality and service.  But if you hadn't brought up buying inferior products as though that's the likely option when doing what the Andersons are doing, then I wouldn't have either.

Finally, you're right. What they're doing won't make much difference economically. One family can't single handledly save black business or small business. I think some expert, a black guy, even says that in one of the articles I mentioned. That's why the Andersons propose more people follow their lead. 

It's just an experiment. What's the big deal? Why do some whites take the time to oppose it?

BTW, tax breaks don't help small businesses if everybody's going to the Wal-Mart. Black or white, they need customers. The Andersons are at least going through the doors of small business owners and making more people aware.

Just so we're clear. I agree that in part the issue is race-neutral. What I disagree with is an avoidance of the topic of race as though race and the legacy of racism never plays a role.  How many customers come through your doors is more about race than you think in black communities.

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE and NOLA Lit Examiner ( http://nola101.com ). Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ).

Claims of reverse discrimination make me crazy. Oppressed peoples banding together to fight off oppression is not reverse discrimination, it is a defence that can be anything from survival oriented to eventually pushing forward toward and to equality.

When I sought out a place for my (non-fiction) blog a few years ago, my preference was for it to be space where women were prominently involved on a corporate level (thanks to info from Denise, hello TypePad.) 

I prefer to support my community, and who better to do this than ourselves, than all of us who have had enough of suppression of rights and of people in various identifiable segments of society?

I'm on this site and find it well suited to my interests for very specific reasons, and more power to anyone who chooses wisely and in the process supports the advancement of equality.

If we had cyber space over the course of our nation's history - think any of those complaining now would have sad scratch about avoiding black owned businesses? And wasn't there a time when they didn't even want black folk in their proprietorships? Yet now... it is racist to make a choice to support community?

I often think of this line of thinking - and I occasionally see it with regard to feminism - as those not very enamoured with the change as trying to forestall change in actuality, trying to hold on to the artificial privilege that has come via past institutionalised inequities.  

I've yet to read the responses, but did glance, and ay yee yee, do I wish to trudge through that? 

llhaesa ( http://llhaesa.org/ )

I think more than the experiment itself, the commentary on this piece has been fascinating.

I have no trouble with the Andersen's spending their money where they choose. For those of you with any money left, that's still your right.

What I think is fascinating is the prism through which the act of spending money is viewed. Nordette sees the act as a racially affirming one and I think that's fine. Were my world view similar to Nordette's I might stake out a similar position.

The big "but" in this is that supporting business which do not provide goods and services that are quality and in demand just artifically props them up. (I do not at all assert that the businesses where the Andersens' spend their money fall into this category. I'm simply asserting a general statement of fact.)

Small business, black or white or purple, are the engine of the economy. I seen stats showing that small business creates anywhere from 70 percent to 90 percent of all new jobs. 

So for me, the issue is economic, not racial. What tax policies can help grow these small businesses? If they are SubS or doing business on a DBA, business revenue is taxed as personal income. So new or increased taxes will hurt their ability to grow, to create new jobs and provide new goods or services. If they've incorporated, then they're taxed twice: the business revenue is taxed and the personal income is taxed.

Sarbanes Oxley of course took care of incentives to go public at least here. The NYSE is no longer the pre-eminent stock exchange in the world. That's transferred to London.

While the Andersens' experiment is nice...in the larger scheme of things it's not going to make a huge amount of difference if the businesses they support crater under tax policies that make it difficult to grow.

I'd suggest the logical next step in the experiment might be to survey these businesses owners. Ask them what policy changes could help their growth. The answers will probably surprise you by being entirely race neutral.

Nordette, I think this is one of the best post I've ever read, and not just of yours.  First of all, I'd never heard of this experiment and if it weren't for knowing you and reading BlogHer, I still wouldn't know about it.

Experiments that are variations on this theme happen all the time - can I buy all kids' toys without getting one that's made in China? Can I go without eating bread for eight days during Passover? Can I use only women-owned businesses to help me with my race for city council?

I confess that I can imagine that once, maybe twice the question about whether it is racist would be asked - but I can guarantee you that the first time I might hear that, I'd roll my eyes and the second time I'd browse away, change the channel or switch stations - it's just not a very deep, relevant or important question - it's not what it's about, just like seeing if we can live on stuff that's only made in the US, or seeing if we can live on only stuff we grow and so on.

Anyway - I laud the couple of trying this, I laud you for writing about pretty much all the dimensions of it and I look forward to learning their conclusions.  Thanks for teaching me a few things - again.

Jill Writes Like She Talks ( http://www.writeslikeshetalks.com )

The focus of this post was that an African-American couple is trying an experiment in supporting the businesses in their community. Let's start there. We do have businesses in our communities. We have professionals, we have trades people and the lists goes on.

Nobody said jack shit about slavery until your post. The questions that could have and may have been asked was "Why is this not a racist act?

I would have responded to you that buying within your community cannot be thought of as a racist act. If you live in a white community and you go to the market that is owned by white people then that is not a racist act. It is where you buy you food.

Now you have a choice. You can shop any place you want. You can choose to spend your dollars as you will. I have bought food at major chains stores, Indian markets, Chinese markets and African-American vendors. I will not spend money at Wal-Mart cuz I don't have one in my area and I do not like their labor practices.

Again, this is an issue of buying choice and how to spend your money. In terms of restoring our communities from the devastation of outsourcing, the changes in technology and the need for new industries (in all communities), we are all trying to find solutions to sustain ourselves and to build new foundations as the old ones crumble.

This is an experiment. It might not work. It might work really well and other African Americans might decide that they do not need the mall or the chain stores. That would have an impact. You see, we really do have non-governmental money at our disposal.

One more thing. I am not going to rag on you for going to Wikipedia. Many people do for background information. When it comes to matters of race, money or any other topic it is customary to provide links to the sources of your information. Some of those links will be to books, other web sites or professionals in the field.

It has never been more important to cite your sources. You have to do it. I might not agree with you source but it tells me that either you have done your research or not. Never let Wikipedia be you sole source of information.

As to the other stuff? Seriously, it was hurtful and I don't know where to begin so I won't.

Gena - Out On The Stoop ( http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com )

Malcolm X's philosophy changed after his departure from the Nation of Islam and pilgrimage to Mecca in 1964. If you read his speech, "Ballots or Bullets," you will find that he advocated self-help, community engagement, entrepreneurship and bloc voting. As you say, he also advocated self-defense. THe speech does not advocate racial separatism. He said that when black people move to white neighborhoods, white flight occurs. That was a valid description of life in 1964, as was his assertion that many powerful members of Congress were illegally elected. The Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act were passed in 1964 and 65.

Anyone who wants to read the speech can do so here: http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/malcolmxb...

( http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/malcolmxb... ) 

KimBlogHer Contributing Editor ( http://blogher.org/blog/kim-pearson )|Professor Kim ( http://professorkim.blogspot.com/ )|

That's about as articulate as I can get about the rant part of the commentary above from blindedbyblonde.  Icky poo wackadoo.  Another word is flat-out racist, period the end.  I don't mind using the word when it's appropriate, and it's not pejorative, it's descriptive.  Racism will always look different with each passing decade, and this is what it looks like now.  

Now on to actual conversation about the actual post, which was really intriguing. 

It's a very old tradition in this country, folks voting with their dollars.  I have my meager -- and now, even meagerer! -- savings for my family and for my kids in "socially responsible" investments, and have long preferred independently-owned businesses to mega-chains whose profits seem rarely to benefit the communities in which their stores are located.

What the Andersons are doing is fantastic, and instructive.  The response they're getting should be appalling.  Sadly, the racial ignorance that fuels the criticism of their project is all too familiar -- on the part of white people, for sure, and to varying degrees in different ways across all races (I live in California where race and ethnicity is plenty complex, and hierarchies of all sorts abound and shift). 

I love the challenge of your question, Nordette,

"how many times have you purchased your car, clothes, groceries from a black-owned company?" 

For my part, I patronize either black or people-of-color owned business when I can, but don't seek them out as much as I'd like.  (I also, in the wake of Prop 8, have made it a more careful point to try not to support businesses of folks who gave big bucks to the campagin to defrock my family of its legal support and recognition.  I consider that a very pro-family thing to do; I owe this much to my kids.)

My one proud (and maybe quirky) thing is, I have stuck with black dentists, for over ten years!  Happily.  When we switched from my old black dentist, we made it a point to go to another black dentist (a woman this time! and a family affair; sister does hygenist & dental assistant stuff, and neice does receptionist work). 

But I'm going to read up on the Andersons' project, and see where I can join in support.  Thanks again for a fantastic piece.

and I have no issues and I have lived in many different communities from upper crust to impoverished communities. 

As far as wikipedia...I noticed one of those comments lashed at me on the Malcolm X was a direct cut and paste from a white woman while the black woman who did offer her comment regarding Malcolm X was dead on and so I visited the link. 

As far as the comments you chose to use in your post seem to me lacking an entire view of the project but rather a narrow view aimed at proving prejudice against this project.  Although you remained objective in your choice of words, the posts seem to represent a majority of white christian idiots.

I refrained from commenting on the color of my friends and boyfriends because I though it is a poor argument to play. As is claiming I have a problem with black people is also a ridiculous argument and not a very intelligent one. I work for Habitat of humanity because I lived in one of the neighborhoods that was falling prey to gangs and violence and cleaning up one house at a time slowly pushed the bad element out. SO please spare me your take on my life. You don't walk in my shoes nor do I walk in yours and I never made this personal accept to judge your narrow focus of racism. I could easily say you have a problem with white people.

I have no problem arguing issues like this one because I have no guilt from my ancestory to play on. My family came from Europe and I was never taught that race was an issue.

 You can have the last word because I can see this is going nowhere and so you win. Your right and I am wrong.

Yes, I gathered that early, but didn't want to dwell on your European roots since you seemed to think you could talk about blackness in America. 

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE. Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ). @Twitter ( http://twitter.com/nordette_verite )

Good caterers are a blessing on the planet. :-)

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE. Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ). @Twitter ( http://twitter.com/nordette_verite )

When I interviewed for a newspaper Dr. William Foley who was retiring as the superintendent of Westfield Schools in NJ a few years back, a white guy, he said that it was important to teach students, beginning in elementary school, how to evaluate source material.  In particular, he stressed teaching them not to rely on Wikipedia and if using Wikipedia to scrutinize the information and sift it through the context of history and science.

The same can be said of books, which came first. But I have read those too. I use what I've learned from books to evaluate the validity of what I read online. I also evaluate book sources to see whether what the author says stacks up with both anecdotal evidence and systematic scholarly research.

You may have noticed that while some people on this thread are recommending links to you, those links are based on books. So, they're not telling you what they think based on Wikipedia. Their knowledge is older and broader than Wikipedia's post or supporting links found via Google.  I think some of them may be suggesting you visit a library. If I had anything to add, it would be step beyond yourself and get to know some people, really know them, who aren't "blinded by Blonde."

I only share this information with you because you seem to think quotes from the Net exist in a vacuum.

Obviously I am black and you are white, but I do have an advantage. I have lived with whites, literally (ritzy boarding school), I have been educated by a white system and so have had to digest for the sake of survival white history, white mindsets, white art and culture. I have even dated white and been privy to the thoughts of white men, top dogs on the social ladder, up close and personal. I have sat for hours with white liberals as well as white conservatives and white racists too, especially the ones who don't know they're racists. So, I don't need books or the web or television to inform me about white people.  I've got my life.

Who do you know? You did some work for Habitat for Humanity but you don't seem to know the people who live in the neighborhoods where the homes are built.

And you do have some kind of resentment issue with blacks.  I don't have to argue that point. It's clear from your commentary.  But get this, please, I don't care that you do. That's you and your life. Only you can determine what, if anything, you wish to do about it.

Someone just looked over my shoulder and read your comments and my response before I hit publish and asked me why did I bother to respond to you. My answer, "I'm responding for the sake of people reading who may genuinely want knowledge and appreciate introspection. The post to which I respond is simply a vehicle to do that."

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE. & NOLA Lit. Examiner ( http://nola101.com ). Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ). @Twitter ( http://twitter.com/nordette_verite )

Um, no, I didn't read about Malcolm X on Wikipedia.  I read about him by reading his autobiography and multiple supplemental texts, as well as taking a doctoral-level class taught by a professor whose spent his entire academic career, including his dissertation, studying Dr. King and Malcolm X's work and publishing books about the two of them.  I actually KNOW that stuff, as opposed to looking it up online.  Let me know when you read an actual book. I can talk about Martin and Malcolm all day using actual knowledge from my brain, not shit I looked up online to make a point. 

I guess I'm not understanding what your point is.  Are you trying to say that Nordette's post was somehow inaccurate?  Are you trying to deny that economic disparities exist among different socioeconomic groups? Are you trying to say that you're not racist because you volunteer for Habitat?  If you could lighten up on the exclamation points and make a coherent statement based on facts, that might help me understand what you are trying to say. 

While the civil rights movement ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African-American_Civi... ) fought against racial segregation ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_segregation_in... ), Malcolm X advocated the complete separation ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_separatism ) of African Americans from white people. He proposed the establishment of a separate country for black people[61] ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcolm_X#cite_note-L... ) as an interim measure until African Americans could return to Africa.[62] ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcolm_X#cite_note-S... ) Malcolm X also rejected the civil rights movement's strategy of nonviolence ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonviolence ) and instead advocated that black people use any necessary means of self-defense to protect themselves.

 so I can pick up stuff I read on wikipedia too!!

So pleez...

I had several objections to the article of which none of them had anything to do with the Anderswons work to build up their community. My objections came from the choices of comments Nordette chose to paste in her article and her opinion of them. The other objection was the dig of what magazines non-colored people pick up and don't pick up. And the last one was the view on why black owned businesses were thought inferior by some. 

I am white so I think white. Nordette is black and so thinks black...of
course we are going to have opposing views on some things. Most of the time I agree with Nordettes posts. It doesn't mean I have a
problem with blacks, which I thought was a cheap shot on her part so I shot
back witht the cut and paste comment.

 And as far as saving neighborhoods..I am anti-box. I use the small Mom and Pop stores. I have never been in a Wal Mart and my grocery store 'Fresh Plus' only has 10 isles that are about as long as a station wagon. I help my community just like the Anderson's are doing.

And last but not least, I volunteer for Habitat for Humanity buidling homes in neighborhoods that the community let fall around them, so yeah!! I want to see a bit more accountability from the people that live there!!!

Great Post Nordette, cutting, pasting and all :) As someone who grew up in the 80's Yes 1980's in a very very segregated town, I remember my grandma would run out of meds before going to the drug store in town.  She used to say that how others treated us was their choice and where we spent our money was ours. Choice is the key word.  This is money we earned and should be able to spend where and how we see fit.  I think this is a nobel experiment as a small business owner myself I love the idea of spending wihtin the community in which you live.  I do small catering events and I get people who will use me for the food but be soo proud as they show me something that they went all the way to wherever to get.  The point is they could have gotten that same service or even better from right in their own community.  I also get the reverse where people will call me from miles away because they could not possibly trust anyone from their community to do a good job.  It is in our best interset to support those in our communities no matter the color.  Blacks have learned that lesson where HBCUs are concerned.

I shudder to think of the day when Walmart is my only choice.  That is just too much for my brain to fanthom!!!!

Michelle

I blog at http://www.mommycan.blogspot.com/

I applaud you for your support of local business.

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE. Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ). @Twitter ( http://twitter.com/nordette_verite )

The problem we have with injustice and inequality stems from the ignorance that is harbored by people, especially those who perpetuate such ideas.  A little reading (informed reading, not just Google) goes a long way.  I'm not saying that everyone must be scholarly, it just isn't for everyone (that is quite obvious) but reputable sources are an amazing thing! I highly recommending educating yourself to avoid sounding incompetent.  In addition, I believe that buying AMERICAN is a great idea, regardless of color.  That is part of the reason our economy has tanked, too much outsourcing.  As a business owner and artist, I find that people are much more willing to spend $3.00 on something of less quality, and poor materials that will not last because it is simply cheaper.  Then, a month or two later there is a recall because of faulty materials and craftsmanship.  I do my best to support my local business owners: my local coffee shop, as opposed to the large chain; my local sandwich shop and delicatessen; the local pizza store, etc. It's only right.  I donate designs for fundraisers for the local library and  daycare center. It's about unity and seeing each other prosper, color should not be an issue. Take a good look in the mirror and confront who you really are inside- that's a great place to start.