Black farmers worry new approach on 'race neutral' lending leaves them in the shadows #BothSides #CourtsMatter
- Thread starter ☑︎#VoteDemocrat
- Start date
step 1: tool up and I don’t mean a backhoe
This is terrible, but can't lawmakers do a better job of coding the law in a way that drastically disproportionately benefits black and asian farmers without needing to explicitly say so to get around this?
This does not apply to farming, but in others areas they say you can pinpoint someone's ethnicity with extreme accuracy based on things like zip code, income, and other factors like that.
Let's say I want to provide a stimulus to black people in Philadelphia, but I can't get anything into law that explicitly designates money for black people. Ok, I'm giving money to people located in the Alleghany West neighborhood with an income of under 80k. The law now states nothing of race, I'm just providing funds to a neighborhood. Well, as of 2010 this neighborhood was 98% black. I've been out of the city for some years now, maybe there's a couple white folks tryna gentrify, that's where the income cap will remove most of them.
Just like that, I have directed all the funds of my program, at least 98% of it using 2010 census data, to black people. I have created policy that is "race neutral" in its text, but is obviously not in its outcome. Push for racially conscious law in the first place, but if it fails why not just do something like this?
This does not apply to farming, but in others areas they say you can pinpoint someone's ethnicity with extreme accuracy based on things like zip code, income, and other factors like that.
Let's say I want to provide a stimulus to black people in Philadelphia, but I can't get anything into law that explicitly designates money for black people. Ok, I'm giving money to people located in the Alleghany West neighborhood with an income of under 80k. The law now states nothing of race, I'm just providing funds to a neighborhood. Well, as of 2010 this neighborhood was 98% black. I've been out of the city for some years now, maybe there's a couple white folks tryna gentrify, that's where the income cap will remove most of them.
Just like that, I have directed all the funds of my program, at least 98% of it using 2010 census data, to black people. I have created policy that is "race neutral" in its text, but is obviously not in its outcome. Push for racially conscious law in the first place, but if it fails why not just do something like this?
Piff Perkins
Veteran
I'm not sure the both sides argument is the way to go here. Yea the courts are a major problem with the particular legislation that was passed. But the bigger issue is a party willing to sit back and do nothing if things don't go their way. At what point do democrats start wielding federal power with the USDA the same way the do it with HUD and other departments. You control the USDA. You can appoint a secretary who goes in, brings his/her staff, and goes to work with a deliberate focus on approving claims for black farmers. Doesn't mean white farmers are rejected. It means treating these black farmers like it's a backlog issue and giving them the help they need. The budget has been passed, the money is there...go to fukking work.
Instead of showing any forward thinking or care for the issue, Biden simply brought back Obama's USDA secretary. Same guy who didn't help black farmers for 8 years. The good news is that the deputy secretary is a black woman. Jewel Bronaugh. Meaning that she will likely be the next dem president's USDA secretary. But the focus has to be on helping these farmers. I don't want to hear Shirley Sherrod brought up or any other deflections. It's been years and NPR is still running the same stories about the same black farmers waiting for the same promised money. And clearly at no point has anyone at the USDA said fukk it let's look into this and help some (black) farmers with money that's already in the budget.
People talk about racist laws all the time but post-Jim Crow, most things we view as racist didn't even mention race in the legislative language. There is no housing legislation that says don't sell to black people. There is no housing legislation that says "under sell a black person's home." Those are decisions made by a collective of people to advance one agenda and stifle another. It's time to throw this identity politics bullshyt in the fukking trash and just start wielding the money stick, like whites have done forever. Again this does not mean telling white farmers to get lost. It means making sure that if 100 farmer claims are on the table, 60 of them are black owned.
Instead of showing any forward thinking or care for the issue, Biden simply brought back Obama's USDA secretary. Same guy who didn't help black farmers for 8 years. The good news is that the deputy secretary is a black woman. Jewel Bronaugh. Meaning that she will likely be the next dem president's USDA secretary. But the focus has to be on helping these farmers. I don't want to hear Shirley Sherrod brought up or any other deflections. It's been years and NPR is still running the same stories about the same black farmers waiting for the same promised money. And clearly at no point has anyone at the USDA said fukk it let's look into this and help some (black) farmers with money that's already in the budget.
People talk about racist laws all the time but post-Jim Crow, most things we view as racist didn't even mention race in the legislative language. There is no housing legislation that says don't sell to black people. There is no housing legislation that says "under sell a black person's home." Those are decisions made by a collective of people to advance one agenda and stifle another. It's time to throw this identity politics bullshyt in the fukking trash and just start wielding the money stick, like whites have done forever. Again this does not mean telling white farmers to get lost. It means making sure that if 100 farmer claims are on the table, 60 of them are black owned.
The very real threat of white backlash
They're trying to remedy that with this tactic actually:
Black people don't engage in identity politics. White people do.
And what "money" are you talking about?
and evade questions that its not targeted enough?
No.
This is also why reparations will ultimately fail and people should adjust how they ask for reparations moving forward, especially race based ones.
City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. - Wikipedia
They already do this and people say "well its not specific enough"
They just will say "well contracts and grants isn't reparations to everyone!"
Amo Husserl
Superstar
More alternatives: black people gotta directly fund our farmers or more black people need to hold USDA positions where they can approve the loans. Direct funding will be more immediate.
Piff Perkins
Veteran
The very real threat of white backlash
They're trying to remedy that with this tactic actually:
Black people don't engage in identity politics. White people do.
And what "money" are you talking about?
Committees are always step one of doing nothing. It's a bunch of recommendations of stuff that should simply be implemented by an active secretary. Except for the "sensitivity training" nonsense which is again, straight out the identity playbook of getting nothing done. Also hilarious this gets released on the last day Jewel Bronaugh is deputy secretary lmao. Read through those bullet points. Most of that shyt could have been done on day one by the right secretary. Not Vilsasck. He lists off some things that have been achieved but again...the results are not there. It's the same black farmers in each of these stories.
The money is in forgiving loans, and/or offering new ones. As well as grants, which that report mentions.
Amo Husserl
Superstar
Y'all have battle royales every election season.asking people to get involved in politics?!
If they ain't gone vote for a politician they can at least fund a supply chain alternative.
Last edited:
