Hard Reality Check (Black Americans Vs. Undocumented Immigrants)

[-]

mushyoscuro@reddit

Thomas Sowell answerd that in his books.

[-]

The harder questions have already been asked, certain people just don’t want to hear them. It’s a cultural issue, not a race issue. I’m not blaming it on the individuals either, but when you are brought up and that is all you know and you’re never exposed to outside thoughts and opinions, 9 times out of 10 you will turn out the same way.

Another part that skews it too, when people immigrate to another country to better their life, they are already most likely ahead of their fellow countryman in terms of work ethic and ambition, because if you are a lazy turd, moving to a country where you’ll have to work your ass off to have a great life isn’t as rewarding, so you’re already filtering the type of person you get via immigration vs your own citizens.

[-]

AgreeableRoll5042@reddit

Well no

[-]

jamesishere@reddit

Welfare and financially incentivizing women to have children out of wedlock broke black America, although it also happens with poor whites and Latinos.

We literally let women not work and raise children if the fathers aren’t in the picture. It’s absurd. Having the father stay in the picture hurts them financially. This is suicidal

[-]

Low_Anxiety_46@reddit

Are you saying Black women were having children so the government would support them and they wouldn't have to work?

[-]

jamesishere@reddit

If you are living in poverty, it is financially better not to get married, and instead remain a single mother, as you will get better welfare benefits in terms of housing, food, and healthcare. That is crazy

[-]

Low_Anxiety_46@reddit

You said welfare was financially incentivizing women to have children. Seems you misspoke. It's only financially beneficial to remain single if the father of your children can't provide for you and his children. The false assumption is that these men could provide and/or that these men wanted to marry.

[-]

jamesishere@reddit

People respond to incentives. We shouldn’t make it financially advantageous to not get married. That is crazy

[-]

Low_Anxiety_46@reddit

Do you think Black women got pregnant because they wanted government support? Do you think the father of the children wanted to marry the mother? Do you think the father of the children could support the mother and the children? You're avoiding the obvious because it's uncomfortable.

[-]

jamesishere@reddit

I think poor women, black or otherwise, will choose not to get married in order to keep their benefits. The state should not financially incentivize staying unmarried

[-]

Ok-Contribution6337@reddit

It's just silly to pretend that the uninterrupted 10,000 year history of black underperformance is a matter of culture. Once you push through the 1960's kumbaya stuff, overcome the crushing guilt that comes with questioning the pseudo religious mantra of "all men are created equal", and face the hard fact that IQ varies by race, all racial differences in outcomes (indeed, much of human history) become much easier to understand.

[-]

Technical_Fee1536@reddit

Do you have any sources to back these claims? I know quite a few highly intelligent and capable black people, and the large discrepancy with them is they were either immigrants/1st generation Americans or grew up in middle class America and weren’t exposed to what we refer to as black culture.

[-]

Ok-Contribution6337@reddit

Of course there are smart blacks. Nobody claims that there are no smart blacks. The claim is that the mean IQ of blacks is lower than other races, which just means that smart blacks occur at a smaller proportion within the population relative to other races, which explains differences in mean outcomes.

It is common knowledge among the well informed that mean IQ differs among races. It's even written about from time to time in prominent left-wing publications:

https://archive.is/aGBNy

The fact that outcome diffs are driven by IQ is also born out by the fact that outcome diffs disappear in things that aren't IQ-dependent (sports, entertainment, popularity), but are the most prevalent where IQ is everything (Fields Medal winners, fortune 500 CEOs, Startup founders, etc)

If you want to see the argument presented well, read Charles Murray's 'Facing Reality'.

[-]

life_is_punderfull@reddit

In order to make a compelling argument here, you need to prove that the variability of IQ between subpopulations is significant when compared to the variability within a given subpopulation. No one will care if the average IQ of all subsaharan Africans is 5 points lower, when there’s a ~45% chance that the next one they will meet is smarter than them.

[-]

Ok-Contribution6337@reddit

This is a good argument, but it's only tangentially related to my point. The argument goes: "Just because the mean IQ of {group A} is lower than the mean in your group doesn't mean that you can assume, with any certainty, that a given individual from {group A} is dumber than you, thus you should not make assumptions about individuals based on statistical data, but should treat people as individuals based on their own merits." This is a good argument which I believe strongly! Yet it does not contradict my argument in any way.

It remains a fact that A) the black mean IQ is 15 points lower than the whole population's mean IQ (in America, anyway--IQs are way lower in sub-saharan Africa), and that B) this difference explains population-level differences in outcomes.

[-]

life_is_punderfull@reddit

I guess I’m struggling to understand the utility of your position. If these population differences don’t have a material effect in our personal lives, is there some action to be taken on the societal level?

[-]

Ok-Contribution6337@reddit

If the truth has to justify itself beyond the simple fact of its truth before you're willing to believe it, your intellectual life is being smothered by your moral framework/religion. This dark-age mindset is precisely what the enlightenment set out to replace with a rational mindset, in which truth and knowledge are a good in and of themselves, and don't need to pass through some religious test before being accepted. If your worldview is not based on the world (i.e. existential reality), the what is it based on?

Regardless, if mean IQ difs are real (which I think they clearly are), then certain progressive mantras become morally untenable. For instance, take the progressive mantra that outcome difs between races are de facto evidence that the system is racist and must be reformed. If {group A} have a higher mean IQ than {group B}, then you cannot take the existence of outcome difs (like "group A has a significantly higher average income than group B") as de facto evidence of racism institutions. Nobody thinks asians have higher incomes than Whites because of some fundamental pro-asian bias, for example. (They have a higher mean IQ!)

If you understand that mean IQ difs explain most group differences in income, then the progressive mantra that outcome difs between races are de facto evidence that the system is racist is suddenly untenable. Further, the common formulation that Whites, specifically, are to blame for outcome diffs becomes extremely problematic. Should we enable this sort of racial scapegoating for racial outcome difs if those difs can be explained by IQ? Obviously not.

In general, human beings are dogshit at understanding their problems and solving them. Their ability to solve problems is never and has never been improved by the introduction of false assumptions, regardless of whether those assumptions make them feel good. The century-long experiment in communism was also propped up by feel-good lies about equality, and we all know how that worked out!

[-]

life_is_punderfull@reddit

Pretty ironic that you close your argument lecturing about assumptions when your entire first paragraph assumes what my position is on the premise. Where did I say anything that would leave you to believe I feel one way or the other about the base claim that there are IQ differences between races?

Also bro, your lofty talk about the enlightenment is frankly batshit to bring up in the context of this thread. Take a step back and breath... Truth for the sake of truth is all fine and good.. but whats the fucking point of the argument? Sure, the left whinges on about dumb shit all the time.. no surprise there. Pointing out that there are racial variations in IQ isn’t going to change their minds. And if my previous argument is correct, that variation within a group is more significant than variation between groups, then the disparity can’t even help you make judgement calls in your day to day life. Refute with an argument and provide your best sources (not an article) and I’m happy to discuss.

[-]

Ok-Contribution6337@reddit

Why would you inquire about the utility (i.e. usefulness) of a fact (i.e. the truth), if not weighing whether to believe it? If the truth of a thing is not sufficient for you to believe it, accept it, and defend it, then what is sufficient? Any answer other than "the truth itself is sufficient" is dark-age nonsense.

> Also bro, your lofty talk about the enlightenment is frankly batshit to bring up in the context of this thread.

Why is that?

> but whats the fucking point of the argument? Sure, the left whinges on about dumb shit all the time.. no surprise there. Pointing out that there are racial variations in IQ isn’t going to change their minds.

Of course it won't, but it's still true. Why would we ignore a lie that our enemies are weaponizing against us? To spare people's feelings? Should Whites go on feeling guilty about outcome diffs and believe that they caused them, based on lies? Should White kids be taught the lie that they are to blame for others' underperformance? What about their feelings?

> And if my previous argument is correct, that variation within a group is more significant than variation between groups, then the disparity can’t even help you make judgement calls in your day to day life.

I've already acknowledged this, agreed with it, and explained that it's not relevant to my argument.

> ... and provide your best sources (not an article) and I’m happy to discuss.

I've already provided you with a source (Charles Murray's 'Facing Reality') which lays out the argument in a clear and convincing way.

[-]

life_is_punderfull@reddit

PART 2

The bottom line here is that you read a book and think the assertions are more valuable than actually are. Murray sidesteps the root cause of the disparity and argues that we should push back on the narrative surrounding the promotion of equity. I happen to think he's right on that point, but not for the same reasons. I believe that the state's decision to move resources from one group to another on the tenuous basis of some previous harm is ridiculous. He believes that reallocation is ineffective because black people are biologically unable to match whites, and that it's fruitless to try.

None of this has anything to do with the enlightenment. If you imagine my thoughts regarding this topic are fixed in any way at all, that's on you and you should probably work on reading comprehension. Don't pretend that I sympathize with the mainstream narratives on equity and CRT because it gives you someone to blather at.

If you feel inspired to reconsider your position, here are some other things to think about that might help you narrow down your search for "truth".

How do we define intelligence and are the IQ tests Murray looks at actually meaningful? It's a tougher question than it seems.
If you think IQ tests are valid proxies for intelligence, why do we see that racial gaps in scores aren't fixed over time? Also, what's causing IQ scores to rise over time, if not driven by environmental factors?
What other factors could possibly affect intelligence?
schooling quality - need quality teachers
family life, or lack thereof - stress sucks
nutrition and exposure to literal toxins - duh

[-]

Ok-Contribution6337@reddit

Murray sidesteps the root cause of the disparity and argues that we should push back on the narrative surrounding the promotion of equity.

ChatGPT ass reply

[-]

life_is_punderfull@reddit

PART 1

"the truth itself is sufficient" ... sufficient for what?

Let's address the "truth".. So usually when people ask for a source, they expect hard science, not a commentary in the form of a book, but whatever, lets dive in. Murray does cite a lot of data on the topic of IQ tests, standardized tests, etc. but he doesn't address the root cause. Why? Because intelligence is an extremely complex area of study with a million contributing factors. As many people have rightly pointed out, culture/resources cannot be brushed off. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to believe all variation in IQ is attributed to evolutionary factors. If not, explain what other factors do you think could contribute the observational data Murray lays out, and to what degree?

If intelligence is entirely determined by evolutionary factors, give me your best explanation as to why we see a significant variation within racial groups when looking at regional testing. You'll no doubt notice the lower scores for blacks, but do you find it interesting that gap between low/high performing states for whites and blacks is similar (whites: 261/281 and blacks 235/251). To me that indicates regional differences play a huge role. What could account for that? In my estimation, the important differences across regions are most likely culture and resources. Here's an even more stark regional comparison in Mathematics. Apparently the intelligence gap starts off small in kindergarden and widens later.

Here is another huge study of district-level exams that finds huge differentials in race AND wealth. One interesting thing to note is that the gap is widening amongst both groups. How is that change possible if not for the impact of culture/resources? Here's a excerpt from the discussion section "We find that the strongest correlates of achievement disparity trends are factors related to school resources and socioeconomic segregation."

[-]

Ok-Contribution6337@reddit

"the truth itself is sufficient" ... sufficient for what?

For belief, clearly.

commentary in the form of a book

You clearly haven't read the book, so sharing someone else's opinion about it is just silly.

...he doesn't address the root cause. Why? Because intelligence is an extremely complex area of study with a million contributing factors.

He does address this point, as it is obviously true and well known. Charles Murray, unlike some, doesn't simply ignore inconvenient facts. Read the book.

As many people have rightly pointed out, culture/resources cannot be brushed off.

Which is why he doesn't brush it off.

Correct me if I'm wrong

You're wrong. Other factors (culture, genetics, nutrition) obviously play a role in IQ. Everyone understands this, and Murray explains this in depth in the book. So of course I am happy to acknowledge that a shit culture will obviously result in some IQ penalty. Are you willing to acknowledge that low IQ would obviously lead to a shit culture? I'm willing to acknowledge that poor nutrition can result in some IQ penalty. Are you willing to acknowledge that low IQ populations are more likely to suffer from poor nutrition, particularly while living in western nations where welfare exists and food banks are everywhere? No doubt it will be psychologically uncomfortable for you to consider these questions (it sure as hell was for me when I was first wrapping my brain around these heretical truths), but push through that and answer honestly.

If intelligence is entirely determined by evolutionary factors, give me your best explanation as to why we see a significant variation within racial groups when looking at regional testing.

I'm glad you asked! These are not IQ tests, they are reading tests. While reading tests are G-loaded, a single reading test (indeed any single type of test) cannot adequately test for intelligence, since by definition general intelligence (G) is the correlation in performance across multiple g-loaded tests. Consider reading the Wiki article on general intelligence, it might help clarify this rather unintuitive concept.

To me that indicates regional differences play a huge role. What could account for that?

Good eye! Regional differences in math and reading aptitude clearly exist, but these are mean differences in individual test scores. IQ, again, is about correlation between scores on multiple g-loaded tests, not raw scores.

In my estimation, the important differences across regions are most likely culture and resources

The median black income in DC is >$80K, yet the average Black score (260) is significantly lower than the median White score in Alabama (279), where the median white income (~70K) is lower. Weird.

We find that the strongest correlates of achievement disparity trends are factors related to school resources and socioeconomic segregation

But what causes the socioeconomic segregation? Wouldn't you expect that a population with a 15 IQ point deficit would be economically stratified/segregated? Why does racial socioeconomic stratification follow the same pattern in every country that blacks share with other races? Why is the same pattern apparent when comparing black countries to non-black countries? IQ diffs explain all of this in a single uncomfortable fact. To explain it all as a huge coincidence, spanning centuries and the whole earth, requires tomes of assumptions and excuses and endless moral hand wringing--or the even sillier alternative, an evil global conspiracy to keep down the blacks out of sheer mean-spiritedness. Occam's razor abhors such silly explanations when a clear and concise alternative is staring us in the face.

[-]

Zestyclose-Ad-9951@reddit

We don’t even have 10k years of recording history how the fuck could we have an uninterrupted history of anything before that?

[-]

Ok-Contribution6337@reddit

I see you are unfamiliar with the concept of archeology. How embarrassing.

[-]

themacfather6@reddit

You’re talking at least two pay grades above your understanding bud. Sit down and listen time. Maybe you’ll even learn something.

[-]

Ok-Contribution6337@reddit

The most reddit comment imaginable. Don't forget to tip your fedora, gaylord.

[-]

themacfather6@reddit

Oh and by “bud” I meant “racist piece of shit”, just so that’s fully clear.

[-]

themacfather6@reddit

Oh and by “bud” I meant “racist piece of shit”, just so that’s fully clear.

[-]

HealthyHelicopter109@reddit

It’s not also Undocumented immigrants but also immigrants from Africa wether they’re here legally or not they tend to be far more likely to be successful and it’s that mindset that changes everything

[-]

OpinionStunning6236@reddit

African immigrants are also heavily filtered through selection bias for high earners and high intelligence. Only the best Africans are allowed to immigrate here

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

Responding to @OpinionStunning6236 & @MicrowaveableHershey

The “Affirmative Action and DEI” excuse doesn’t hold up. First, Affirmative Action was banned in multiple states years ago, and the Supreme Court struck down race-based admissions in 2023. Yet Black immigrants were already outperforming native-born Blacks in income, education, and family stability long before DEI offices even existed. That performance gap predates DEI, so it clearly isn’t the driving factor.

As for “only the best Africans are allowed in” , that’s just false. Yes, some Africans come on skilled visas, but a huge share arrive through refugee programs, family reunification, or even undocumented routes, often with little money or English. Haitians and many West Africans, for example, are not coming as wealthy elites, yet they still tend to climb economically over time at higher rates than native-born Blacks.

So you can’t wave away the data with “DEI” or “selection bias.” The consistent difference across multiple immigrant groups, legal and undocumented, shows that culture, family structure, and mindset play a huge role. If “the system” was the sole explanation, those immigrant success stories shouldn’t exist at all.

[-]

MicrowaveableHershey@reddit

Also in Affirmative Action and DEI, Caribbean and Africans are favored, not Black Americans.

[-]

Both-Day-8317@reddit

Yeah, my experience volunteering as a homework coach at our county library supports this. The neighborhood is predominantly low income minorities and immigrants. The immigrant children are in the library doing homework and using resources...but it's rare to see a black kid show up.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

I actually agree with a lot of what you’re saying here, especially about culture and mindset shaping outcomes. When someone uproots their life to move to a completely new country, it makes sense that they would be highly motivated and hardworking compared to the average person who stays. That self-selection filter is real.

Where I would push back is on the idea that it is only culture. The data on Nigerian and Caribbean immigrants in the U.S. shows they outperform native-born Black Americans not just in income but also in education, with Nigerian-Americans having college graduation rates higher than the national average. That cannot simply be explained by saying immigrants are different. They face the same system, the same police, the same courts. So while culture plays a big role, it is also worth asking why native-born Black Americans are not able to leverage the same system in the same way.

[-]

Technical_Fee1536@reddit

That’s because black culture in the US in vastly different from Africa. Yes, they might face the same systemic issues when they come to the US, but that is vastly different now than in the 60s and prior. If a black person comes from Africa to gain higher education, it’s fairly easy because all of the diversity efforts now to make sure people like that can attend. They didn’t grow up thinking that the system exists to bring them down and that white people/government are the enemy and only trying to bring them down, so they don’t have that bias engrained into them. Black people definitely could succeed today, but it goes back to it being ingrained into them from birth that everyone else is the enemy and the respected figures in their communities tend to be gang leaders and drug dealers because they are the ones actually making money and in authority roles.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

You’re right it’s not the 60s anymore and opportunities have opened up which actually proves my point. If diversity initiatives and access make it easier now than ever, why do Black immigrants take advantage while native born Black Americans still lag? Nigerian Americans even outperform the national average in education, which shows its culture and mindset, not just the system.

African culture emphasizes education, work ethic, and family structure, while too many native-born Black Americans are conditioned to see the system and authority as the enemy. Same skin color, same system, completely different results that’s mindset at work.

[-]

Technical_Fee1536@reddit

My thoughts are we need to leverage the successful black people we have in the US, especially the ones who escaped that lifestyle, to be more involved with the Youth in those communities so they can see that there are actual opportunities outside of gang banging or dealing. And I’m not trying to discredit the work that a lot already do, but I think it just needs to be a balls to the wall type deal or else the impact isn’t going to be enough. Education is also another one. Being from St. Louis, the funding and quality of education is drastically different depending on which side of a street you might live on. Somehow we need to fix that and get the youth access to better education or else they’ll end up being influenced by those in their communities and the fact that being black can almost get them a full ride won’t even matter.

[-]

sandstonexray@reddit

A big part of the problem is that more funding often does not equal better education.

[-]

Technical_Fee1536@reddit

Yeah that’s definitely a problem too, making sure funding is directed correctly and used efficiently, but at least for here, there is still a significant funding gap between schools in certain areas.

[-]

sandstonexray@reddit

making sure funding is directed correctly and used efficiently

If it was that easy, we wouldn't have 99% of the problems we have with fraud, waste, and abuse.

[-]

TheDopeAndTheDealer@reddit

The ignorance on this post blows my mind. Lets ignore centuries of systemic racism and slavery that Africans and other immigrants never faced in America. None of you are willing to do 30min of research to seek the actual answeres, its easier for you to ignore that and believe 'the culture' is the issue. Read a few books!! Black Americans excelled and you burned it all down, introduced crack (which was NOT handled like opiod addiction) and started redlining. GIVE ME A BREAK.

[-]

OwlScared5606@reddit

Short answer? It's because you and your people have been exposed for brutally graping the American welfare system and our tax dollars. You were only able to migrate due to the sacrifice and atrocities of inflicted upon my ancestors. In particular, I find where melanated immigrants try to shit on their descendants (freedmen) every chance you get. This post is one of the many examples why fast forward 5 months you all are dumbfounded to believe that there is no such thing as the American dream. It was all smoke and mirrors. Which is what we have been screaming from the mountain tops all along. Did you really think you were special? You became another cog in America's system benefiting from the very same one that most like had a hand in destabilizing your homeland. You're not better, you're not a harder worker, or more apt to succeed than the wealthiest and most influential melanated group of the African diaspora. Why don't you compare the people from your homeland to our people in America and see how they measure up. Immigrants have ridden the coat tail of the 14th amendment for far too long. Your tribalism and competitive mindset has no place in our community. This rhetoric is exactly why we are standing down. It's fine time to clean house and trust me it's still all love but definitely from a distance.

[-]

One_Teach4610@reddit

Reality check like we don't hear this constantly 😂

[-]

Low_Anxiety_46@reddit

Immigrants operate in enclaves. Shared housing. Shared resources. When Black Americans did this we were lynched and our communities were burned.

Immigrants typically will work for less than minimum wage. American citizens usually will not.

[-]

mrcrocswatch@reddit

Don't get this. White Americans are vastly outperformed by white immigrants as well as Asians and Nigerians. So what's the problem there?

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

That actually proves my point. White Americans underperform compared to certain immigrant groups too because those immigrants often bring stronger family structures, higher educational drive, and tighter community support.

The difference is, you don’t see white Americans blaming “the system” for why Nigerians or Asians are outperforming them. They recognize it’s about culture and mindset, not oppression.

[-]

mrcrocswatch@reddit

Lol you don't see white Americans complaining about immigrtion?

YOU DON'T SEE WHITE AMERICANS COMPLAINING ABOUT IMMIGRATION???

HAHAHAHAHA 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

Complaining about immigration ≠ blaming immigrants for outperforming you.

White Americans may dislike immigration politically, but they’re not saying, ‘Nigerians and Asians succeed because the system is oppressing us.’

That’s the key difference. They might argue over policy, but they don’t use immigrant success as a shield for underperformance. When immigrants excel under the same system, it proves the point: the system isn’t the excuse culture and mindset are.

[-]

mrcrocswatch@reddit

Here is an analysis of the sophistry used, primarily by user Silverfin007. 1. False Equivalence (The Core Sophistry)

This is the most significant fallacy in the argument. It falsely equates the historical and contemporary circumstances of two groups to draw an invalid conclusion.

The Comparison: The OP compares "Black Americans" (a broad group defined by a specific racial history in the US) with "undocumented immigrants" (a group defined by a legal status, encompassing people from dozens of countries with vastly different backgrounds).

Why it's False: The comparison ignores the foundational context of chattel slavery, Jim Crow laws, redlining, and systemic disenfranchisement that specifically targeted Black Americans for centuries to explicitly prevent wealth accumulation and economic mobility. Undocumented immigrants, while facing immense challenges, did not undergo this specific, multi-generational, state-sanctioned program of asset-stripping and legal subjugation in the United States. Comparing the two is like comparing the recovery of someone who just broke their leg to someone whose family has had a broken leg enforced upon them for ten generations.

Cherry-Picking and the "Model Minority" Myth

Silverfin007 uses specific, high-achieving immigrant groups (Nigerians, Asians) as a rhetorical cudgel while ignoring the full spectrum of immigrant experiences.

The Sophistry: They point to successful Nigerian and Asian immigrants as "proof" that the system works for anyone with the right "culture." This selectively highlights outliers (e.g., many Nigerian immigrants come on educational/professional visas and are already part of a highly educated elite from their home countries) while ignoring the struggles of other immigrant groups from different socioeconomic backgrounds or regions.

The Omission: There is no mention of undocumented immigrants from Central America living in poverty, or refugees who struggle for years. The argument cherry-picks the most successful examples to set an impossible standard and imply that any group not meeting it has a cultural deficiency.

Straw Man Argument

Silverfin007 misrepresents the argument about systemic racism to make it easier to knock down.

The Setup: They frame the counter-argument as: "The system is the only thing to blame, and it is the sole excuse for all outcomes."

The Knockdown: They then argue that if immigrants can succeed, then the system cannot be a barrier, so the only thing left to blame is "culture and mindset."

Why it's a Straw Man: Serious discussions about systemic racism do not claim it is the only factor. They acknowledge it as a significant, foundational, and compounding barrier that operates alongside other factors like culture, individual initiative, and community support. The argument creates a false binary: either the system is entirely to blame, or culture is entirely to blame. This ignores the complex interplay of both.

Circular Reasoning / Begging the Question

The entire argument is built on an unproven assumption that is presented as a conclusion.

The Logic: "When immigrants excel under the same system, it proves the point: the system isn’t the excuse."

The Circularity: This assumes that both groups are, in fact, operating under the "same system," which is the very point in contention. The argument against systemic racism is that it doesn't exist, and the "proof" offered is the success of immigrants. But this proof only works if you first assume that the system is the same for everyone, which is what the concept of systemic racism challenges. It's a circular logic: The system is equal because immigrants succeed. Immigrants succeed because the system is equal.

Emotional Language and Motivated Reasoning

The language is designed to sound like a "hard reality check" and to shut down dissent by framing any counter-argument as excuse-making.

Phrases like: "Hard Reality Check," "stop blaming 'the system'," "ask harder questions," "shield for underperformance."

The Effect: This framing paints the speaker as brave and clear-eyed, while implicitly painting those who discuss systemic factors as weak, blame-shifting, and avoiding responsibility. It doesn't engage with evidence; it appeals to an emotion (frustration) and a pre-existing worldview.

Deflection in the Final Reply

When challenged with the obvious fact that white Americans do complain about immigration, Silverfin007 subtly shifts the goalposts.

The Shift: They change the subject from "complaining about immigration" (which is common) to a much narrower claim: "blaming immigrants for outperforming you."

The Sophistry: This move deflects the valid point that nativism and xenophobia are often directly tied to economic anxiety and perceptions of being "outperformed" or "replaced." It's an attempt to dismiss a counter-example on a technicality rather than engage with its substance.

Conclusion

The sophistry in this thread lies in its use of a specious comparison to construct a false binary, supported by cherry-picked data and framed in emotionally charged language that pre-emptively discredits opposing views. It replaces a nuanced, multi-factorial analysis of socioeconomic outcomes with a simplistic and culturally deterministic narrative that serves to absolve historical and systemic factors of any responsibility. The argument is designed to feel logically sound and provocative, but its foundation is built on a series of logical fallacies.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

Throwing around terms like “false equivalence” and “circular reasoning” doesn’t actually refute the argument. It just makes it sound like a debate club exercise. Let’s focus on reality, not labels.

Black Immigrants Documented and Undocumented Rise Anyway. The claim that I’m “cherry-picking elites” doesn’t hold water. Sure, some Nigerians come here on educational visas, but many Black immigrants both documented and undocumented arrive with nothing. I personally know people who crossed borders, worked construction, auto shops, kitchens, cleaning crews, stores and they maybe struggled for 10–20 years before finding stability. But they did find it. Not because the system handed it to them, but because their culture emphasized work, family, and long-term discipline. That’s not privilege, that’s mindset.
Same System, Different Results. Here’s the uncomfortable fact: both native-born Black Americans and Black immigrants face the same cops, the same schools, the same neighborhoods, and the same systemic issues. Yet outcomes diverge. Nigerian-Americans have higher college graduation rates than the U.S. average. Caribbean immigrants build thriving small businesses. Even undocumented immigrants who start with fewer rights, less access, and more barriers often climb faster than families who’ve been here for generations. If the system were truly the immovable barrier, no one would succeed. But some do, which proves the system isn’t the only variable.
Historical Trauma vs. Current Reality. Yes, slavery, Jim Crow, and redlining happened. They were brutal, unjust, and absolutely shaped American history. Nobody is denying that. But we are in 2025. At some point, generational excuses stop holding weight. Black immigrants don’t come here free of scars they bring histories of colonization, famine, dictatorship, civil wars, and poverty. Yet instead of clinging to historical trauma, they push forward. Meanwhile, native-born Black Americans have had multiple generations in the richest nation on Earth, with affirmative action, diversity initiatives, scholarships, and government programs specifically designed to help them. If immigrants can overcome their own historical baggage while starting from zero, why can’t the group with a head start do the same?
Welfare and Victimhood Are Traps, Not Explanations. Government incentives and broken policies did create cycles of dependency in poor communities, but that’s not unique to Black Americans it’s also true in poor white towns. The difference is, when white workers struggle, we blame opioids, broken families, and culture. We don’t excuse it as “the system holding them down.” But with Black Americans, excuses dominate the conversation: systemic racism, oppression, lack of opportunity. Yet in the very same neighborhoods, Black immigrants hustle their way up. That’s proof that mindset matters more than circumstance. Victimhood doesn’t build wealth; accountability and effort do.
Violence and Culture Can’t Be Ignored. This is the part nobody wants to admit. Too many native-born Black communities glorify gangs, violence, and hostility toward authority. That’s not “the system forcing their hand,” that’s culture and choices. Meanwhile, immigrant families push their kids toward school, trades, and business ownership. You can dismiss this as “simplistic,” but outcomes prove otherwise. Look at which group rises in income, education, and stability, and which group stagnates or declines.
The Core Point Stands. No amount of academic jargon erases this: Nigerian-Americans graduate at higher rates than the U.S. national average. Caribbean immigrants climb into the middle and upper class at disproportionate levels. Undocumented immigrants with literally no rights often outperform people born into U.S. citizenship. Same system. Same obstacles. Completely different results. That means the system isn’t the excuse culture and mindset are.

So we can throw around labels like “strawman” or “false equivalence,” but at the end of the day the question remains: if immigrants facing the same racism, the same cops, and often worse starting conditions can climb, why can’t native-born Black Americans after multiple generations in America? At what point do we stop blaming the system and start acknowledging culture, mindset, and accountability?

[-]

mrcrocswatch@reddit

Your entire argument is tautological:

1) Assume that the system is equal for everyone. 2) Point to different outcomes between two groups. 3) Conclude that the difference must be due to the groups themselves (culture/mindset). 4) Use that conclusion to reinforce the initial assumption that the system is equal.

It dismisses any evidence of systemic inequality by definition, because any outcome—good or bad—is automatically attributed to the character of the group in question. This is the essence of sophistry: it uses a veneer of logic (comparing two groups) to arrive at a pre-ordained, prejudiced conclusion that absolves systems of any responsibility and places it entirely on individuals and cultures.

But more specifically here is what you're doing:

Deepening the false equivalence

The core fallacy remains. You insist that Black immigrants and native-born Black Americans face the "same system," but this is a profound oversimplification.

Sophistry: "Same cops, same schools, same neighborhoods, same systemic issues."

Reality: While they may live in the same physical spaces, their historical and social context is entirely different. A first-generation immigrant's interaction with "the same cop" is not equivalent to that of a descendant of slaves whose family was targeted by that same police force for generations. The immigrant may face prejudice, but they do not face the specific, ingrained, historical legacy of oppression designed to destroy Black family wealth and autonomy in America. This argument deliberately ignores intergenerational trauma and inherited disadvantage (e.g., the inability to inherit wealth due to redlining and historical asset-stripping) that specifically affects native-born Black families.

Then we KNOW they don't live in the same neighborhoods. Look up "anything but black" neighborhoods.

More Cherry-Picking and reliance on the model minority myth

You are doubling down on this by focusing exclusively on successful immigrant groups while ignoring data that doesn't fit the narrative.

Sophistry: Highlighting high-achieving groups like Nigerians and Caribbeans while completely ignoring other Black immigrant groups who may struggle, or the fact that within those successful groups, there is still a range of outcomes. It also ignores that these groups are self-selecting; immigrants, by definition, are people with the resources, health, and drive to undertake a difficult migration. This is not a random sample compared to a entire native-born population that includes all levels of initiative and circumstance.

Do you have ANY idea how much money it takes to get out of Africa or the Caribbean? It's not peasants that are coming bucko.

The Anecdote Fallacy: "I personally know people..." is not data. It is cherry-picked storytelling used to represent a complex, population-wide issue.

Straw Man and Motte-and-Bailey on "Blaming the System"

This is a classic rhetorical trick. You set up an extreme version of my argument to easily knock it down.

The Straw Man: The argument claims the opposing view is that "the system is the only variable" and an "immovable barrier." It then says, "If the system were truly the immovable barrier, no one would succeed."

The Reality: No serious person argues this. I certainly didnt. Not sure you are talking to. The argument against systemic racism is that it is a massive and significant headwind, not an absolute barrier. By pretending the argument is that the system is an "immovable barrier," the author can then point to any success story as "proof" the system doesn't matter, completely dodging the actual point that the system makes success dramatically harder on average for one group than for another.

Historical Simplification ("We are in 2025")

This argument dismisses history as irrelevant to the present, which is a profound logical error.

Sophistry: "At some point, generational excuses stop holding weight... But we are in 2025."

Reality: Wealth and poverty are inherited. The economic head start given to white Americans through programs like the GI Bill (from which Black Americans were largely excluded) and generations of home equity (denied to Black Americans via redlining) compounds over time. To say "slavery happened but it's 2025" is to ignore that the financial and social disadvantages were legally enforced well into the 20th century and their effects are still measurable today in the massive racial wealth gap. Dismissing this as an "excuse" is to ignore causality.

Ignoring the Data on "The Same System"

Your own points contradict the "same system" claim.

The Admission: You astated that native-born Black Americans have been the target of "government incentives and broken policies [that] did create cycles of dependency."

The Contradiction: If one group has been specifically targeted by government policies that created dependency (a fact), then they are not operating under the "same system" as immigrants who arrived after those policies were in place. Immigrants were not the primary target of these specific, damaging welfare state designs. This admission completely undermines the core "same system" premise.

But the reality is even worse as we all know that colleges and employers PREFER foreign born anything over natives, especially when race is involved. Thats why the majority of blacks in the ivy league arent native born blacks. Why take one of those when you can get the son of Nigerian doctors? the programs set up to help minorities are dominated by foreigners. Just look at the specialized high school in NY or California. Almost all spots take up by first generation asians.

Blaming the Victim through Cultural Determinism

This is the conclusion the sophistry is designed to lead to: blaming the victims of systemic issues for their own outcomes.

Sophistry: "Victimhood doesn't build wealth; accountability and effort do." and "Too many native-born Black communities glorify gangs, violence..."

Reality: This ignores that "culture" does not emerge from a vacuum. The glorification of violence and distrust of authority are rational responses to decades of systemic neglect, over-policing, under-policing of real crimes, and lack of economic opportunity. It confuses symptom (a damaging cultural element) for cause (the systemic conditions that fostered it). Furthermore, it ignores the vast majority of native-born Black Americans who do not engage in these behaviors but still face significant economic hurdles.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

Alright, let’s go line by line, because you’ve packed a lot of words into what is essentially a dodge of the original question: why do Black immigrants, legal and illegal, consistently outperform native-born Black Americans, despite facing many of the same systemic barriers?

“Tautology” accusation You claim I’m assuming equality of the system and then looping it back on itself. That’s false. I’m not assuming, I’m observing outcomes. Black immigrants and native-born Blacks live in the same country, under the same laws, same government, same economic climate. Yet the outcomes are different. That’s data, not circular logic. If you want to argue the system is unequal, you still need to explain why immigrants, supposedly at an even greater disadvantage (no citizenship, no generational wealth, language barriers), often rise faster.
“False equivalence / different history” Yes, slavery, Jim Crow, and redlining happened. No one denies that history shapes starting points. But here’s the key: that history is not present for Black immigrants. They arrive with none of those generational ties, yet they still walk into the exact same “racist” institutions, the same cops, the same schools, the same job markets, and perform better. That shows history explains where you started, but not why you’re still stuck. At some point, culture and choices today matter more than what your great-grandparents endured. That’s not oversimplification, that’s basic accountability.

And about the “anything but Black” neighborhoods claim: many immigrant Blacks start in those same neighborhoods because housing is cheap. Yet their kids still manage to rise out of them. That undermines your own point.

“Cherry-picking / model minority myth” You call it cherry-picking to point at Nigerians, Caribbeans, and similar groups. But those aren’t fringe cases, they are the majority of Black immigrants. Pew, Brookings, and Census data all show: • 31% of Black immigrants hold a bachelor’s degree vs. 22% of U.S.-born Blacks. • Black immigrant households earn ~$57k vs. ~$42k for native-born Black households. • Out-of-wedlock birth rate: 38% vs. 78%.

That’s not cherry-picking, that’s broad demographic trend.

As for the claim that they are a “self-selecting elite”? False. Millions of Africans and Caribbeans come here dirt poor, many undocumented, often working menial jobs for decades before climbing. If only the wealthy and elite were immigrating, you wouldn’t see so many West Africans hustling in taxi driving, food service, warehouses, or mechanics shops. That’s reality, not theory.

“Straw man on blaming the system” You say nobody claims the system is an “immovable barrier,” just that it’s a massive headwind. Fine, then my question stands: if immigrants face the same headwind (and arguably an even stronger one as foreigners without status or generational connections), why are their sails still moving them forward while native-born Blacks stall? You can’t have it both ways. Either the system is so crushing that no one can advance (which immigrants disprove), or culture and mindset play a decisive role in navigating those headwinds. Immigrants prove the latter.
“Historical simplification / it’s 2025” You’re right that wealth and poverty compound. But that doesn’t explain why new arrivals, starting at zero wealth in America, can leapfrog people who’ve been here for centuries. If compounding disadvantage were the sole driver, immigrants should be worse off, but they’re not. That’s the crack in your argument you haven’t addressed: why do those with no inherited advantage at all often outperform those with inherited disadvantage? Culture fills that gap.
“Contradiction on same system (welfare policies)” Yes, government policies like welfare dependency disproportionately targeted native Blacks. That’s not proof the system is unequal against them today, that’s proof that embracing those incentives is destructive. Immigrants often avoid welfare, pool family resources, and rely on tight-knit community structures instead of government checks. That’s precisely the cultural difference I’m pointing at. And ironically, your own example supports my point: the system provided incentives, but culture determined who fell into dependency and who built upward mobility despite them.
“Blaming the victim / culture doesn’t emerge from a vacuum” You say culture is shaped by systemic neglect. Maybe at first. But culture also self-perpetuates. At some point, glorifying gangs, violence, or victimhood becomes its own feedback loop. Meanwhile, immigrant cultures, despite also facing racism, poverty, and discrimination, emphasize education, family, and community advancement. They could just as easily fall into despair, but they don’t. That’s the difference.

And yes, the vast majority of native Blacks don’t engage in those behaviors. But then why do immigrant Blacks still, on average, outpace them in education, income, and family stability? If both face racism, and most don’t fall into gangs, the remaining explanation is cultural emphasis on long-term discipline versus short-term blame.

Bottom line: You can throw around “tautology,” “sophistry,” and “fallacy” all you want, but those are labels, not answers. The outcomes are clear: immigrant Blacks, even starting poor and marginalized, rise faster than native-born Blacks who’ve had generations in America. If systemic racism alone explained disparities, this would not be possible. But it is possible, and it happens, because culture, family structure, and mindset matter. That’s the uncomfortable truth you’re dancing around.

[-]

mrcrocswatch@reddit

Your dismissal of terms like "tautology" and "sophistry" as mere "labels" is precisely the behavior they are designed to explain. These are not debate club tricks; they are precise descriptors for a specific type of flawed reasoning—a reasoning that is circular, self-insulating, and designed to arrive at a pre-determined conclusion while creating the illusion of logical engagement. You are not being criticized for your conclusion, but for the faulty logical process you use to get there, a process you may be unaware you are even using.

The core of your error is a tautology: a circular argument in which the conclusion is assumed in the premise. In your case, the tautology works like this:

Premise: The system is essentially equal (because any outcome difference must be attributed to the groups themselves).

Observation: Outcomes are different.

Conclusion: Therefore, the difference is due to the groups themselves (culture), proving the system is equal.

This is not "observing data." This is using data to confirm a assumption you never question. Any evidence of systemic inequality is automatically dismissed by this circular logic, because the conclusion (it's culture) is the only variable your premise allows.

Now, let's examine how your line-by-line response perfectly exemplifies this tautology and other fallacies by refusing to wrestle with the substantive criticisms:

On Tautology: You say, "I’m not assuming, I’m observing outcomes... That’s data, not circular logic."

Why this doesn't engage: You mistake observation for explanation. You observe different outcomes and then simply assert that the cause is culture. You do not prove it; you assume it. The criticism was that your reasoning is circular, and your response is to simply restate the observation as if it is the explanation. This is the tautology in action.

On False Equivalence: You say, "that history is not present for Black immigrants. They arrive... and perform better. That shows history explains where you started, but not why you’re still stuck."

Why this doesn't engage: You completely sidestep the criticism. The point wasn't just about "history," but about intergenerational compounding disadvantage. You acknowledge history affects the "starting point" but then magically divorce the present from that history. A negative starting point that has compounded for generations (via denied wealth accumulation, targeted disruptive policies, and inherited trauma) is not just a "starting point"—it is the ongoing reality. Immigrants starting at $0 are not starting from the same place as groups whose starting point was actively pushed into negative equity for centuries.

On Cherry-Picking: You cite aggregate data for all Black immigrants (31% vs. 22% degrees) and say, "That’s not cherry-picking, that’s broad demographic trend."

Why this doesn't engage: You ignore the core criticism of selection bias. The demographic trend of immigrants is not a random sample. It is a self-selected group of people with the means, health, and drive to emigrate. Comparing the outcomes of a population that has been filtered for ambition and resourcefulness to a population that includes everyone—the ambitious and the defeated, the healthy and the sick, the privileged and the oppressed—is a fundamental statistical error. You are comparing the best of one group to the average of another.

On the Straw Man: You present a false dichotomy: "Either the system is so crushing that no one can advance (which immigrants disprove), or culture and mindset play a decisive role..."

Why this doesn't engage: You are still arguing against a claim nobody made. The criticism was that you constructed this "immovable barrier" straw man. The actual argument is that the system is a massive headwind. The fact that some people can run very fast into a headwind does not mean the wind doesn't exist. It proves they are strong runners, not that the wind is imaginary. You use the success of immigrants to dismiss the headwind entirely, rather than engaging with the argument that the headwind is stronger for some due to historical factors.

On Historical Simplification: You state, "new arrivals, starting at zero wealth in America, can leapfrog people who’ve been here for centuries."

Why this doesn't engage: You repeat the same error. "Zero wealth" is not the same as "generations of negative wealth." This is the heart of the false equivalence. You refuse to acknowledge that the "leapfrogging" is happening from two entirely different baselines—one of neutral (0) and one of deeply negative (-100) due to historical asset-stripping.

On the Welfare "Contradiction": You argue that welfare policies are "proof that embracing those incentives is destructive."

Why this doesn't engage: This is pure victim-blaming and confirms the criticism. You admit native-born Black Americans were the specific target of government policies designed to create dependency. Then, you blame them for the results of being targeted, while praising immigrants who were never the primary target of those same disruptive policies. You use the evidence of a uniquely targeted systemic attack as proof of cultural failure, which is a breathtakingly circular and unfair argument.

On Culture: You claim that immigrant cultures "could just as easily fall into despair, but they don’t."

Why this doesn't engage: You ignore the criticism that culture doesn't emerge from a vacuum. You treat culture as a mystical, independent variable, utterly disconnected from historical and material conditions. The criticism was that the cultural elements you condemn are symptoms of systemic neglect and targeted oppression, not their root cause. You dismiss this by simply asserting that culture "self-perpetuates," again using the outcome (a cultural trait) as the explanation for that outcome.

In every single instance, your rebuttal follows the same pattern: you restate your original premise slightly differently, you dismiss systemic factors by pointing to outcomes (the tautology), and you blame the group facing a unique historical and systemic burden for their own predicament. You have not refuted the criticisms; you have simply illustrated them more clearly.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

You know what stands out here?

The fact that your reply reads less like a human response and more like something polished through an AI or debate template.

It’s full of academic buzzwords: tautology, sophistry, circular reasoning, but it’s strangely detached from lived reality.

That’s exactly the problem, it hides behind labels instead of grappling with outcomes.

Real people don’t experience life as “premises and tautologies.”

They experience it in results: higher graduation rates, stronger family structures, more small businesses, less dependency. And the observable fact is that Black immigrants, legal and illegal, consistently show better outcomes than native-born Black Americans despite facing the same “system.”

That’s not AI jargon, that’s measurable reality.

Throwing around logic terms doesn’t erase the question you keep dodging: if the system is equally racist, why do immigrants succeed where native-born Blacks stall?

Calling that a “tautology” isn’t an answer, it’s just academic hand-waving dressed up to sound smart.

At the end of the day, outcomes matter more than wordplay and the outcomes show culture and mindset play a decisive role.

[-]

mrcrocswatch@reddit

Throwing around logic terms doesn’t erase the question you keep dodging: if the system is equally racist, why do immigrants succeed where native-born Blacks stall?

I literally explained this to you three seperate times. If you don't understand what a word means don't just call it a buzzword, look it up.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

Not even gonna waste my time with you, your 100% a loser who blames others for your problems.

Just go find something else to complain about

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

And honestly, You don’t sound smart, you sound like a sore loser hiding behind big words and excuses for your own shortcomings. People like you are exactly the problem all talk, no results. I actually tried to enlighten you, but instead you’d rather play endless mental gymnastics.

And you know what…., I’m fine with that. Because the more people like you cling to this mindset, the easier it becomes for people like me to step over you and win. So go ahead, keep clinging to your wannabe PhD jargon. At the end of the day, results speak louder than excuses.

Take this L.

[-]

mrcrocswatch@reddit

Those aren't buzzwords bud, they're the basic building blocks of communication. If you can't understand what they mean then you don't have the capacity to see how your arguments are literally millenia old logical fallacies.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

And honestly, you don’t sound smart, you sound like a sore loser hiding behind big words and excuses for your own shortcomings. People like you are exactly the problem all talk, no results. I actually tried to enlighten you, but instead you’d rather play endless mental gymnastics.

And you know what…., I’m fine with that. Because the more people like you cling to this mindset, the easier it becomes for people like me to step over you and win. So go ahead, keep clinging to your wannabe PhD jargon. At the end of the day, results speak louder than excuses.

Take this L.

[-]

julioninjatron@reddit

The abundance of ignorant answers here is honestly baffling. This is the first time I post in this sub, but I follow it bc there are libertarian principles I believe in and found the idea interesting. I remember a friend of mine that told me about this ideology and suggested I looked into it. Immediately my response was questioning why there are so many racially ignorant comments here and by other so called libertarians?

Looking at most the answers to this question is yet another example of exactly that.

Leaving out systematic racism entirely is inherently ignorant, at best. The overwhelming majority of scientific research papers support the existence of systematic racism. Full stop. Pretending that there is more evidence to the contrary is willfully ignoring facts. For a group of people so inclined to read and learn perspectives, history, political science etc, there is a major gap in what you are learning.

I'll end with answering the last question from the op:

The hard questions aren't just about blaming the system, there needs to be understanding the effects of it, and why the notion of trying harder just isn't enough for people that have endured years and years of compounded disadvantages. The answer is obviously a mix of reasons that may include the culture in low income areas, but let's not pretend that these areas were just the natural spawn point and not also tied to systemic issues.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

You’re leaning on “systemic racism” like it’s a mic drop, but here’s the problem: Black immigrants documented and undocumented face the same systemic racism, the same cops, the same schools, and the same America as native-born Black Americans. Yet they consistently outperform in education, income, and family outcomes.

Hard numbers: • Education: 31% of Black immigrants hold a bachelor’s or higher vs. just 22% of U.S.-born Black Americans. • Median income: Black immigrant households earn ~$57K vs. ~$42K for U.S.-born Black households. • Family structure: Out-of-wedlock birth rate is ~38% for Black immigrants vs. ~78% for U.S.-born. That gap alone has massive downstream effects. • Labor force participation: Sub-Saharan African immigrants work at higher rates than both native-born Black and White Americans many in high-skill fields, many starting from scratch.

So if “systemic racism” is the sole, immovable barrier, explain why Nigerians, Jamaicans, Haitians, and other Black immigrants still climb under the exact same system. Are they just immune to racism? Or does the evidence point to culture, mindset, and family structure playing a bigger role than the narrative admits?

And let’s not pretend immigrants all arrive wealthy elites I know plenty who crossed borders broke, hustled in warehouses, auto shops, and construction for 10–20 years, and still built businesses and pushed their kids into college. Compare that to native-born families who’ve had multiple generations in America’s opportunity structure, with access to affirmative action, welfare, scholarships, and still choose gangs, violence, and victimhood.

That’s not “ignoring history.” That’s acknowledging reality: same racism, same system, wildly different results. Which means blaming the system alone isn’t just incomplete it’s dishonest.

And here’s the truth: yelling “systemic racism” at every outcome gap isn’t analysis, it’s a shield. It shuts down accountability, avoids uncomfortable truths, and leaves the culture untouched. It’s the lazy answer people retreat to when the data doesn’t fit the narrative.

If racism explains everything, then nothing explains anything. Culture and mindset explain why some climb the same ladder others insist is broken.

[-]

julioninjatron@reddit

You bring up valid statistics, but they don’t actually prove what a lot of people assume. Comparing Black immigrants to native-born Black Americans doesn’t show that systemic barriers aren’t real—it really just highlights that the floor Black Americans started on is much lower, for reasons that go back much further.

Black immigrants, on average, tend to arrive with advantages native-born Black Americans didn’t get: a country of origin where their families, for the most part, weren’t subjected for generations to institutionalized racism, segregation, and denied opportunities after emancipation. In the U.S., the systems set up to hold Black people back—dating from slavery through Jim Crow and redlining, and on into present-day wealth and education disparities—have stacked up over centuries. That’s why the “floor” for upward mobility is so much lower for native-born Black Americans, who never got a fair reset. Most Black immigrants were able to “level up” in their own countries first, entering the U.S. with stronger family structures or education, and without the trauma and cumulative disadvantages of being targeted generation after generation—South Africa and Rhodesia/Zimbabwe are exceptions that prove this rule.

Just as importantly, data and migration research consistently show that immigrants, no matter where they come from, are often a self-selected group—people with the means, ambition, or education to move here. That doesn’t mean immigrants don’t face racism in the U.S.; it just means the history and depth of discrimination for Black Americans is even more severe and persistent.

So, when outcomes are so different for groups facing the “same” system, what it actually proves is that systemic racism hits much harder—and earlier—for native Black Americans. It’s not about ignoring questions of responsibility, family, or culture; it’s about recognizing there’s more at play than individual effort, and that you can’t erase centuries of generational harm with just grit or mindset. Calling out systemic factors isn’t a shield from accountability—it’s connecting cause to effect.

If all of that context is ignored, the analysis is simply incomplete.

Furthermore, this highlights the premise of your post as disingenuous at best: you're not asking a question, you are stating your opinion about the matter, and that opinion is very obviously based on incomplete information. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that the gaps in what information you consume isn't cherry picked to support the flawed premise.

I was very clear when I said that systemic issues aren't the ONLY reason and that the real reason is probably a combination of things, that can include culture (so long as you do not ignore the fact that said culture is a result systemic racism, like redlining for example). If you are truly curious, then we can disagree on the how much weight each of the possible reasons may have, but to pretend the biggest factor isn't due to systemic issues compounded is simply ignorant. Being ignorant isn't inherently evil of negative either, as long as it is not a deliberate choice. Especially in 2025, when we have the entire of the internet at our disposal, and now, most of us have the equivalent of a personal librarian with AI tools to help us index and find resources. Choosing to reject evidence, disagree with the evidence or flat out omit evidence all together, simply because it doesn't support our thesis is a deliberate choice to remain ignorant.

This reeks of "tell me who you are and who you listen to without telling me who you are of who you listen to". This type of racist thought process is precisely what I immediately saw the more I read about stuff posted here. I've been intrigued with a lot of the libertarian principles for a little over a decade, as far back as I can remember, the racist undertones were present. This has been documented in articles and TV shows, one of the first articles I ran into, and something this very post reminded me of was this: https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/looking-back-look-forward-blacks-liberty-state.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

You keep saying I’m ignoring history, but I’m not. Slavery, Jim Crow, and redlining absolutely left scars. The point is that those scars don’t fully explain today’s gap. If racism and generational disadvantage are the immovable barriers you claim, then Black immigrants m who arrive with the same skin color, often with zero wealth, no citizenship, no networks, and sometimes no English should be struggling even worse. Yet the numbers are clear: higher graduation rates, higher incomes, stronger family structures, and higher workforce participation than native-born Blacks. That reality alone means the “system” can’t be the full story.

The “self-selected elite” argument also doesn’t hold up. If only the rich and privileged emigrated, we wouldn’t see so many West Africans, Haitians, and Caribbeans grinding in warehouses, kitchens, construction, taxis, and small shops. Many arrive broke and undocumented, but within a generation they still climb. That’s not cherry-picking that’s a consistent demographic trend.

And culture isn’t a “mystical variable” like you suggest. It’s the habits and values groups carry with them. Nigerian parents drill education. Haitian and Caribbean families pool resources and start businesses. These cultural patterns push their kids upward even while facing racism. Meanwhile, too many native-born Black communities have normalized broken family structures and victimhood as default. That divergence in cultural mindset is what explains why two groups, under the same system, produce such different outcomes.

So yes, history matters. Racism exists. But it doesn’t explain why new arrivals with nothing can leapfrog families who’ve had generations in America’s opportunity structure. Dismissing that difference as “racist” isn’t analysis, it’s avoidance. The uncomfortable truth is that culture and mindset are bigger drivers of outcomes today than the history you keep leaning on.

[-]

Entropy_Pyre@reddit

Do undocumented immigrants really outperform? Do you have some stats on that or something I can otherwise use to better understand what you're saying?

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

Sure here are some solid stats for anyone who wants sources:

• Education: 31% of Black immigrants hold a bachelor’s degree or more, compared to just 22% of U.S.-born Black Americans

• Median income: Black immigrant households earn ~$57K vs. ~$42K for U.S.-born Black households

• Family structure & outcomes: Black immigrants have a much lower out-of-wedlock birth rate (38% vs. 78%), which correlates with better long-term outcomes

• Labor participation: Sub-Saharan African immigrants participate in the workforce at higher rates than native-born Americans and many work in high-skill fields .

These differences persist despite the systemic barriers they face lack of legal status, cultural dislocation, racism and they underscore how culture, mindset, and family structure can dramatically influence outcomes.

[-]

Entropy_Pyre@reddit

Ooooh. Okay so black immigrants in particular are outperforming black citizens, you weren't referring to illegal Hispanic populations?

Umm...Let's see. These appear to be from "A Rising Share of the U.S. Black Population Is Foreign Born" and this article addresses immigrant black populations, not undocumented immigrants like you mentioned in the title of this. These immigrants in those stats would be more likely to be legal, and that's something that may actually be linked to higher income backgrounds. You're looking at wealth in those stats.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

You’re missing the forest for the trees.

Whether we slice it by legal/illegal status or not, the consistent fact is this: Black immigrants documented and undocumented are outperforming native-born Black Americans in education, income, and family outcomes.

•   Yes, a portion of African immigrants come in on student or work visas, but that doesn’t erase the huge number who come here with nothing. Many grind in construction, service jobs, warehouses, auto shops, etc. They struggle for a decade or two but they eventually climb. Why? Culture and mindset.

•   Family structure is one of the clearest differentiators. Out-of-wedlock birth rates: ~38% for Black immigrants vs. ~78% for native-born Black Americans. That difference alone has long-term ripple effects on poverty, crime, and education. And you don’t need a PhD to know that stronger family units produce more stability.

•   Work ethic: Sub-Saharan Africans have higher labor force participation rates than native-born Americans overall, not just Black Americans. That includes plenty who are undocumented or working in low-wage sectors.

So the “they’re elites who already had wealth back home” angle doesn’t hold. If that were the case, why do so many start out broke, hustling in menial labor, yet still end up owning businesses or pushing their kids into college at higher rates than the U.S. average?

Meanwhile, native-born Black Americans who’ve had multiple generations in America, access to welfare programs, affirmative action, scholarships, and no immigration hurdles still lag. The gap here can’t just be hand-waved away with “systemic racism,” because the same system is producing success for other groups under worse starting points.

That’s the hard reality. Same racism. Same schools. Same cops. Different outcomes. Which means the explanation isn’t the system it’s culture, mindset, and choices.

[-]

Entropy_Pyre@reddit

It's important to back up those statements with research that controls for economic background and legal/illegal status. If we have that, then we can run numbers to look at statistical significance and more accurately argue the potential underlying cause. You could be right, but without the numbers it's just conjecture, and there's a risk of making a correlation/causation fallacy.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

You’re asking for data here it is. Pew, Census Bureau, and research from the Migration Policy Institute have already controlled for legal status, education, and economic background:

•   Education: 31% of Black immigrants hold a bachelor’s degree or higher compared to 22% of U.S.-born Blacks. Nigerians specifically have one of the highest attainment rates in the country.

•   Income: Median household income: ~$57k for Black immigrant families vs ~$42k for U.S.-born Black families.

•   Family Structure: Out-of-wedlock birth rate is ~38% for Black immigrants vs ~78% for native-born Blacks. That stability strongly predicts better long-term outcomes.

•   Labor Participation: Sub-Saharan African immigrants have higher workforce participation than both native-born Blacks and even the U.S. national average.

These differences persist even when immigrants start broke, undocumented, or in low-skill labor. Many arrive with less than nothing, yet within a generation they’re climbing above native-born outcomes. That rules out “wealth back home” or “legal advantage” as the explanation.

Now here’s the contradiction in your logic: if systemic racism explains Black American underperformance, then why doesn’t it equally crush Black immigrants? They’re the same skin color, facing the same “system,” often with more barriers (language, legal status, no generational wealth). Yet the outcomes diverge. That can’t be hand-waved away with “correlation fallacy” the data shows a pattern too consistent to ignore.

So yes, history matters. Yes, racism exists. But when one group faces the same external system and still outperforms, the only variable left is culture, mindset, and family choices. That’s the piece nobody wants to talk about.

[-]

Hutch_is_on@reddit

Look at drug usage statistics, and then look at drug incarceration statistics. See who uses versus who goes to jail or prison.

Go watch the Stax Records documentary on HBO and then get back with us.

Maybe start with asking yourself some hard questions first.

I have a hard question. Are you a troll?

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

Yes, Black Americans are incarcerated at nearly 5x the rate of whites, even though drug use is about the same. That’s unequal enforcement nobody’s denying the justice system has bias.

But here’s the part you dodged: if the system is equally racist toward all Black people, why do Black immigrants from outside countries Nigerians, Jamaicans, Haitians consistently outperform native-born Black Americans in both education and income? If racism alone explained everything, those results shouldn’t exist.

And if your only rebuttal is to call me a troll instead of answering, that just proves you don’t have one.

[-]

Hutch_is_on@reddit

Bro, I work in a correctional setting in the states. I hear the bullshit from racists almost everyday. Black racist. White racist. Brown racist. All kinds of colors racist.

I'm white. When I hear other white people start whistling shit like you are, I just ask them to count how many people of the other race they have actually seen do the shit they are spitting out of their mouths. Then, when they inevitably stumble, I ask them how many people they have seen of their own colored skin do the shit they are saying with their lips.

It's your fingers typing. How many of them have succeeded other than on reddit? Troll. That's all you are. Troll.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

Working in corrections doesn’t change the data. Nobody’s denying racism exists, I literally opened by acknowledging unequal enforcement in the justice system.

The point you dodged is this: if racism in America is equally crushing for all Black people, then Black immigrants (Nigerians, Jamaicans, Haitians, etc.) should be just as trapped as native-born Blacks.

Yet the stats show the opposite.

• Black immigrants earn higher median incomes than native-born Blacks.

• They have higher college graduation rates.

• They have stronger family stability outcomes.

These aren’t Reddit anecdotes, they’re Census and Pew data.

So yelling “racists say dumb things in prison” doesn’t answer the question. If the system is the only explanation, these immigrant outcomes shouldn’t exist. The fact they do means culture, family structure, and mindset matter too.

Calling me a troll isn’t an argument, it’s a dodge.

If you don’t have a rebuttal to the actual question, just say that instead of pretending you do.

[-]

Sea_Journalist_3615@reddit

"Why are Black Americans stuck while undocumented immigrants with less rights, less money, and zero connections pass them by?"

Culture.

"Generations deep in the richest country on earth, yet constantly outperformed by people who show up with nothing.'

Culture.

"At some point, do we stop blaming “the system” and start asking harder questions?"

The government subsidizes poverty and creates a socialistic culture in these communities. It's spreading to white and hispanic areas as well.

[-]

MajkiF@reddit

Dunno, why Africa never moved forward, while South America build pyramids?

[-]

GrandMonk97@reddit

WTF does that have to do with moving forward? And I like how you ignored the the atrocities inflicted on the continent by pathological "UR A PEAN" nations.

[-]

rlpewpewpew@reddit

I would recommend reading Poverty by America. It explains how the individuals are at fault to an extent, but that the systemic issue of poverty are perpetuated by the system itself.

[-]

JailhouseJuliet@reddit

The system is designed to send us all into poverty and government control. They’ve criminalized homelessness so that you have no way to get away from the government and the force labor.

[-]

Anthrax6nv@reddit

One of these groups is notoriously family-oriented, while the other sees 70% of its youth raised in single-parent homes.

Consistently throughout all races and cultures, not having a father figure is the single greatest predicate for future drug use, gang participation, incarceration, etc.

Kids with loving, supportive families statistically are encouraged to make good decisions which will set them up for a lifetime of future success: study hard, stay out of trouble, stay in school, choose a lucrative career, etc.

[-]

JailhouseJuliet@reddit

It’s not without a father that it’s a problem. It’s not having both parents. Before the 90s it was still the father’s discretion who got custody in divorce. It’s only been since this generation that fathers lost that control because it was detrimental to the children and fathers were using it as a weapon against mothers. I was taken by my father. Being without my mother was the trauma I faced and it was much worse. It’s always harder on a child to lose the same gender parent.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

Black undocumented immigrants come here with nothing and build; meanwhile some who’ve had generations in the U.S. are still stuck blaming “the system.” At some point, it’s not the system it’s the culture.

[-]

Quirky_Film1047@reddit

Racist dog whistle. If you actually were interested in the answer there are several books/videos/podcasts/ ted talks about why and how this occurred

[-]

sandstonexray@reddit

OP apologize for asking a racist question right now or else

[-]

Quirky_Film1047@reddit

And you should apologize to the trees for wasting their oxygen

[-]

awskiski09@reddit

Data bias. Anybody who escaped from a worse place to be in a better place is already demonstrably more likely to be the kind of person who will work hard and take risks to get better stuff compared to other groups of people.

For one example, look at Hong Kong longevity data, or the "blue zone" stuff. Most of its oldest residents are descended from, or are personally, people who walked across China to get there for a better life, but some still assume it must be their diet that makes them live so long instead of just... being a population weighted with a degree of demonstrated "works extraordinarily hard for a better life" qualities.

[-]

Anen-o-me@reddit

Every group has segments that are struggling. Immigrants become immigrants by being the most capable, motivated, talented, and connected, it's not surprising that this is a self sorting process that brings capable people to the desirable places to live.

Don't forget that the poorest people in America, the poorest towns, are white towns.

[-]

sandstonexray@reddit

Don't forget that the poorest people in America, the poorest towns, are white towns.

I hate to be that guy, but do you have a source for that? Not sure I've ever heard it before.

[-]

Anen-o-me@reddit

Well it used to be true that the poorest town was white, Appalachia has broad poor white regions. Now the poorest town isn't white.

However whites are still the majority of poor people in the USA.

According to KFF (2020 data), there were approximately 15.9 million white individuals living in poverty more than any other single racial group.

In comparison: Black poverty was about 8.5 million and Hispanic poverty about 10.4 million.

American Indians are also very poor, but are technically a separate nation, generally are choosing that lifestyle, and had their land stolen and forced segregation, etc.

[-]

sandstonexray@reddit

Oh okay, well thanks for looking into it I guess. Always interested to learn something new.

According to KFF (2020 data), there were approximately 15.9 million white individuals living in poverty more than any other single racial group.

In comparison: Black poverty was about 8.5 million and Hispanic poverty about 10.4 million.

Is this adjusted for total population in any way? If not, that means that black americans account for a way higher proportion of individuals in poverty relative to their share of the population.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

I get the point about immigration being a self-selection filter motivated people are the ones most likely to leave their home country in search of something better. But that just reinforces my argument: culture and mindset matter. Nigerian and Caribbean immigrants face the same racism, the same police, and the same system as native-born Black Americans, yet their outcomes in education and income are significantly better. And yes, there are poor white towns, but nobody excuses their failures as purely ‘the system.’ Same country, same system, different results culture and mindset are what make the difference.

[-]

Hench999@reddit

If a man is a cheating POS and he knows for a fact that his wife will forgive him regardless, even if he ignores her for other women, then why would he bother to pay attention to and be faithful to his wife unless convenient?

The same goes for the democratic party and Black Voters. They know for a fact that they have the majority on lock, so why would they bother catering to them when pandering to illegals is their key to unchecked power? Poorer inner city neighborhoods with large percentages of blacks suffer the most from unchecked immigration. They deal with excessive crime, fewer jobs, and a burden to the already overstretched bloated welfare state.

Regardless, though, people need to stop listening to race grifters who act as if they are the only ones who can help them and that their salvation lies in said race grifter doing something or some legislation or something that white people have to do to fix supposed injustices.

Their salvation lies with the individual and the family. The welfare state has wreaked havoc on families of all races, but Blacks have suffered the most from it. The last thing the democratic party wants is black people to be wealthy and independent. They want them to be perpetual victims and dependent on the scraps from the table they throw. That is how they get voted in without that why do people need an AOC or Bernie? Republicans aren't all that great either, but they are bad in other ways.

[-]

real_eyes_6052@reddit

It’s all been said nothing will change The only difference now is that the internet allows the world to see the dysfunction in real time, archived, forever!

I can only be responsible for myself

I don’t represent all black Americans and all black Americans don’t represent me

[-]

techshot25@reddit

Harder questions? They’re kinda obvious. Welfare creates dependency and dysfunctional families. Fatherless children tend to perpetuate behaviors that got them into poverty. And cultural factors that really make the problem worse by encouraging crime and violence instead of hard work and honest living

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

Exactly

welfare incentives and fatherlessness have created generational dependency.

But here’s the key: those same policies exist for everyone, yet Black immigrants coming from Nigeria or the Caribbean still outperform native-born Black Americans in education and income.

If welfare alone explained the outcomes, they’d be struggling too.

The real difference is culture and mindset. Some communities lean into victimhood, others lean into opportunity and the stats make that impossible to ignore.

[-]

Dangerous_Brush_3556@reddit

If you really want your mind blown look up the statistics of Kenyon immigrants.

[-]

dratseb@reddit

We stop blaming the system when they stop doing blatantly racist and anti-capitalist shit like Black Wall Street and Seneca Village. Or, Waco and Ruby Ridge. Take your pick, it’s not just blacks and immigrants that the government targets.

[-]

prometheus_winced@reddit

No do black Americans vs black immigrants from any other country.

[-]

RobertStronghold@reddit

One guy. Oliver North. Black communities in America post segregation were bombarded by ops from the alphabet boys. While Africans had their countries run by or culturally impacted by Europeans and the USA. They were mainly important for mining operations and to break black unity across the world. Patrice lumumba is a good example of what happens if you try to unite blacks intentionally. Africans common abusers in the last 60+ years or so are other Africans. So the outlook on racial interference is different between the two cultures especially among older people of both factions imo. Crack in America added a new era of torture in black neighborhoods across America. Watch new Jack city. Obviously people can overcome things and raise but few people have had the same challenges as black Americans throughout the history of the country. Hell look at opioids, that wasn't targeted and it took so many lives. Crack did the same but was a weapon used on a group of traumatized people. Of course they're going to be different. Different people ran their countries of birth.

[-]

Suckmyduck_9@reddit

Immigrant mentality

[-]

WalrusMe@reddit

I’m going to assume, in the spirit of generosity, that you want a real answer and aren’t just race-baiting. The answer(s) are fascinating.

The New Yorker just reviewed a number of books on the subject: https://archive.is/bRkHd

Don’t dismiss it just because it’s the New Yorker—the author is appropriately skeptical and cracks down on books that don’t take culture, family structure, etc. seriously as an explanation, and the article specifically calls out the question you ask (why have recent immigrants outperformed Black Americans economically). Worth reading the whole article and probably some of the reviewed books, imo, if you are genuinely interested in the subject.

I’ll summarize my takeaway, though, which is that post-Civil War white Americans held 56x the wealth of Black Americans. By the 1960s (throughout Reconstruction and Jim Crow) that gap narrowed to 7x, and then it stalled.

In the modern era, why can’t Black families seem to narrow the wealth gap further? To me, this is the most compelling explanation (though I think family structure, education, etc. contribute): “The economist Ellora Derenoncourt identifies three key reasons. First, income convergence between Black and white Americans largely halted. Second, Black wealth is held disproportionately in housing rather than in financial assets or businesses, meaning that stock-market booms—which have become a hallmark of the post-Reagan economy—widen, rather than shrink, the gap. Third, a persistent savings gap between Black and white households compounds over time.”

[-]

UnitCell@reddit

Half AA individual here. What is noteworthy, is that AA are also often outperformed by black immigrants from African countries. I think it is a cultural issue. There are also plenty of AA individuals who wise up, get with the program and go places.

There is a large part of the AA community which are completely adversarial to work ethic, morals and intellectualism - which are all things necessary to advance oneself in society.

I've seen it first hand, too many times, and I know it's real.

And it absolutely are democrat pushed social programs that feed that attitude and culture.

[-]

ssaall58214@reddit

💯

[-]

usafmd@reddit

Two black scholars: Thomas Sowell and John McWhorter of Columbia

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

Great callout. Sowell and McWhorter have been making this point for years that culture, mindset, and family structure explain far more than systemic excuses ever could. Both of them show with data that immigrants and other groups facing the same environment still manage to succeed, which proves it isn’t just about the system but about how communities choose to respond to it. Appreciate you bringing them up, they add a lot of weight to this discussion.

[-]

DonEscapedTexas@reddit

Family structure doesn't explain it all,

so we must presume that structural segregation relegates Blacks to a closed and relatively unsuccessful culture from which they are unlikely to graduate. I take the position that this is a national tragedy.

I despise our government(s) and believe that the history of its efforts have proved to have largely made the problem worse. Personally, I would like to participate in a private movement to help Blacks participate in the culture of independence and success.

My suspicion is that public education in cities is a huge part of the problem....as is the obsession with college-track curriculum. It might be that programs aimed at trade-craft and autonomy by, say, 12 to 14, is more appropriate to maybe half of Americans of all ethnicities. I can tell you that commercial/industrial construction, fabrication, plumbing, and HVAC can all be great ways for the individual to escape to more individualized and independent careers.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

I agree family structure isn’t the only factor, but it’s clearly the foundation. Once that breaks down, the odds are stacked against success no matter what policies are in place. But you’re right that schools and how we prepare kids matter too especially when we push everyone into a 4-year college track instead of also promoting trades and skills that can actually provide upward mobility.

That’s why immigrants who emphasize family stability and education (whether academic or trade) tend to outperform. Culture and mindset decide how a community responds to the same system.

[-]

WindBehindTheStars@reddit

Well the system is deliberately interfering with the social progress of black Americans. So it's still the system keeping them down, just not in the way they mean when they say it.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

That excuse falls apart when you look at numbers. Nigerian and Caribbean immigrants face racism too, yet they outperform native born Black Americans in education and income.

Pew data shows Nigerian-Americans have higher college graduation rates than even the national average.

If ‘the system’ is holding everyone down equally, why are some groups still climbing while others stagnate?

At some point, it’s not just the system it’s culture, choices, and accountability.

[-]

WindBehindTheStars@reddit

Way to not comprehend.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

Ah yes, the ‘you don’t comprehend’ comeback… the last refuge of someone with no argument.

[-]

WindBehindTheStars@reddit

The system keeps the black community down by incentivizing, among other things, underemployment, single parent homes, and staying in poverty-heavy, high crime areas to maximize the benefits paid out to the individual. This has been discussed so many times before for so very long I didn't think I had to explain it to you, but apparently I was wrong.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

I don’t disagree that government incentives and broken policies have played a role in trapping parts of the Black community in cycles of poverty and dependency. That history is real.

But the exact same system exists for Black immigrants from Nigeria, Jamaica, and the Caribbean who also face racism, poverty-heavy neighborhoods, and the same police.

Yet statistically they climb higher in education and income than native-born Black Americans.

If the system is designed to hold everyone down equally, why are some groups able to break through while others remain stuck?

That’s the part your explanation doesn’t cover.

[-]

LycheeAppropriate315@reddit

The American black experience is not a monolith. You are talking about entirely different communities with entirely different American experiences and history and the ways they even got to America. Do you know what the story of Black Wall Street and several other similar experiences are even about?

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

Sure, the Black American experience isn’t a monolith, but that actually proves my point even more. Nigerian and Caribbean immigrants enter the same America, deal with the same racism, the same cops, the same schools, and yet statistically outperform native-born Black Americans in both education and income.

If history alone explained the present, those outcomes wouldn’t exist. Black Wall Street and past injustices are real, but they don’t explain why two groups with the same skin color and the same system today end up with such different results. That gap is where culture, mindset, and choices come in.

[-]

LycheeAppropriate315@reddit

I will respectfully disagree. Generational Poverty due to legal and illegal discrimination are a real thing. If you’re not Black, I do not expect you to understand all of the layers of this, but also, Black peoples gave no obligation to educate you. Good night.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

I don’t dismiss the injustices of the past, but the past is the past. The generations living now have every opportunity to succeed in America. That’s exactly why the comparison to Black immigrants matters.

Nigerian, Caribbean, and even undocumented Black immigrants face the same skin color, the same systemic challenges, and in many cases even tougher obstacles language barriers, no legal status, starting with nothing. Yet they still statistically outperform native-born Black Americans in both education and income.

That gap can’t be explained by racism alone. It comes down to culture, mindset, and the choices communities make. That’s why Black immigrants, despite all the barriers, often do better their cultural mindset pushes them toward achievement. There’s no excuse anymore to say why American Blacks haven’t advanced more, when others with the same skin color and even fewer resources are making it work.

[-]

WindBehindTheStars@reddit

Simply because a measure does not work the same way with every demographic does not mean that it was not an intentional choice, or designed to have the effect that it does on one community or another. A measure does not have to be a one-size-fits-all program to qualify as a form of oppression I frankly don't give a shit, I just want less government shittiness.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

Fair point, not every policy has the exact same impact on every group. But that’s exactly why bringing up Black immigrants matters. They face the same racist cops, the same broken policies, the same underfunded neighborhoods, yet they still outperform native-born Black Americans in education and income. If oppression alone explained the outcomes, we wouldn’t see such a gap between two groups who are both Black and both exposed to the same system. That suggests culture and choices can’t be ignored in this conversation.

[-]

WindBehindTheStars@reddit

Meh. The system might suck ass, but that's because governments suck ass, and it's their system. It's not that blacks are oppressed, so much as it's the government wants to control people, and this is one of the ways they're working towards that goal. Systemic racism as the left goes on about pretty much doesn't exist.

[-]

Every-Weekend7435@reddit

no bro, u are right

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

Thanks man, that’s all I was saying.

[-]

RocksCanOnlyWait@reddit

You missed what was being said.

The popular narrative is that the system (slavery, Jim Crow, racism, etc) is keeping black people down. On the contrary, it's the system (various welfare programs) which contribute to a culture of apathy and perverse incentives.

For example, the rise in single parent homes, especially among blacks, is due to welfare for single mothers. There's no longer a need to support a child as a family or extended family when the government will do it. And lacking a father figure is strongly correlated with being involved in crime and gangs.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

I get what you’re saying that the system itself, through welfare incentives, actually pushed Black families into single-parent homes and dependency.

But that still proves my point: if those same incentives apply to everyone, then Black immigrants should be struggling even more.

Instead, they’re outpacing native-born Black Americans in education and income, which shows culture and mindset make the difference.

The government should absolutely cut back on policies that reward dependency, and yes, push for the restoration of the nuclear family because that’s the foundation every thriving group is building on.

[-]

prof_weisheit@reddit

I haven't studied this so just talking out of my ass, but just looked this up and it seems that 56% of the black population in the US lives in the south. I'm guessing if we also compared maps of the worst states in the US in terms of education, as well as the poorest states, there would be quite a bit of overlap of the three. This is without analyzing where immigrants might typically relocate to (guessing that skews to major cities and the more coasts).

https://www.pewresearch.org/race-and-ethnicity/fact-sheet/facts-about-the-us-black-population/ More than half of the U.S. Black population (56%) lives in the South as of 2023. Another 17% each live in the Midwest and Northeast, and 10% live in the West.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

You’re right that 56% of the Black population lives in the South, which has some of the worst outcomes in terms of poverty and education. But that’s kind of the point those outcomes don’t exist in a vacuum.

Culture and community norms play a huge role in shaping the environment people live in.

If Nigerian or Caribbean immigrants move to the same cities and neighborhoods, face the same racism, and deal with the same system, yet still manage to climb higher in education and income, then it shows the difference isn’t just geography or systemic bias.

The results come down to cultural outlook, family structure, and accountability, not just where people happen to live.

[-]

Fuck_The_Rocketss@reddit

Woosh.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

Woosh is what people say when the facts fly straight through them.

[-]

PeteDub@reddit

Because they teach their children that they are victims. So they don’t try.

[-]

beershitz@reddit

One group is sold the story that America is the best country on earth and they can do anything and improve their life.

One group is sold the story they will be held down no matter how hard they try.

[-]

Silverfin007@reddit (OP)

That’s it right there. Black immigrants arrive believing America is opportunity and they climb, while too many native-born Black Americans are told from birth the system is hopelessly rigged. Same system, different mindset, completely different results.

[-]

Cannoli72@reddit

do you really need to ask why.

[-]

Unique-Quarter-2260@reddit

Blacks and native Americans are probably the most government dependent groups so that is part of the problem.