Joined: 19 Jan 2006 {Posts: 223 } Location: Southern California
Posted: Wed 13 May 2009 21:28 Post subject: Consumers Make Vow to Only Patronize Black Businesses
Quote:
Now Read This
Consumers make vow to patronize only black businesses
By Errin Haines
ASSOCIATED PRESS
2:00 a.m. May 13, 2009
ATLANTA – John and Maggie Anderson are among thousands of African-Americans who have signed on to a unique experiment: vowing to patronize only black-owned businesses for the next year. It hasn't been easy.
The “Empowerment Experiment” is the reason John had to suffer for hours with a stomachache and Maggie no longer gets that brand-name lather when she washes her hair. A grocery trip is a 14-mile odyssey.
“We kind of enjoy the sacrifice because we get to make the point ... but I am going without stuff and I am frustrated on a daily basis,” Maggie Anderson said. “It's like, my people have been here 400 years and we don't even have a Walgreens to show for it.”
So far, the Andersons have spent hundreds of dollars with black businesses, from grocery stores to dry cleaners. But the couple still hasn't found a mortgage lender, home security system vendor or toy store. Nonetheless, they are hoping to expand the endeavor beyond their Chicago home.
Plans are under way to track spending among supporters nationwide and build a national database of quality black businesses. The first affiliate chapter has been launched in Atlanta, and the couple has established a foundation to raise funds for black businesses and an annual convention.
“We have the real power to do something, to use the money we spend every day to solve our problems,” Maggie Anderson said recently at a meet-and-greet in Atlanta. “We have to believe that black businesses are just as good as everybody else's.”
Now, the Andersons are following up with 4,000 people who signed up for the experiment on their Web site to gauge their commitment and set up online accounts to track their spending. Hundreds also have joined the experiment's Facebook page, Maggie Anderson said.
Gregory Price, chairman of the economics department at Morehouse College, said black visionaries like Booker T. Washington and Marcus Garvey made similar calls to action.
“The idea is a sound one, given that black Americans are still underrepresented in the ranks of the self-employed and that entrepreneurship is a key component to wealth,” Price said.
There are 1 million black businesses in the United States accounting for more than $100 billion in annual sales, according to the National Black Chamber of Commerce. The latest U.S. Census numbers report that blacks have more than $800 billion in expendable income each year.
The Andersons track their spending on their Web site and estimate about 55 percent of their monthly spending is with black businesses for things like day care, groceries, car maintenance and home improvements.
One of the businesses highlighted by the Empowerment Experiment is Brenda Brown's Atlanta wine boutique, a shop with a growing black clientele. Brown said the project can help overcome the problems many black consumers lament.
“When we were a community of black folks who could not go to the white stores, our community of black stores flourished,” Brown said. “When we were given the opportunity to go into the white store, it was like nothing else mattered anymore and we wanted to go to the white store, regardless of what the black store provided. We could have the same or better products if we supported (black businesses) in the same way.”
Dallas Smith, who owns a commercial real estate firm in Atlanta, said mainstream retailers have undervalued black consumers. Smith lives in a black neighborhood in southwest Atlanta, where he tries to dine at black restaurants. He lamented the lack of quality businesses catering to black customers and said blacks should appreciate such businesses more.
“We've still got that 'the white man's water is colder'mentality,” he said. “We can't take us for granted. When we go to our establishments, it's almost like we're doing a favor. That ought to be a given for us.”
Joined: 26 May 2007 {Posts: 425 } Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posted: Wed 13 May 2009 23:29 Post subject:
This isn't possible. What about book stores, computers & electronics stores, furniture stores, car dealerships, cab and limo services, furniture, airlines, cell phone service, cable and satellite TV, etc - the list goes on?
I'm not saying that such black business don't exist, but if you can name ONE city or metropolitan area in this country where you get all of these things by using black businesses only, I've got some beach front property in Kentucky that I'll gladly give away.
I doubt you'll find a place where you can do more than two.
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 {Posts: 223 } Location: Southern California
Posted: Thu 14 May 2009 00:01 Post subject:
^^^^^Correct. The one thing that I found to be disturbing in the article was about the guy who "suffered for hours with a stomach ache". I sure hope that this wasn't a symptom of a more serious health issue that needed prompt medical care. I wouldn't be putting my health at risk for that ideology-that's where I'd draw the line. If I needed medical attention, I'd go to the nearest doctor/specialist I could afford, be he black, white, puple or whatever....
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1828 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Thu 14 May 2009 18:08 Post subject:
erasmusinfinity:
This ain't new, black folks been doing this for years, ever heard of NOI???
I view this as wrong but it is not more wrong than Jews, Asians, Italians etc who do it and have been doing it since they came to this country. They circulate money in their community.
I know a lot of East Asians, first generation, 2nd and 3rd...most of them but the most acculturated still prefer "Asian foods" and they shop at stores and dine at Asian restaurants, usually owned by immigrant Asians, and those Asian owners higher other Asians to work in those businesses (along with their family and often some Hispanic immigrants to cook or stock shelves). Those immigrant Asians use this money to invest in other Asian businesses (usually within their own specific ethnic group), send their kids to college, and buy homes in the suburbs.
Why can't blacks do the same? If that is racist, than every immigrant group in America has been racist, whatever...
Some of you must not live in America or do not have a diverse peer group...I have seen this all my life among everyone else but African Americans.
Reality is black owned businesses have expanded more every year, but after the civil rights movement they took a serious hit because black folks were so proud to shop at a white owned place that discriminated against them a year before that many black owned businesses went out of business, even if 50% of those businesses only hired one none black family member, that is helpful.
The people who did this more than anyone else in America were Jews and they still do it. I'm not hating, I think it is fine, but they never get accused of being "racist" or "self segregating" they are just "helping their community"..."working together"...lol
Why on earth do you think there are so many Jews in Hollywood, maybe they started it and helped each other? Check out any movie credit and you will see that at least 20-30% of people are Jewish, when they don't even make up 10% of the population, same in the banking industry.
That is not my stereotype, there are Jews who openly admit this, read this article by Joe Stein:
I appreciate Foxman's concerns. And maybe my life spent in a New Jersey-New York/Bay Area-L.A. pro-Semitic cocoon has left me naive. But I don't care if Americans think we're running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.
Guess that is not empowerment, that is just self segregation. LOL
If black folks choose to go out of there way to help spend their money at another black owned business they aren't doing anything different than many other groups in this country and it is no ones business. It is a free society and a free market system. I do not do this myself, although my wife does with Asian businesses, but if someone else chooses to, I don't see it as wrong, I see it as quintessentially American.
Why is it so threatening when African Americans do something that many communities in this country have done historically and continue to do?
I view this as wrong but it is not more wrong than Jews, Asians, Italians etc who do it and have been doing it since they came to this country. They circulate money in their community.
I absolutely agree.
Dragon Horse wrote:
Why can't blacks do the same?
My point was not to suggest that "blacks" who do this are doing anything any more wrongful to others then would be the case enacted by some other group. I don't suppose that I really even think of it as all that wrongful to others if "blacks" choose to "look out for their own" in some more generic ways.
My thought was that it is bad for "blacks" if they segregate themselves.
Dragon Horse wrote:
The people who did this more than anyone else in America were Jews and they still do it.
Let's not keep score now.
Dragon Horse wrote:
Why on earth do you think there are so many Jews in Hollywood, maybe they started it and helped each other?
Some would argue that this clanish mentality is part of what has fueled much of the anti-semitism that we see across history. I'm not saying that any such feelings have ever been legitimate. Just that these are highly visible sentiments about Jews across history. They can be seen in the works of Martin Luther, Charles Dickens, Adolf Hitler... to name a few. People who feel that they are on the outside of exclusive tribal arrangements often feel resentment toward those groups that they feel excluded from.
Dragon Horse wrote:
Guess that is not empowerment, that is just self segregation.
Yes, and perhaps even quite dis-empowering.
Dragon Horse wrote:
Why is it so threatening when African Americans do something that many communities in this country have done historically and continue to do?
If anything I would think that it is quite a bit less threatening for "blacks" to engage in this sort of behavior then it might be for other groups, because of what "blackness" is and isn't. I certainly don't see it as more threatening.
They can be seen in the works of Martin Luther, Charles Dickens, Adolf Hitler... to name a few.
And Du Bois. Du Bois was virulently antisemitic.
erasmusinfinity wrote:
My thought was that it is bad for "blacks" if they segregate themselves.
Precisely. Segregation produces lower quality goods and services at higher prices. Not because of anything special about the A-A community, but simply because reduced competition lowers quality and inflates costs. Just imagine if your home town or neighborhood banned all imports to the town or neighborhood. Everything from food to neurosurgery would have be provided from within.
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1828 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Thu 14 May 2009 23:57 Post subject:
fwsweet wrote:
erasmusinfinity wrote:
They can be seen in the works of Martin Luther, Charles Dickens, Adolf Hitler... to name a few.
And Du Bois. Du Bois was virulently antisemitic.
erasmusinfinity wrote:
My thought was that it is bad for "blacks" if they segregate themselves.
Precisely. Segregation produces lower quality goods and services at higher prices. Not because of anything special about the A-A community, but simply because reduced competition lowers quality and inflates costs. Just imagine if your home town or neighborhood banned all imports to the town or neighborhood. Everything from food to neurosurgery would have be provided from within.
In general, yes, but not necessarily.
For some reason H-Mart, a local Korean store chain in the DC Metro area has superior vegitable to the mainstream chains, so much so that many whites, blacks, Indians, Hispanics, have started shopping their. It is completely Korean owned an financed.
These are not little dirty store front China-town like stores, they have stores as big as Walmarts.
Lotte is another Korean store in my area that also opened a huge store and to my knowledge has three.
They are cheaper than local mainstream stores too. Why? They hire a lot of illegals and relatives and then make up excuses why they "have to work there and can't find an American" and sponsor visa for them.
Another example are hair good stores, for blacks. They are often owned by Asians, but are convenient because the mainstream stores do not always carry all the brands. There was one in Texas not too far from my work, I would stop by on the way home to pick up stuff once and awhile.
I think the idea is that blacks need to focus on niche markets where they have competitive advantage, and they can appeal to blacks based on ethnic bonds.
A grocery store is not likely, but there are other such things that might be good. Very few blacks will allow a non-black to touch their hair, those hair cut/beauty salons are still dominated by black ownership and clientele...
One big example I have seen of inter-ethnic business relations going to hell was the Madoff case.
He used his Jewishness to purposefully go after rich Jews for his financial dealings...he ended up stealing billions and is in prison. Maybe if he was not Jewish they would have been more suspicious? Some Jews are quite angry at Madoff for this.
Quote:
entral to Madoff's Empire State-sized impudence was the bamboozling of fellow Jews, some of them his closest friends. The epic con involved burrowing into the very arteries of American Jewish life - the great hub of world Jewry.
Starting with the well-heeled Jewish country club circuit in New York and Florida he was entrusted with entire family fortunes. Around the putting greens and card tables the seemingly high returns from a Madoff investment was dubbed "the Jewish bond" - the shakedown had begun.
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 {Posts: 223 } Location: Southern California
Posted: Fri 15 May 2009 01:12 Post subject:
Dragon Horse wrote:
This to me is the immediate downside, you let down your guard for a co-ethnic...not good.
You're right. At times , I've even heard it said that one's "in-group"(a.k.a. your own) can "do you in" to a greater degree than the so-called outsiders.
The Madoff case still blows me away. And him having the cojones to swindle even his closest friends? Oh well, as the saying goes, "With friends like *that*.....etc" . I'd be curious about the tax situation for those who had gotten swindled. After all, they had to declare their returns to the IRS each year. Now that it's known that these "returns" were actually money snookered from others in the pyramid; and the victims weren't paying taxes on what they thought were "legal" returns, I wonder how the IRS would treat this whole mess?
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1828 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Fri 15 May 2009 13:10 Post subject:
cjohns48233305 wrote:
Do Bois antisemite? Really? I've never heard of this
I wouldn't be surprised, my grandfather told me once that..."one thing all men can agree one, colored folks and whites...is that you can't trust a Jew"..
antisemitism is not as bad now as it was, but at one time it was as "commonsense" as Jim Crow, and banning interracial marriage, not allowing women to vote...etc
I wouldn't be surprised, my grandfather told me once that..."one thing all men can agree one, colored folks and whites...is that you can't trust a Jew"..
I Knew that Ford and Lindbergh were antisemitic didnt know Du bois was also.
[quote="G-Man"]Was Linbergh really as anti-Semitic as Ford or Father Coughlin? Or was he labeled as such because of his opposition to U.S. entry into WWII?
Dont Know. Just going by what i heard/read about Linbergh over the years.
George Bornstein, "W. E. B. Du Bois and the Jews: Ethics, Editing, and The Souls of Black Folk", Textual Cultures: Texts, Contexts, Interpretation, Volume 1, Number 1, Spring 2006, pp. 64-74. Indiana University Press
Quote:
Abstract:
This article explores the importance of the differences between the two major authorial versions of W. E. B. Du Bois’s influential The Souls of Black Folk. The original edition of 1903 included eight incidental passages reflecting the anti-Semitism of the time. After World War II and the Holocaust, Du Bois revised those passages for the 1953 edition in the light of his longtime increased sensitivity to Jewish issues and in the interests of historical accuracy. Yet many paperback versions taught today sadly use the unrevised 1903 text. The most desirable editions call attention to the revisions, and thus to Du Bois’s continuing reflection on a text that had become iconic in his own lifetime and to his ability to change his mind.
My copy is the original. Perhaps the man's change of heart, after the Nazi holocaust, was sincere. Most scholars of ethnic assimilation attribute the general U.S. acceptance of Jews into Whiteness to revulsion and reaction to news of the death camps. Nevertheless, in 1903 he was as antisemitic as most intellectuals of the time.
If one wants to support any particular ethnic owned business, fine. However, this couple is taking it to the extreme.Particular ethnic owned businesses: doctor, hair/nail salon,contractor/plumber/mechanic,restaurant, small stores, etc.
Somethings are just not possible: airlines, computers,hosptials,automobile companies, ven grammar,middle,high private schools and evenn public and private HBCU etc.
I do not agree with this kind of thinking by this couple, but if this is what they want to do, then fine. I think they have to consider and haven't that many national companies, products/places are produced/financed by BlackAmericans. A Black owned car dealership is Black owned, but the cars are produced by many Black employees and many Black Americans have extremely high corporate positions in that company.
I think this couple is way too radical and when people are too radical, they sort of miss the point they are trying to make. A better way for their goal would be to establish something to help young people seek and realize how vaulable an education is and what doors it can open for them.
Start a scholarship find. Mentoring program. After school tutoring program. Many BAmer. are in companies ,Black owned or not, by owning some stock, working there in big postions. This couple is opposite of some White Americans who only cater to White businesses, but they really can't because there are Blacks working there in all capacities.
I think this couple is way too radical and when people are too radical, they sort of miss the point they are trying to make. A better way for their goal would be to establish something to help young people seek and realize how vaulable an education is and what doors it can open for them.
Start a scholarship find. Mentoring program. After school tutoring program.
I agree. It seems to me that it would be far more constructive for "blacks" to work to elevate themselves and to improve opportunities for themselves and one another within the mainstream of society, as opposed to separate from it. The goal ought to be to break down the barriers that divide and thus disadvantage, not to strengthen the separateness that is by nature unequal.
Creole GAL wrote:
This couple is opposite of some White Americans who only cater to White businesses,
Yes. And if we are to embrace the notion that it is OK for self identified "blacks" to do these sorts of things then, I think, we must also be prepared to accept the reciprocal scenario of self-identified "whites" doing the same. Would we not be justifying and even paving the way for the return of "white" and "colored" signs in shop windows and on water fountains? Or is it somehow supposed to be OK for "blacks" to do these sorts of things but not "whites?"
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1828 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Mon 18 May 2009 12:01 Post subject:
Creole GAL wrote:
This couple is opposite of some White Americans who only cater to White businesses,
Yes. And if we are to embrace the notion that it is OK for self identified "blacks" to do these sorts of things then, I think, we must also be prepared to accept the reciprocal scenario of self-identified "whites" doing the same. Would we not be justifying and even paving the way for the return of "white" and "colored" signs in shop windows and on water fountains? Or is it somehow supposed to be OK for "blacks" to do these sorts of things but not "whites?" [/quote]
In just about every Western nation and non-Western minorities are given more leedway in these things (i.e. jews, i.e. Asians) because they are already at a disadvantage. That is like asking why it is okay for Cris Rock to make fun of white people but seen as bad for a white comedian to make fun of blacks.
It is the social perceived power difference. Ask Jews about that. Many Jews in pre-Nazi Germany thought they should not make an issue of rising anti-Semitic, and when they did it was too late.
Whereas ethnic Germans did not have to fear Jews ethnically cleansing them or discriminating against them in such a way in mass that they could not live above poverty in Germany sort of some extraordinary measures.
White Americans are not generally scared that blacks will ethnically cleanse them and Cris Rock presents a threat to white people in general, that is why whites can go to his shows (which they do, in large numbers) and laugh, whereas black folks would not be laughing (generally speaking) at a white man making fun of blacks (although Steve Martin's "Jerk" was similar to that, but most people found it quite funny.
Personally I would prefer that no racia/ethnic jokes, no ethnic shopping, etc.
The reason some see these things as necessary was not caused by them, they exist in a social framework and they are trying to make the best of their situation and improve people like them, now one can argue that they are not being efficient in doing this.
Also whites do do the same. Ethnic whites do this.
Italians do this.
Greeks do this
Russians do this.
Just as Koreans do this.
Armenians do this.
Chinese do this.
Vietnamese do this.
I think the problem is you are looking at "black and white as a race" when what we are really talking about is African Americans, who are an ethnicity.
I seriously doubt these people are buying from "Nigerians" and "Ethiopians" for example, and I know Ethiopians and Somalis often do this in their communities in DC.
Now do any of these groups do this to the extent of this couple? No, but most blacks (African Americans) would not do that either, these people are an extreme example.
Hell, over the weekend, my friend had her chimney cleaned for next season but Russians, she is Russians and she knew these Russians owned a store and wanted Russians to do the work. She did not even do a price comparison. She also has Russians contractors do work on her house.
This is in the DC area. Now does she only shop at Russians grocers, etc? No, it is not possible, but I am sure if she could shop at more Russian places she would. This woman came here in 1991, she speaks fluent English, has a Master's from a prestigious university, and is very proud of being Russian. All her kids (who are only half Russian) have Russian names and speak Russian.
There are many examples of this in America in various ethnic enclaves, once you get rid of "race" and break down by ethnicity.
That doesn't make it OK, does it? In the case of "whites" doing it, it is also illegal in many contexts. And I think that it is also frowned upon by most in the mainstream.
Dragon Horse wrote:
I think the problem is you are looking at "black and white as a race" when what we are really talking about is African Americans, who are an ethnicity.
I don't think that I am doing this, but even if I were I don't see how it would effect my judgement in the matter. Is it somehow OK for ethnicities to engage in this sort of behavior and just not OK for races? If it is, then there are large populations of "whites" who regard themselves as an ethnicity and not just a race. I am not just talking about the varieties of immigrant populations that you mentioned. There is also the "my grandpappy came over on the Mayflower" crowd. Is it OK for "white" persons who identify with a "white" ethnicity to patronize only "white" businesses???
Dragon Horse wrote:
but most blacks (African Americans) would not do that either, these people are an extreme example.
Exactly! And I think that their behavior would be frowned upon by many.
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1828 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Mon 18 May 2009 13:53 Post subject:
erasmusinfinity:
"make it okay?" That is a moral judgment, I'm not interested in that, as there is no right or wrong answer to me. I care more about the utility of such action. I don't think the mainstream looks down on Italians or Russians buying from Italians or Russians. Sorry.
I think in the case of whites, if a white man says they only want to by from "whites" due to "supporting the white race" or "hatred of blacks" that would not be seen as okay. It might be ironic to you, but the idea of supporting an ethnic culture or grouping has long been seen as fine in America and as I pointed out it goes on today and I don't see a lot of mainstream angst over it. It is not an issue of kind, but degree.
So to answer your question, in America, yes, it is generally seen as okay for ethnicities and religions to do this but not to do this just based on "race" and I can provide many examples of this (as I already have).
Although I think there behavior is extreme, I don't care about it. They are not discriminating against people, as in they are saying whites (etc) can not shop at black owned businesses or should not. They are saying, "they take their money" (Not public money) and shop at black businesses because they believe there needs to be more liquidity in the black community and they can best do this by buying from black business owners.
Although I think it is extreme and has limited utility (for them, because it is difficult to do) I see nothing wrong with this. As I said, this is as America as apple pie and baseball.
Also, many Italians and Greeks who did this, were not immigrants, they were 2nd or 3rd generation, when I lived in Chicago and they shopped in the "Old Neighborhood" often, which usually was close to their families church (even if they did not live in the immediate area)...I'm going to assume as time goes on less and less people will do this but there are still Italian and Greek ethnic enclaves in places like Chicago where almost no one but a grandfather is an immigrant and almost all the stores are still owned by locals...
I think what you have to understand is that many people in the U.S. (including blacks) don't want your "we our the world" cosmopolitanism.
They want equal rights under the law and to be left alone.
They want "pure Italian" grandkids, "pure Chinese grandkids", "pure black" grandkids...they want to be around "thier people", continue their traditions, etc.
I don't personally agree with this for a variety of reasons that I've talked about on this site, but you can't change that. It is their right to live as they please in America.
If they want to go off in the desert and live in a community of all blond Nordic types, as long as they aren't discriminating against someone in a way that violates the laws that is their business.
America is not a melting pot in many areas, it is more a "salad bowl". So your moralizing can only go so far, as others don't share your moral beliefs, don't forget that (I don't). In fact I would say a good percentage of Americans don't believe as you (and I) do.
Maybe it is the libertarian streak in me, but you can't force folks to associate or break with their ethnic loyalties. If there was no utility in it, people would not keep doing it. The alternative might be better for society over all, theoretically but it comes with risks as well.
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
