A thoughtful article addresses the question. (HT: JH)
The article disputes the widely held theory that fatherlessness is the cause. It instead points to higher levels of testosterone; anti-social personality types more prevalent among blacks; and culture.
I am not willing to concede that fatherlessness is not a contributing factor. However, it is likely that culture is overall a major factor. The prevalence of anti-social personality types is something that needs to be explored further because it seems plausible.
I doubt testosterone levels is the explanation. To kill someone unjustifiably, there must be an absence of conscience that would restrain others from committing such a heinous deed. Such an absence of conscience and restraint can’t be explained by testosterone. Other dynamics lead to those becoming an issue.
All sociologists have suffered from the same basic problem: finding urban white communities that are as disadvantaged as the poorest black neighbourhoods, so that you can get a fair comparison.
Some thinkers play down the importance of poverty in favour of the “violent subculture theory”.
This is the idea that some black communities, for some reason, have developed cultural values that are more tolerant of crime and violence.
While it would be naïve to suggest that there is no racism in the US criminal justice system, victim reports don’t support the idea that this is because of mass discrimination.
Higher poverty rates among various urban black communities might explain the difference in crime rates, although the evidence is mixed.
There are few simple answers and links between crime and race are likely to remain the subject of bitter argument.
What is the truth?
As the article by Carl Noah states: “Based on currently available evidence, it’s hard to say for sure. “
Fred, it is probably fair to say that multiple factors exist that contribute to the problem. I wish that the problem didn’t exist in the first place. Yet another reason to look forward to heaven…
It is a thoughtful article. Noah Carl has a depth of knowledge on this subject and the bravery to write about it.
Triad, I share your inclination to believe lack of a father is a significant negative factor.
The impression left by “Time on the Cross: The Economics of American Slavery” was that blacks were not especially criminal or murderous under that regime. Did a diet high in pork and sweet potatoes affect testosterone?
I could be wrong, but my memory is that in Notes on the State of Virginia (in which Jefferson was answering questions from the Secretary of the French embassy in 1780) Jefferson said blacks seemed more impulsive. Slightly related to this, I’ve seen a study that concluded that blacks did better at tasks requiring quick intuition and that whites did better at tasks which required deliberation and logic.
A big subject and a consequential one.
Yes, it is, J. Sobran.
Slavery and having a father in the home both provide structure and accountability and boundaries one can’t violate during one’s formative years. Makes sense there would be less murders under those circumstances– right? Obviously, I am not advocating slavery, but merely trying to find an explanation.
Indeed, I’m very against slavery in any form. I mentioned it rather as a weak counter-argument to the notion of higher testosterone or something biological about blacks predisposing them to murder.
Perhaps also relevant to the discussion is “Time on the Cross” providing reams of evidence that the family was the basic organization of slavery. Above 95% of slaves had black fathers in the home. And families were rarely split up by sales. (Sales were generally infrequent, on the order of 1-2%/yr.) Plantation owners supported slave families in their own economic interest. Slaves had black fathers present, contrary to what is implied by modern speakers with their Hollywood images as a knowledge base.
Great points, J. Sobran. Thanks…