african americans have had it harder than other immigrants to the new world. other groups have come, been maligned, overcome the obstacles, and succeeded in american society while peoples of african descent remain poor and disadvantaged.
I think the biggest single factor which contributes to the success of new groups of ethnicities is the family structure. they come and work together, pulling it together so that some members work, some go to school and become educated and can enter the middle class so the whole family can benefit, and some members look after the home and family.
the family is an extremely powerful economic unit when it functions properly, and it provides the framework which allows individuals and groups to find success in their new homes.
African Americans had their family structures completely destroyed by the whole enslavement process. men and women could not count on being able to stay together, women could not count on being able to keep their children, and they most certainly lost touch with their roots and their sense of connection to the past and blood connections to a community of people.
african americans have not succeeded in overcoming this disruption in their past. they do not have last names of their own. as a culture they do not tend to have stable family structures that they can use to better their postion in society. as a result large elements of african american culture express alienation, hoplessness, naked greed and selfishness, and violence which is the result of spending centuries severed from any sort of positive family influence.
when african americans begin to be able to restructure their families and communities effectively and with solidarity then they will probably leave behind their slave names and become an empowered group. but I can't say how long it will take for them to rebuild what was destroyed for so long.
2007-03-27 19:56:29
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
A name defines where you historically came from. Most last names are related to an occupation, or an area where you lived, or who your father was, etc. The name Miller says someone in your ancestry was a miller for example. If a person takes the name of a slaveowner and keeps it, it defines the history of being a slave.
Should a person named Miller not be called Miller anymore (because he is not a miller by trade)? My point is names have historical significance. Changing your name to something else for whatever reason and making it into something new erases the historical significance of it.
2007-03-28 02:49:46
·
answer #2
·
answered by Dovahkiin 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Okay now you're an irritant. What are you obsessed? Are you getting paid for these stupid questions or are you just jealous and you're looking for a way to take advantage of the culture even more so than greedy whites already have? It's none of your business. You should direct your energy towards getting a better job than working at a McDonald's and maybe your life wouldn't be such a waste that you would keep asking these crummy questions that serve no purpose.
2007-03-28 03:40:07
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
at one point in history (the 1960's) it was important for black people to identify with their african heritage and simultaneously express their rejection of the larger white society that robbed them of their heritage. This was the case when members of the Nation of Islam decided to remove their slave given name and replace it with an X
In today's world many changes have taken place and the black man has been gain his pride back through a knowledge of self.
Because of this knowledge-for some-it is not necessary to abandon their slave name. Ironically some can even find pride in it-as it symbolises a point in time when black people have been mentally awakened in the wilderness of north america and can take pride in their new names-that symbolize the product of struggle and overcoming tremendous obstacles
2007-03-28 04:42:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by ineedhennessy 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Probably because by the time they were freed, very few knew any other name. Even those that changed their name from the slave owner's name, and I'm guessing many did, it would have likely been an English surname they chose because, again, that's all most of them knew. It's not like they were freely allowed their names and culture.
2007-03-28 02:44:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by Lee N 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
What difference would a new name make? What makes a name is the man wearing it.
My greatgrandfather came from a shtetl in Lithuania, and his name was anglicized on immigration. He was the same man as Meyer or Miller.
Never mind where your name came from, it's the one your father and mother gave you, and barring extraordinary circumstances it will do. You are entitled to it, no matter where you found it.
2007-03-28 02:44:23
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why do when white people get disrespected by a black person at school they need to come on-line and vent at black people as an entire race?
2007-03-28 02:38:18
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
So what do you suggest they do change their last name to what ? it's not like they can always trace their ancestors last name before slavery and change their name to that particular last name ,They can in some cases but not all of them so the ones that can't find their ancestors last name what do you suggest they do ? i would really like to know
2007-03-28 09:31:13
·
answer #8
·
answered by canielany 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
because not all black people come from Africa, then once the white man got with the black women the child took on the fathers last name, Don't you have your fathers last name?
2007-03-28 02:43:01
·
answer #9
·
answered by reddie 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
because when they came to the USA they forgot there African names
2007-03-28 03:45:05
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋