- As you read, make annotations that help you Understand, Ask Questions, Draw Relationships, and Challenge. Post pictures of at least 4 different annotations, using at least two of the moves we’ve been practicing. ^^^
- Pay attention to what happened to Clyde Ross, one example of a Black man who moved from the south to Chicago in the great migration. How does the information Coates provides about housing in Chicago complicate the perhaps more commonly known narrative of historical discrimination? Be sure to quote from at least one part of Coates’ text in Part I. Pay attention to the time period involved.
- I’m not sure exactly what common known narrative about historical discrimination you have in mind because my highschool never talked about the great migration. But going off of what I have in front of me, there are many twists and turns these white sellers can take to really just straight up bamboozle their black buyers. Like Clyde Ross said “‘I’d come out of Mississippi where there was one mess, and come up here and got in another mess. So how dumb am I?’”(para. 25). He was just looking to get away from his suffering down south but was tricked into a different situation of suffering. He wanted a good house for him to grow his family yet they could barely pay for it given the fact that the man who sold the house to him had more than doubled the price that he had just bought the house for. It also doesnt help that there were no insurance policies that were there to help black people, and there were no lawyers that were actually on the black residence’s side when trying to fight for their rights over their home. A quote that shocked me was “If he missed a single payment, he would immediately forfeit his $1,000 down payment, all his monthly payments, and the property itself”(para. 15). This shocked me because of the extreme nature of just trying to keep your house. If you couldn’t make rent that month, like a lot of people do today, you are immediately kicked out but you also need to pay the seller $1000? It just makes no sense to me.
- As you read Part II, pay careful attention to the statistics/information. Pick 2-3 pieces of data that strike you as important in some way. Explain why.
- “Forty-three percent of the people in North Lawndale live below the poverty line—double Chicago’s overall rate” (para. 32).
- “The income gap between black and white households is roughly the same today as it was in 1970” (para. 34).
- With both of these quotes in mind,, how are black people expected to “just work harder” or “get better jobs” when they already are working their butts off to still keep living below the poverty line. Why if we have made progress in other areas is the income gap the same as it was in 1970? Like I have seen a lot since last May after George Floyd’s tragic death, many black activists have called out the fact that the system wasn’t made for them. This is so very true given just these two statistics from the article. The income gap has not changed because the system has not allowed it to change. This is what’s keeping a majority of black people below the poverty line because the system wants to keep them there to struggle which is absolutely ridiculous. No one ever deserves to live in poverty even as they try their best to keep themselves afloat.
4. Coates reports that the Contract Buyer’s League was seeking “reparations,” as was Belinda Royall. What is the theft/fraud/crime for which they sought repair? Does it seem reasonable for them to seek reparations? Why or why not? Be sure to support your view with relevant passages.They both sought reparations for the money they rightfully should have gotten. Belinda Sutton/Royall wanted reparations/a pension from the Royalls since she was their slave. She wanted to get the money she rightfully deserved and I agree that it was a reasonable request. The contract Buyers League was seeking reparations because of all the money each homeowner/renter lost and hardship endured due to their white seller which I think is also reasonable. Both their requests were reasonable because each situation was clearly in favor of the white person involved since they received great profit while the black person/people involved were left in the dust. For the Contract Buyers League, they called out reparations based on “Chicago’s long history of segregation, which had created two housing markets—one legitimate and backed by the government, the other lawless and patrolled by predators” (para. 41). The Contract Buyers League sought reparations from a system that inherently put them at least importance. Considering the fact that “85 percent of all black home buyers who bought in Chicago bought on contract” this means the majority of black people living in Chicago were more than likely scammed (para. 23)! I think it’s very reasonable that the Contract Buyers League was seeking justice. Their houses could have been in really bad shape and the White seller could have lied about anything they wanted to. So their call for reparations was a good one.
