ANTI-BLACKNESS AND PERSONAL FINANCE

Chiding Black people remains a big-time industry. I mean, it’s not like you must search far and wide to find some politician, some pundit, or some preacher who specializes going all in on Negroes for some supposed deficiency, for allegedly coming up short in some desired or prized virtue, for ostensibly dropping into ditches dug by their own sloth. Granted, no group is without their challenges. Most of us can stand to step up our game. I get that. But when it comes to us—especially the poorest amongst us— it seems like there’s a whole industry that specializes in the infantilization of Black folk. Nobody gets talked down to the way we do. Nobody gets singled out for chastisement the way we do. Nobody is held up as emblems of personal irresponsibility the way we are. Nobody is caricatured the way we are.

Nobody.

I’ve experienced speeches, political punditry, writing—you name it—that are steeped in stereotypes about Black folk. I’ve seen people shout and scream approval at some silver-tongued speaker specializing in insults. I’ve seen people nod their noggins at talking heads who do nothing more than trade in trash.

And you know what? It’s not a hard sell. It’s easy to get people to plug into and purchase what’s being sold, so to speak. It’s no sweat to get people to get down with a speaker who infantilizes and chastises Blacks. It’s no sweat because anti-Blackness primes us to see Blacks as “Other,” as a departure from the “norm,” as a self-made problem responsible for both much of our own ills and the tribulations of others. Anti-Blackness primes us to see us a problem.

Take, for example, the ways in which anti-Blackness too often creeps into calls for financial literacy and Black economic empowerment. Now, let me make this clear: I am not making the claim that folk don’t need financial literacy or economic empowerment. I’m not even making the claim that all those out here giving financial advice to Black people are consciously catering to anti-Blackness. What I am saying, though, is that anti-Blackness is so insidious that it sometimes even smuggles into advice given by well-intentioned people.

But the good news is that some prominent Black women specializing in money matters are calling this out.

ANTI-BLACKNESS AND ECONOMIC EMPOWERMENT

Recently, a well-known and respected personal financial guru—Michelle Singletary—openly criticized financial advice books aimed at Blacks for being stepped in stereotypes. Singletary zeros in on something that is omnipresent in the financial advice industry, namely, the notion that Blacks are spendthrifts. So stuck on stupid that they won’t wrangle themselves free of the grip of behavioral patterns that prioritize the presence over the future. What they—Blacks—need, so the story goes, is be taught that indolence is a direct route to indigence. If Blacks are to accumulate wealth and close the racial chasm in wealth, then Blacks have got to get a handle on their spending and clamp down on all this conspicuous consumption. Or at least that’s’ the narrative that’s constantly circulating within much of the financial advice given to Blacks.

Here’s what Singletary says about that narrative:

“In order to preach economic empowerment, black financial advisers, preachers, politicians, and community leaders have found it necessary to chide blacks for what they characterize as shameless spending.”

But Singletary is not having it. She openly challenges the idea that Blacks are fashion fiends and, correlatively, financial fools. She stomps all over this statement by Jessie B. Brown, author of Investing In The Dream: Building Strategies for African Americans in Search of Financial Freedom:

"I strongly believe that there would be more African American millionaires next door if we spent less of our money on symbols of affluence and more of it on building true wealth"

Think about it. Such statements imply that Blacks have a lower savings rate because of their supposed tendency to overspend on “symbols of affluence” rather than doing what, presumably, Whites and others do: Saving, investing, and building wealth. For Singletary, people like Brown never marshal evidence that supports this claim but, rather, just continually circulate what we already “know” about Blacks. We don’t need evidence, we don’t ask for such claims to be corroborated because, after all, we “know” what’s the deal Black folk. Who needs evidence when we already “know” that Blacks are profligate, at least when it comes to money? That’d be like asking for evidence that fire burns, ice is cold, and water is wet.

When’s the last time some fool asked you to prove water is wet or ice is cold? We “know” what the deal is and we just run with it. Similarly, we just run with the “fact” negroes are recklessly when it comes to responsibly managing cash. Seriously, when’s the last time you’ve heard somebody stop a speaker riffing on the so-called recklessness of the race with the request that they actually take a moment to substantiate their claim? That’s one of the ways in which anti-Blackness works: You can make all kinds of scurrilous claims about Black spending without ever having to worry about getting checked. Chiding Black folk is one of the easiest gigs around. You ain’t likely to catch that much grief.

By the way, Singletary confesses that, in earlier writings, she may have very well have penned some stuff that played into this negative portrayal of Blacks and money management. Here she goes:

Who needs to worry about stereotypes from whites when blacks are doing such a great job of scolding their own people? In all honesty, I might have been guilty of preaching the same trite sermons when I first began writing my personal finance column. But I've seen the light, or at least I've seen how such a message comes across as condescending.

And, just in case that’s not clear, then here’s this:

"Blacks are no more prone to materialism than anybody else. Trust me. Tommy Hilfiger isn't getting rich off just the pricey sweatshirts that blacks are buying"

So, let me say this before I go any further: Big ups to Michelle Singletary for critically engaging one of the central claims advanced in so much of the financial advice geared to Blacks and, in doing so, pushing us to rethink what we think we “know” about the efficacy in which African-Americans handle money. The presence of Black women makes a difference. Even in the field of personal finance.

But back to Brown for a quick minute: He believes that Blacks are far too profligate to save, invest, and increase the number of millionaires. He believes that conspicuous consumption is blocking Black’s pathway to financial freedom. And, presumably, he believes that the racial wealth divide is at least partially attributable to racial disparities in savings rates. He believes that,

Yet, here’s the deal: It’s not a matter of beliefs. I believe that he believes what he says he believes. People believe all sorts of things. Some believe that the world is flat, and I’ve met several “prophets” who believe that there’s money in their mouth, who believe that they can “speak” prosperity in existence. The question is whether those beliefs are accurate or whether they are grounded in caricatures. So, then, here’s this:

Is it accurate, is it true, that the Black saving rate is lower than White’s?

ECONOMIC EVIDENCE

If you’ve been pushing the notion that, compared to Whites, Blacks are spendthrifts, you might want to sit down for this news: Sorry to disappoint you, but a growing number of economists have conducted careful studies suggesting that, after controlling for racial differences in income, Blacks are hardly the spendthrifts they’re often portrayed as in jokes, personal finance books aimed at African-Americans, and sermons. Here’s how one group of economic scholars summarizes the research:

The finding advanced in peer reviewed articles in economic journals is clear: there is no evidence that black Americans have a lower savings rate than white Americans once household income is taken into account

Those words “once household income is taken into account” are important. What this means, so to speak, is that you ought not to compare apples to oranges. Carefully crafted statistical studies seek to compare similarly situated individuals. By “taking household income into account” your asking yourself these types of questions:

Is the savings rate of upper income Blacks less thrifty than upper income Whites?

Is the savings rate of middle-income Blacks lower than that of middle-income Whites?

Is the savings rate of lower income Blacks less than the savings rate of low-income Whites?

And, again, the answer that comes forth is a resounding no. The answer that emerges is that there is no evidence of a statistically significant difference in the savings rate of similarly situated Blacks and Whites. The answer is that, once income is taken into account, Blacks are no more likely to “make it rain” than similarly situated Whites. The answer is that some of y’all need to stop circulating portrayal of your people that ain’t got no grounding. The answer is that anecdotes can’t substitute for analysis. The answer is that we need to more critical and more willing to challenge claims that come forth without any substantiation, regardless of how talented the tongue of the teller is.

Are we perfect? Of course not. Do we have problems? You bet! But none of that warrants accepting and pushing anti-Blackness in anything. Including personal finance advice aimed at us.

There’s a lot more to be said. But that’s another post.

So, I’m ought of here!

Catch you on the flip side,

Doc Greene