Kristen Gyles | Emancipation – almost two centuries later… (Part II)

Teacher: “Race and colour are major determinants of wealth and social status in Jamaica. You’ll probably never find a white person in Jamaica who is poor.”

Steve: “Sir, so what about the white beggar on Trafalgar Road with the cardboard sign???”

Teacher: “… Steve, He’s not white. He’s albino!”

This mimics part of a discussion we had in one of my classes in high school. I think we were all rooting for ‘Steve’ to be right. I mean, can such a sweeping statement about race and wealth really be true? It’s been a few years now and, well, I’m yet to prove my teacher wrong.

Last week I discussed how descendants of the enslaved have been adversely affected economically by the slave trade. The economic impact itself is somewhat psychological as well.

Many black people have hardly got the practical opportunity to manage money. As a demographic, we are recovering from moneyless-ness. Those who are leading the economic growth curve might have good money management 101 tips and might be able to dictate what salary percentage should be put towards an emergency fund or towards buying a home or towards little Timmy’s college education. However, for someone who has never had a steady income but has instead spent their entire adult life earning an occasional tuppence here and there, there’s no such thing as an emergency fund. Their whole life is an emergency situation.

These people do have children and these children have grown watching the way they spend (or not spend). It is difficult to hold children of poor people (and the poor people themselves) to the same standard of money management as wealthier people since wealthier people have money to manage and have lots of experience managing money. Experience is the best teacher. This is why roughly 70 per cent of lotto winners take five years or less to totally deplete their winnings.

MISMANAGE MONEY

So, do black people have a tendency to mismanage money? No. Poorer classes of people have a tendency to mismanage money and it just so happens that Africans make up a large portion of that demographic.

That’s only half the story of psychological imprints, so let’s move away from economics. Here goes the other half:

The family is the most dominant unit of socialisation. This dominance is usually severely watered down in cases where teenage girls become mothers, and especially by men who are absent. Fathers play a significant role in child development and mothers can’t be fathers, just like fathers can’t be mothers.

Fatherlessness has been one of the greatest challenges to child-rearing in the black community. Slave trade almost totally shattered the black family. That shattering is likely to have contributed to a reduced sense of the importance of family contributing to fatherlessness, reducing the likelihood of academic and developmental success for the child.

Self-denigration appears to be another staple part of the same culture shift. When it is not that black people are lazy, ‘licky licky’ and only want free things, it is that black people aren’t collaborative. Where did all of that self-deprecating conjecture come from? Is there any research on the origin of this ‘licky licky’ black trait?

We have also learned to communicate with and about the people we love in an awkwardly denigrating way. How does the stereotypical black mother speak about her children? Usually not much along the lines of how proud she is or how great the child is. Usually more about how much he or she is a headache or a bag of work. That never actually means she isn’t proud. But that’s how we have learnt to communicate. This has adverse effects for children growing up though and only contributes to a cycle of denigration.

Dr Joy DeGruy, author of Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome, gives the parallel of how enslaved mothers would derogate their children when communicating with the planters, as a tactic to ensure they weren’t sold. Who would want to buy a ‘worthless’, ‘trouble-making’, ‘good-for-nutten’ little boy or girl to work for them?

One does not need to be personally affected by trauma in order to suffer Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or in this case, Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome. A number of epigenetic studies suggest that traumatic events in an individual’s lifetime can alter DNA expression and that these epigenetic alterations can be passed down through generations. The Dutch Hunger Winter Families study is one such piece of research.

TERRIBLE FAMINE

Towards the end of World War II, between September 1944 and May 1945, there was a terrible famine in the Netherlands. The Nazis had blocked all food supplies to certain parts of the country and by May of 1945 about 20,000 Dutch had died of starvation.

The Dutch Hunger Winter study found epigenetic changes to the DNA of persons who were in utero during the famine and were born to starved mothers. This cohort of people grew to become notably heavier in adulthood than those born before or after the famine. They also had an increased incidence of obesity and diabetes and, interestingly, schizophrenia.

Even though this famine ended almost 80 years ago, its epigenetic impact still lingers. Similarly, the impact of the brutalisation of millions of Africans continues to have an impact on the psychological health and behaviour of descendants, a mere 200 years later.

A 2015 study conducted by Dr Rachel Yehuda also found that for children of Holocaust survivors, a stress gene linked to PTSD showed epigenetic modification that could only be linked to the parents’ exposure to the Holocaust.

By extension, yes, the slave trade is definitely a thing of the past – with present-day implications. An attempt can be made to right the wrongs of the past, partly by addressing these present-day implications. Either way, a knowledge of why we are where we are helps us in moving forward.

- Kristen Gyles is a free-thinking public affairs opinionator. Email feedback to kristengyles@gmail.com.