Search This Blog

Monday, April 24, 2023

Christmas controversies

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_controversies
 
A 1931 edition of the Soviet magazine Bezbozhnik, published by the League of Militant Atheists, depicting an Orthodox Christian priest being forbidden to take home a tree for the celebration of Christmastide, which was banned under the Marxist–Leninist doctrine of state atheism

Christmas is the Christian celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ, which, in Western Christian Churches, is held annually on 25 December. For centuries, it has been the subject of several reformations, both religious and secular.

In the 17th century, the Puritans had laws forbidding the ecclesiastical celebration of Christmas, unlike the Catholic Church or the Anglican Church, the latter from which they separated. With the atheistic Cult of Reason in power during the era of Revolutionary France, Christian Christmas religious services were banned and the three kings cake was forcibly renamed the "equality cake" under anticlerical government policies. Later, in the 20th century, Christmas celebrations were prohibited under the doctrine of state atheism in the Soviet Union. In Nazi Germany, organized religion as a whole was attacked as an enemy of the state and Christmas celebrations were corrupted so as to serve the Party's racist ideology.

Modern-day controversy occurs mainly in China, the United States and to a much lesser extent the United Kingdom. Some opponents have denounced the generic term "holidays" and avoidance of using the term "Christmas" as being politically correct. This often involves objections to government or corporate efforts to acknowledge Christmas in a way that is multiculturally sensitive.

History

Date

Mosaic of Jesus as Christus Sol (Christ the Sun) in Mausoleum M in the third-century necropolis under St Peter's Basilica in Rome

Sextus Julius Africanus, a historian of the second century, maintained that Jesus of Nazareth was conceived on 25 March, which the Christian Church came to celebrate as the Feast of the Annunciation. With the term of a pregnancy being nine months, Sextus Julius Africanus held that Jesus was born on 25 December, which the Western Christian Church established as Christmas. Recorded in Sextus Julius Africanus's Chronographiai (221 AD), this thesis is corroborated by an interpretation of Gospel of Luke that places the appearance of Gabriel to Zechariah on the observance of Yom Kippur that occurs around October, as "the worshipers were praying outside of the Temple and not within" for "only the priest could enter the Temple at this time to conduct the proper rituals"; because Jesus was six months younger than his cousin John the Baptist, Jesus was conceived in March and born in late December.

An early mention of Christmas observance is from 129 AD when a Roman bishop decreed: "In the Holy Night of the Nativity of our Lord and Saviour, all shall solemnly sing the Angels Hymn." In 274 AD, Emperor Aurelian made a festival for Sol Invictus ("The Unconquered Sun"), originally a Syrian deity who was later adopted as the chief deity of the Roman Empire. While some writers believe this may have influenced the Christian feast of Christmas, other historians such as Louis Duchesne, Hieronymus Engberding [de] and Thomas Talley maintain that the Christian feast of Christmas was already being celebrated and that Aurelian established Dies Natalis Solis Invicti in order to compete with the Christian feast of Christmas.

The Christian Council of Tours of 567 established Advent as the season of preparation for Christmas, as well as the season of Christmastide, declaring "the twelve days between Christmas and Epiphany to be one unified festal cycle", thus giving significance both to 25 December and to 6 January, a solution that would "coordinate the solar Julian calendar with the lunar calendars of its provinces in the east".

In Christian belief, the teaching that God came into the world in the form of man to atone for the sins of humanity, rather than the exact birth date, is considered to be the primary purpose in celebrating Christmas; the exact date of the birth of Jesus of Nazareth is considered a non-issue.

During the winter, the burning of logs was a common practice among many cultures across Northern Europe. In Scandinavia, this was known as the yule log and originally had a pagan significance; after the Christianization of Scandinavia, it may have been incorporated into the Christian celebration of Christmas there, with the pagan significance no longer remaining. However, as there are no existing references to a Christmas log prior to the 16th century, the burning of the Christmas block may have been an early modern invention by Christians unrelated to the pagan practice.

Many other Advent and Christmastide customs developed within the context of Christianity, such as the lighting of the Advent wreath (invented by Lutherans in 16th century Germany), the marking of an Advent calendar (first used by Lutherans in the 19th century), the lighting of a Christingle (invented by Moravians in 19th century Britain), and the viewing of a Nativity play (first enacted by Catholic monks in 11th century Italy).

Puritan

Prior to the Victorian era, Christmas was primarily a religious holiday observed by Christians of the Roman Catholic, Anglican, and Lutheran denominations. Its importance was often considered secondary to that of Epiphany and Easter.

The Puritans, on the other hand, objected to the Christian feast of Christmas, during the English Interregnum, when England was ruled by a Puritan Parliament. Puritans sought to remove elements they viewed as unbiblical, from their practice of Christianity, including those feasts established by the Anglican Church. In 1647, the Puritan-led English Parliament banned the celebration of Christmas, replacing it with a day of fasting and considering it "a popish festival with no biblical justification", and a time of wasteful and immoral behaviour. Puritans disliked traditions that inverted social hierarchies, such as wassailing in which the rich were expected to give to the poor on demand, and which with the addition of alcohol sometimes turned into violent intrusions. Protests followed as pro-Christmas rioting broke out in several cities and for weeks Canterbury was controlled by the rioters, who decorated doorways with holly and shouted royalist slogans. The book The Vindication of Christmas (London, 1652) argued against the Puritans, and makes note of Old English Christmas traditions, dinner, roast apples on the fire, card playing, dances with "plow-boys" and "maidservants", old Father Christmas and carol singing. The Restoration of King Charles II in 1660 ended the ban. Poor Robin's Almanack contained the lines: "Now thanks to God for Charles return, / Whose absence made old Christmas mourn. / For then we scarcely did it know, / Whether it Christmas were or no." Many clergymen still disapproved of Christmas celebration. In Scotland, the presbyterian Church of Scotland also discouraged observance of Christmas. James VI commanded its celebration in 1618, but attendance at church was scant.

In Colonial America, the Pilgrims of New England disapproved of Christmas. The Plymouth Pilgrims put their loathing for the day into practice in 1620 when they spent their first Christmas Day in the New World building their first structure in the New World—thus demonstrating their complete contempt for the day. Non-Puritans in New England deplored the loss of the holidays enjoyed by the laboring classes in England. Christmas observance was outlawed in Boston in 1659, with a fine of five shillings.[48][49][50] The ban by the Puritans was revoked in 1681 by an English appointed governor, Edmund Andros; however, it was not until the mid-19th century that celebrating Christmas became fashionable in the Boston region. Before the Declaration of Independence in 1776, it was not widely celebrated in the American Colonies.

19th century

With the appearance of the Oxford Movement in the Anglican Church, a revival in the traditional rituals and religious observances associated with Christmastime occurred. This ushered in "the development of richer and more symbolic forms of worship, the building of neo-Gothic churches, and the revival and increasing centrality of the keeping of Christmas itself as a Christian festival" as well as "special charities for the poor" in addition to "special services and musical events". Historian Ronald Hutton believes the current state of observance of Christmas is largely the result of a mid-Victorian revival of the holiday, spearheaded by Charles Dickens, who "linked worship and feasting, within a context of social reconciliation". Dickens was not the first author to celebrate Christmastide in literature, but it was he who superimposed his humanitarian vision of the holiday upon the public, an idea that has been termed as Dickens's "Carol Philosophy".

Modern celebrations of Christmas include more commercial activity in comparison with those of the past.

Historian Stephen Nissenbaum contends that the modern celebration in the United States was developed in New York State from defunct and imagined Dutch and English traditions in order to refocus the holiday from one where groups of young men went from house to house demanding alcohol and food into one centered on the happiness of children. He notes that there was a deliberate effort to prevent children from becoming greedy in response. Christmas was not proclaimed a holiday by the United States Congress until 1870.

20th century

In the early 20th century, Christian writers such as C. S. Lewis noted what he saw as a distinct split between the religious and commercialized observance of Christmas, the latter of which he deplored. In Xmas and Christmas: A Lost Chapter from Herodotus, Lewis gives a satire of the observance of two simultaneous holidays in "Niatirb" ("Britain" spelled backward) from the supposed view of the ancient Greek historian Herodotus (484–425 BC). One of the holidays, "Exmas", is observed by a flurry of compulsory commercial activity and expensive indulgence in alcoholic beverages. The other, "Crissmas", is observed in Niatirb's temples. Lewis's narrator asks a priest why they kept Crissmas on the same day as Exmas. He receives the reply:

"It is not lawful, O Stranger, for us to change the date of Crissmas, but would that Zeus would put it into the minds of the Niatirbians to keep Exmas at some other time or not to keep it at all. For Exmas and the Rush distract the minds even of the few from sacred things. And we indeed are glad that men should make merry at Crissmas; but in Exmas there is no merriment left." And when I asked him why they endured the Rush, he replied, "It is, O Stranger, a racket ..."

The Soviet Union (until 1936), and certain other Communist regimes, banned Christmas observances in accordance with the Marxist–Leninist doctrine of state atheism. In the 1920s USSR, the League of Militant Atheists encouraged school pupils to campaign against Christmas traditions, such as the Christmas tree, and encouraged them to spit on crucifixes as protest against this holiday; the League established an antireligious holiday to be the 31st of each month as a replacement.

Most customs traditionally associated with Christmas, such as decorated trees (renamed as New Year Trees), presents, and Ded Moroz (Father Frost), were later reinstated in Soviet society, but tied to New Year's Day instead; this tradition remains as of the present day. However, most Russian Christians are of the Orthodox community, whose religious festivals (Christmas, Easter etc.) do not necessarily coincide precisely with those of the main western Christian churches (Catholic or Protestant), because of continued connection of the church calendar to the Julian calendar.

Likewise, in Nazi Germany, "because Nazi ideologues saw organized religion as an enemy of the totalitarian state, propagandists sought to deemphasize — or eliminate altogether—the Christian aspects of the holiday" and as a result "propagandists tirelessly promoted numerous Nazified Christmas songs, which replaced Christian themes with the regime's racial ideologies."

China

The People's Republic of China has a doctrine of state atheism and prior to the start of the Christmas season in 2018, the Chinese government shut down many Christian churches and arrested their pastors to prevent them from celebrating the holiday. According to NetEase, on the Christmas Day of 2014, a "Boycotting Christmas" campaign launched in downtown Changsha, Hunan Province, China.

United States

The expression "the War on Christmas" has been used in the media to denote Christmas-related controversies. The term was popularized by conservative commentators such as Peter Brimelow and Bill O'Reilly beginning in the early 2000s.

Brimelow, O'Reilly and others claimed that any specific mention of the term "Christmas" or its religious aspects was increasingly censored, avoided, or discouraged by a number of advertisers, retailers, government sectors (prominently schools), and other public and secular organizations. As the egalitarian term "holidays" gained popularity, some Americans and Canadians denounced that usage as a capitulation to political correctness.

Jeff Schweitzer, a commentator for The Huffington Post, addressed the position of commentators such as O'Reilly, stating that "There is no war on Christmas; the idea is absurd at every level. Those who object to being forced to celebrate another's religion are drowning in Christmas in a sea of Christianity dominating all aspects of social life. An 80 percent majority can claim victimhood only with an extraordinary flight from reality."

Heather Long, an American columnist for The Guardian, addressed the "politically correct" question in America over use of the term "holidays", writing, "people who are clearly celebrating Christmas in their homes tend to be conflicted about what to say in the workplace or at school. No one wants to offend anyone or make assumptions about people's religious beliefs, especially at work."

Christmas Day is recognized as an official federal holiday by the United States government. The American Civil Liberties Union argues that government-funded displays of Christmas imagery and traditions violate the U.S. Constitution—specifically the First Amendment, which prohibits the establishment by Congress of a national religion; on the other hand the Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian advocacy organization, believes that Christmas displays are consistent with the First Amendment, as well as court rulings that have repeatedly upheld accommodationism. The debate over whether religious displays should be placed within public schools, courthouses, and other government buildings has been heated in recent years.

In some cases, popular aspects of Christmas, such as Christmas trees, lights, and decorating are still prominently showcased, but are associated with unspecified "holidays" rather than with Christmas. The controversy also includes objections to policies that prohibit government or schools from forcing unwilling participants to take part in Christmas ceremonies. In other cases, the Christmas tree, as well as Nativity scenes, have not been permitted to be displayed in public settings altogether. Also, several U.S. chain retailers, such as Walmart, Macy's, and Sears, have experimented with greeting their customers with "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings" rather than with "Merry Christmas".

Supreme Court rulings, starting with Lynch v. Donnelly in 1984, have permitted religious themes in government-funded Christmas displays that had "legitimate secular purposes". Since these rulings have been splintered and have left governments uncertain of their limits, many such displays have included secular elements such as reindeer, snowmen and elves along with the religious elements. Other recent court cases have brought up additional issues such as the inclusion of Christmas carols in public school performances, but none of these cases have reached the Supreme Court.

A controversy regarding these issues arose in 2002, when the New York City public school system banned the display of Nativity scenes but allowed the display of what the policy deemed less overtly religious symbols such as Christmas trees, Hanukkah menorahs, and the Muslim star and crescent. The school system successfully defended its policy in Skoros v. City of New York (2006).

Retail

Since at least 2005, religious conservative groups and media in the United States, such as the American Family Association (AFA) and Liberty Counsel, have called for boycotts of various prominent secular organizations, particularly retail giants, demanding that they use the term "Christmas", rather than solely "holiday", in their print, TV, online, and in-store marketing and advertising. This was also seen by some as containing a hidden anti-Jewish message. All the major retailers named denied the charges.

2000s

  • In 2005, Walmart was criticized by the Catholic League for avoiding the word "Christmas" in any of their marketing efforts. The company had downplayed the term "Christmas" in much of its advertising for several years. This caused some backlash among the public, prompting some groups to pass around petitions and threaten boycotts against the company, as well as several other prominent retailers that practiced similar obscurations of the holiday. In 2006, in response to the public outcry, Walmart announced that they were amending their policy and would be using "Christmas" rather than "holiday". Among the changes, they noted that the former "Holiday Shop" would become the "Christmas Shop", and that there would be a "countin' down the days to Christmas" feature.
  • In 2005, Target Corporation was criticized by the American Family Association for their decision not to use the term "Christmas" in any of their in-store, online, or print advertising.
  • When it was revealed in November 2006 that Walmart would be using the term "Christmas" in their advertising campaign, an article about the issue initiated by USA Today pointed out that Best Buy Corporation would be among the retailers that would not be using "Christmas" at all in their advertising that year. Dawn Bryant, a Best Buy spokeswoman, stated: "We are going to continue to use the term holiday because there are several holidays throughout that time period, and we certainly need to be respectful of all of them." The AFA launched a campaign against Best Buy's policy. In reaction to the same policy, the Catholic League placed Best Buy on its 2006 Christmas Watch List.
  • In late October 2008, U.S. hardware retailer The Home Depot was criticized by the AFA for using terms such as "holiday" and "Hanukkah" on their website, but avoiding the term "Christmas". The retailer responded by saying they will be adjusting their website to make references to Christmas more prominent. Snopes later stated that the AFA's characterization of Home Depot's advertising was false, as the retailer's advertising had initially included several instances of the word "Christmas".
  • On 11 November 2009, the AFA called for a "limited two-month boycott" of Gap, Inc. over what they claimed was the "company's censorship of the word 'Christmas.'" In an advertising campaign launched by Gap on 12 November, the term "Christmas" was both spoken and printed on their website at least once, and a television ad entitled "Go Ho Ho" featured lyrics such as "Go Christmas, Go Hanukkah, Go Kwanzaa, Go Solstice" and "whatever holiday you wanna-kah". On 17 November, AFA responded to this campaign by condemning the ads for references to the "pagan holiday" of solstice, and declined to call off the boycott. On 24 November, the AFA ended the boycott, after learning from Gap's corporate vice president of communications that the company planned to launch a new commercial with a "very strong Christmas theme".

2010s

  • In November 2010, the word "Christmas" on two signs at Philadelphia's Christmas Village was removed by the organizers after complaints, but restored three days later after the mayor intervened.
  • In 2014, Northwest University closed the campus completely on Christmas Eve, and all the requests for leave were rejected by the school officials.
  • In November 2015, the coffee shop chain Starbucks introduced Christmas-themed cups colored in solid red and containing no ornamentation besides the Starbucks logo, contrasting previous designs which featured winter-related imagery, and non-religious Christmas symbols such as reindeer and ornaments. On 5 November, a video was posted on Facebook by evangelist and self-proclaimed "social media personality" Joshua Feuerstein, in which he accused Starbucks of "hating Jesus" by removing Christmas-oriented imagery from the cup, followed by him "tricking" a barista into writing "Merry Christmas" on the cup, and encouraging others to do the same. The video became a viral video, spurring discussions and commentary: businessman and Republican 2016 president-candidate (later elected) Donald Trump supported Feuerstein's claim by suggesting a boycott of Starbucks, saying that "If I become president, we're all going to be saying 'Merry Christmas' again." Many social media users, including other Christians, perceived the criticism to be an overreaction. In contrast to the controversy, the color red has been associated with Christmas since at least the 19th century, and is often present in Christmas decorations and Christian services, such as the red ribbon that is tied around the oranges used for Christingles. Also in 2015, Resolution 564 received 36 sponsors including Doug Lamborn to assert Christmas in public. Newt Gingrich's stance of defence against the supposed "War on Christmas" resonated in popular culture for years.

Canada

In 2007, a controversy arose when a public school in Ottawa, Ontario, planned to have the children in its primary choir sing a version of the song "Silver Bells" with the word "Christmas" replaced by "festive"; the concert also included the songs "Candles of Christmas" and "It's Christmas" with the original lyrics. In 2011, in Embrun, Ontario, near Ottawa, some parents were displeased when a school replaced the Christmas concert it had held in previous years with a craft sale and winter concert scheduled for February.

United Kingdom

"Poster with the headline 'Christmas in Birmingham', then a picture of a mother and children, looking at toys, with the words 'Come for the shopping, stay for the day'. Below that, in smaller type, the Birmingham City Council and Winterval 1998 logos."
1998 'Christmas in Birmingham' poster, with the Winterval logo in smaller type than the word 'Christmas'

In the United Kingdom, the temporary promotion of the phrase Winterval for a whole season of events (first from 20 November to 31 December 1997 and then from Halloween to the Chinese New Year in January) by Birmingham City Council in the late 1990s remains a controversial example of "Christmas controversy". Critics attack the use of the word "Winterval" as being "political correctness gone mad", and accuse council officials of trying to take the Christ out of Christmas. The council responded to the criticism by stating that Christmas-related words and symbols were prominent in its publicity material: "there was a banner saying Merry Christmas across the front of the council house, Christmas lights, Christmas trees in the main civil squares, regular carol-singing sessions by school choirs, and the Lord Mayor sent a Christmas card with a traditional Christmas scene wishing everyone a Merry Christmas"

In November 2009, the city council of Dundee was accused of banning Christmas because it promoted its celebrations as the Winter Night Light festival, initially with no specific references to Christianity. Local church leaders were invited to participate in the event, and they did.

South Africa

The Christian holidays of Christmas Day and Good Friday remained in secular post-apartheid South Africa's calendar of public holidays. The Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities (CRL Rights Commission), a chapter nine institution established in 2004, held countrywide consultative public hearings in June and July 2012 to assess the need for a review of public holidays following the receipt of complaints from minority groups about unfair discrimination. The CRL Rights Commission stated that they would submit their recommendations to the Department of Home Affairs, the Department of Labour, various Portfolio Committees and the Office of the Presidency by October 2012. The CRL Rights Commission published its recommendations on 17 April 2013, including the scrapping of some existing public holidays to free up days for some non-Christian religious public holidays.

Norway

The common practice of schoolchildren visiting local churches for Christmas services in December is opposed by the Norwegian Humanist Association, the Children's Ombudsman and by the Union of Education. There have been several local controversies over the issue. The political parties have mostly been in favor of this being decided by the schools themselves, but the government has underlined that schools who participate in Christmas services must offer an alternative for pupils who do not want to attend and that services must not take place on the day that marks the closing of schools before the Christmas holiday. The Solberg's Cabinet says in its government declaration that it looks positively upon schools taking part in services in churches before religious holidays.

According to a 2013 poll by Norstat for Vårt Land, 68% of Norwegians support having school-arranged Christmas services, while 14% are opposed. 17% do not hold any opinion on the issue.

Sweden

A 2011 school law stating that public schools should be non-confessional led to debate over what this meant for the tradition that schools gather in churches in December to celebrate Advent, Lucia or Christmas. Eighty thousand Swedes signed a 2012 protest letter (Adventsuppropet) initiated by the newspaper Dagen to Minister for Education Jan Björklund, demanding that school visits to churches should still be allowed to include religious rituals. The minister clarified that church visits before Christmas might include the singing of Christmas hymns and a priest talking about the Christmas gospel, but common prayers and reading a Confession of Faith would violate the law.

In 2012, Sveriges Radio reported that about one in six schools had changed the way they mark Christmas traditions as a result of the new law.

Christmas tree

In 2007, U.S. hardware store chain Lowe's published a catalog that accidentally referred to Christmas trees as "family trees".

The Soviet Union, and certain other Communist regimes, banned Christmas observances in accordance with the Marxist–Leninist doctrine of state atheism. In the 1920s USSR, the League of Militant Atheists encouraged school pupils to campaign against Christmas traditions such as the Christmas tree and the country rehashed the Christmas tree as the New Year tree, devoid of its Christian associations.

Since the 1980s, there have been instances in the United States and Canada when officials used the term "holiday tree" to refer to what is commonly called a "Christmas tree". Reaction to such nomenclature has been mixed.

In 2005, when the city of Boston labeled their official decorated tree as a holiday tree, the Nova Scotian tree farmer who donated the tree responded that he would rather have put the tree in a wood chipper than have it named a "holiday" tree.

In 2009 in West Jerusalem, the Lobby for Jewish Values, with support of the Jerusalem Rabbinate, handed out fliers condemning Christmas and called for a boycott of "restaurants and hotels that sell or put up Christmas trees and other 'foolish' Christian symbols".

The Brussels Christmas tree in the Belgian capital sparked controversy in December 2012, as it was part of renaming the Christmas Market as "Winter Pleasures". Local opposition saw it as appeasement of the Muslim minority in the city.

Efforts have also been made to rename official public holiday trees as "Christmas trees". In 2002, a bill was introduced in the California Senate to rename the State Holiday Tree the California State Christmas Tree; while this measure did not pass, at the official lighting of the tree on 4 December 2007, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger referred to the tree as a Christmas tree in his remarks and in the press release his office issued after the ceremony. Schwarzenegger had previously ended the secular practice of calling it a "holiday tree" in 2004 during the 73rd annual lighting. The name change was in honor of the late Senator William "Pete" Knight. Schwarzenegger said at Knight's funeral that he would change the name back to Christmas tree. Knight had lobbied unsuccessfully to change the name after Governor Davis decided to call it a holiday tree.

The Michigan Senate had a debate in 2005 over whether the decorated tree in front of the Michigan Capitol would continue to be called a holiday tree (as it had been since the early 1990s) or named a Christmas tree. The question was revisited in 2006, when the bipartisan Michigan Capitol Committee voted unanimously to use the term Christmas tree. And in 2007, Wisconsin lawmakers considered whether to rename the tree in the Wisconsin Capitol rotunda, a holiday tree since 1985, the Wisconsin State Christmas Tree.

Rejection among certain groups

Atheism

With the atheistic Cult of Reason in power during the era of Revolutionary France, Christian Christmas church services were banned and the three kings cake was forcibly renamed the "equality cake" under antireligious government policies. In the former Eastern Bloc, where governments implemented the policy of state atheism, Christmas and other religious holidays were "effectively banned". The League of Militant Atheists organized alternate festivals "specifically to denigrate religious holidays" in the USSR. In the United States, some atheists choose to celebrate Christmas fully, while others celebrate only portions of the holiday, and others reject it completely. In China, which is officially an atheist state, some officials in 2018 raided Christian churches just prior to Christmas and forced them to close.

Islam

The celebration of Christmas has occasionally been criticized by Muslims in Turkey. Turkey has adopted a secular version of Christmas and a Santa Claus figure named Noel Baba (from the French Père Noël). During the 2013 holiday season, a Muslim youth group launched an anti-Santa Claus campaign, protesting against the celebration of Christmas in the country. In December 2015, political and religious activists organized protests against the growing influence of Christmas and Santa Claus in Turkish society. In Indonesia, some radicalists proposing December 25th as "World Moslem Convert Day" (Hari Muallaf Sedunia), even though some people dismiss this idea as asinine and dangerous.

Restorationist Movement

Some churches, sects, and communities of the Restoration Movement reject the observance of Christmas for theological reasons; these include Jehovah's Witnesses, Armstrongites, the True Jesus Church, The Seventh Day Adventist Church, the Church of God (Seventh-Day), the Iglesia ni Cristo, the Christian Congregation in Brazil, the Christian Congregation in the United States, and the Churches of Christ, as well as certain reformed and fundamentalist churches of various persuasions, including some Independent Baptists and Oneness Pentecostals.

Xmas

The December 1957 News and Views published by the Church League of America, a conservative organization founded in 1937, attacked the use of Xmas in an article titled "X=The Unknown Quantity". The claims were picked up later by Gerald L. K. Smith, who in December 1966 claimed that Xmas was a "blasphemous omission of the name of Christ" and that "'X' is referred to as being symbolical of the unknown quantity." Smith further argued that Jews introduced Santa Claus to suppress the New Testament accounts of Jesus, and that the United Nations, at the behest of "world Jewry", had "outlawed the name of Christ". There is, however, a well-documented history of use of Χ (actually a chi) as an abbreviation for "Christ" (Χριστός) and possibly also a symbol of the cross. The abbreviation appears on many Orthodox Christian religious icons.

Jim Crow economy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The term Jim Crow economy applies to a specific set of economic conditions in the United States during the period when the Jim Crow laws were in effect to force racial segregation; however, it should also be taken as an attempt to disentangle the economic ramifications from the politico-legal ramifications of "separate but equal" de jure segregation, to consider how the economic impacts might have persisted beyond the politico-legal ramifications.

It includes the intentional effects of the laws themselves, effects that were not explicitly written into laws, and effects that continued after the laws had been repealed. Some of these impacts continue into the present. The primary differences of the Jim Crow economy, compared to a situation like apartheid, revolve around the alleged equality of access, especially in regard to land ownership and entry into the competitive labor market; however, those two categories often relate to ancillary effects in all other aspects of life.

Etymology

Frequently sources will mention the Jim Crow economy, and then proceed to discuss only what is specific to the topic being broached by a particular author; however, unlike the laws passed to restrict access to services and education, the laws that governed the economy were often written in race-neutral terms, with inequality stemming from enforcement decisions. The economic impacts of Jim Crow are also intertwined with changes in the overall economy of the United States, from the Civil War through the 20th century. There is a temporal rhythm to the economic impacts of Jim Crow; from the Reconstruction onward, social trends preceded policy changes that, in turn, preceded economic changes.

History

Reconstruction

During the decade following the Civil War, the freed slaves made gains in political participation, land ownership, and personal wealth; but, those gains were somewhat temporary, perhaps because the mood of the federal policy-makers changed from punishing secessionists, to repatriating them. In the decades following the closure of the Freedmen's Bureau, in the South, black political participation was curtailed, the potential for acquiring new land was diminished, and ultimately Plessy v. Ferguson would usher in the Jim Crow era.

Stagnation

By the end of the first decade of the 20th century, not only was African American progress halted, it was regressing. Leading up to and following World War I, the agrarian economy of the South was in dire straits, beginning a slow shift to urbanization and limited industrialization; this period also saw the beginning of the Great Migration. The 1930s saw increasing urbanization and industrialization in the South; and, federal policies of the time, such as the National Industrial Recovery Act and the Fair Labor Standards Act, attempted to force economic parity between the South and the rest of the nation (Wright 1987:171).

Aftermath

By the time of the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the scientific racism that had underlain much of the justification for the Jim Crow era legal racism had been discredited, the South had substantially closed its wealth gap with the rest of the nation, and America was both urbanized and industrialized. However, the African American struggle to earn economic parity, that had made progress during the first half century of the postbellum era, had largely been reversed during the second half. Legally, equality was assured, but that did little to actually promulgate equal conditions in daily life.

Some of the gains in the South's economic relation to the rest of the U.S. can be explained by population shifts to other regions; so, it may have had as much to do with spreading poverty around, as spreading wealth around. In the period when agriculture had formed the basis of the economy, land and labor were intimately tied together in the ownership of farmland; in the shift to urban industrialization, neither land tenure, nor labor opportunities were necessarily improved for African Americans. Thus, to understand the Jim Crow economy it is required to look to the social and political climate prior to the implementation of the laws, and to the economic inertia that continued to impact people's lives after the repeal of the laws.

African American land ownership

In the decades following the Civil War, there were steady increases in African American ownership of farmland in the South, from 3 million acres (12,000 km2) in 1875, to 8 million acres (32,000 km2) in 1890, 12 million acres (49,000 km2) at the turn of the century, and peaking at 12,800,000 acres (52,000 km2) in 1910 (Reynolds 2002:4). Other estimates suggest that total black ownership of land in the South may have been as much as 15 million acres (61,000 km2) within a half century after emancipation (Mitchell 2000:507). There were also setbacks, due to property being taken illegally; in the first 30 years of the 20th century, 24,000 acres (97 km2) were taken, from 406 separate landowners (Darity Jr. & Frank 2003:327). By 1930, the number of black owned farms was 3% lower than what it had been at the turn of the century (Woodman 1997:22).

Rural

After being freed, there were 2 main ways for African Americans to acquire land in the South: either buy it from a private landowner, or stake a claim to public land offered by the federal government under laws like the Southern Homestead Act of 1866, and by state governments, such as South Carolina's Land Commission. The Southern Homestead Act opened up the transfer of public land in the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, and Mississippi, with the hope of providing land to freedmen by limiting the claims to 80 acres (320,000 m2) for the first 2 years (Pope 1970:203).

The results were less purchasers than had been hoped for, largely because the recently freed slaves did not have the material means to settle unimproved property, and only 4,000 of the 11, 633 total claims were registered by freedmen (Pope 1970:205). Within the South, the Southern Homestead Act was seen as further punishment of attempting to secede; this was substantiated, by the repeal of 1876, when old enmities gave way to the promise of federal revenues (Gates 1940:311). After the Act was repealed, cash sales of public lands were reopened to large-scale purchasers; the repeal was reversed in 1888, but prior to that point more than 5,500,000 acres (22,000 km2) of land in the 5 public land states of the South were sold off to land speculators and timber harvesters (Gates 1936:667).

South Carolina's Land Commission was a unique case of a Reconstruction-era state government organization that was formed explicitly for the purpose of selling bonds to fund the purchase of non-operating plantations and selling the land to small farm operators over a 10-year repayment schedule at 7% annual interest (Bethel 1997:20). From 1868 to 1879, the Land Commission sold farmland to 14,000 African American families (Bethel 1997:27). Another well documented sample of African American property ownership in a non-public land state comes from census and tax records in Georgia. In the year following the end of the Civil War, black property owners accumulated approximately 10,000 acres (40 km2) of land, with a value of about $22,500; however, on average, African Americans in Georgia held a total wealth of less than $1 per person (Higgs 1982:728). Between 1880 and 1910, Georgia's African Americans increased their average wealth, from $8 per person to $26.59, with some setbacks occurring around the turn of the century; however, relative to white Georgians, that amounted to an increase from 2% to 6% of total wealth held (Higgs 1982:729).

By expanding the defined territory of the South to 16 states (including Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia), in 1910, there were 175,000 black farm owners compared to 1.15 million white farm owners (Higgs 1973:150). Discounting the states of Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Oklahoma, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia, the average white-owned farm was nearly twice the size of the average black-owned farm (Higgs 1973:162).

Land ownership was an important source of capital for both groups, but the ability to use the land with maximal productivity was not equally afforded to both groups. From the antebellum period up to the mid-1880s, all land owners were highly dependent on credit from merchant transporters of cotton; however, as the transportation infrastructure improved the white land owners were able to use their greater land holdings to attract credit directly from Northern financiers, and were thus able to usurp the position of the merchant transporters that furnished necessary staple goods to cotton growers (Woodman 1977:547).

Drawing from a representative sample of 4,695 farms in 27 counties in Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, and South Carolina, regarding the 1879-1880 cotton crop, white owners were able to leave more than 4 times the amount of land fallow, had nearly twice the value in farming implements, and were more than a third more likely to have access to fertilizer than were the black land owners (Ransom & Sutch 1973:141). Thus, African Americans were laboring harder for lower crop returns, and putting the long-term productivity of their land in greater jeopardy (Ransom & Sutch 1973:142).

Between 1900 and 1930, in the South, 4.7% of black farm owners became tenant farmers; while 9.5% of white farmers were reduced from owners to tenants during that period, that amounted to only 46.6% of all white farmers being tenants compared to 79.3% of all black farmers (Woodman 1997:9). Moreover, there were fewer opportunities to acquire land, as white owners refused to sell land to black purchasers regardless of the price being offered, and there was little legal recourse when property was lost due to extra-legal practices (Higgs 1973:165). In any case, the availability of funds was greatly reduced by the failure of government-initiated lending institutions like the Freedman's Savings and Trust Company; and, lending organizations founded by benevolent societies often found themselves too overextended to withstand moderate levels of default on loans, such as the failure of the True Reformers Savings Banks in 1910 (Heen 2009:386).

Lending organizations outside the South, backed by Northern capitalists, were mostly unwilling to make loans supporting African American land purchase, out of concern that the development of a class of black landowners would result in increased demands from Northern industrial workers (Ezeani 1977:106). With new land being unobtainable, and existing land only able to be subdivided so far before becoming unusable as farmland, the progeny of the land owning generation were pressured to move to Southern cities, or outside the South completely (Bethel 1997:98;101). When the U.S. Became involved with World War I, Northern cities became the focus of out-migration, and Northern industry became the employer of many former farmers (Tolnay et al.:991). The South was much slower to industrialize; and, where predominantly white land owners retained large tracts of farmland, and where the population of black laborers remained high, agriculture continued as the economic base (Roscigno & Tomaskovic-Devey 1996:576).

Urban

African American movement into urban centers had begun just after the end of the Civil War; and, by 1870, the black population, in cities greater than 4,000, was increased by 80%, compared to only a 13% increase in the white population (Kellogg 1977:312). In contrast to the antebellum urban settlement pattern, cities that rose to prominence in the postbellum years tended to be more highly segregated (Groves & Muller 1975:174). To provide an example of monetary value, in Georgia, African American holdings of urban property increase from a value of $1.2 million in 1880 to $8.8 million in 1910, even though the properties were often in the least desirable locations; however, at the end of World War I, much of that property was sold off to white buyers, as African Americans started moving to Northern cities in large numbers (Higgs 1982:730-731).

There were no explicit racial zoning ordinances in Southern cities prior to 1910; however, the individuals who developed and sold real estate in these areas often refused to sell to African American purchasers, outside of the prescribed areas (Kellogg 1982:41). In fact, the National Association of Realtors could take disciplinary action against a realtor for selling property to a person of a different race than those who presently lived in a particular neighborhood (Herrington et al.:163-164). The impact was greatest on those who migrated to cities early on; for those who migrated to the North, after 1965, there is evidence that they moved into neighborhoods that were the least segregated by race (Tolnay et al.:999).

The initial pattern, starting in the 19th century, was to allow the original enclave neighborhoods to become overcrowded, while individual property owners subdivided acreages in low-lying areas at the urban periphery or close to industrial areas that employed unskilled laborers (Groves & Muller 1975:170). Starting with Baltimore in 1910, a number of cities throughout the South starting implementing racial zoning codes; although these were overturned by the Buchanan v. Warley Supreme Court decision, in 1917, many large and small cities simply changed from overtly racial zoning to instituting zoning based on existing neighborhood composition (Silver 1997). In Alabama, "Birmingham continued illegally to enforce a racial zoning code until 1951" (Silver 1997:38).

Many growing cities and towns enacted their own Jim Crow ordinances; and, as they grew, they planned low-cost housing in areas with less access to public services, often using transportation corridors and natural features as buffer zones (Lee 1992:376-377). This practice was not restricted to the South; for example, in 1940s Detroit, a 6 ft (1.8 m). high concrete wall was erected to divide the Eight Mile-Wyoming area from neighboring white developments (Hayden 2003:111-112). These policies did not just impact the poor and undereducated; for example, around 1950, a cooperative housing development, that housed mainly faculty from Stanford University, limited availability to non-whites to 10%, in order to preserve financing for mortgages (Arrow 1998:92).

Demographics

Southern Labor

The first consideration in the availability of labor is the overall distribution of the African American population. In 1870, 85.3% of all African Americans lived in the South, by 1910 that number dropped to 82.8%, by 1950 the number had dwindled to 61.5%, and by 1990 it was down to 46.2% living in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, or Virginia (Shelley & Webster 1998:168).

In 1900, African Americans represented 34.3% of the South's overall population, in 1910 they still comprised 31.6% of the population; however, by 1950, they were only 22.5% of the total population, and that number dropped to 21% in 1960 (Nicholls 1964:35). Within the South, the African American urban population went from 8.8% in 1870 to 19.7% in 1910, while the white urban population went from 7.7% to 19.5% in that same time period; however, in 1920, 25.4% of whites and 23.5% of blacks were in urban areas, a slight change in the pace of urbanization that only occurred in the South (Roback 1984:1190). For the United States, as a whole, the African American population went from 79% rural in 1910, to 85% urban in 1980 (Aiken 1985:383).

Migration

From 1870 to 1880, the relative rates of out-migration for whites and blacks were fairly similar; however, in the decade from 1880 to 1890 black out-migration slowed relative to whites in Alabama (42.3%), Mississippi (17.8%), and Tennessee (72%), and in the decade from 1890 to 1900 the same relative decline began in Arkansas (9.3%), Georgia (45%), and Kentucky (73.9%), in total numbers (Roback 1984:1188-1189). In the decade of World War I both groups were leaving the South, with whites leaving at a slightly higher rate; but in the decade of World War II, the South lost 1.58 million blacks, and only 866,000 whites (Wright 1987:174).

In the decade from 1950 to 1960, the net out-migration was 1.2 million blacks, to only 234,000 whites; but, from 1960 to 1970 the picture changed dramatically, still losing 1.38 million blacks, but gaining 1.8 million whites. Starting in the decade of 1970–1980, there was a net influx of both groups, but with a markedly higher rate for whites, at 3.56 million to only 206,000. The raw numbers mask that the median education level of African Americans migrating out of the South was 6.6 years, up to 1960; whereas, by that same time, slightly more than a third of the white males in the South, with more than 5 years of college, had been born outside that region (Wright 1987:173). Thus, another factor that is masked by the raw numbers is that the areas African Americans were moving into were already experiencing black unemployment rates of up to 40%, and where there were few employers that utilized unskilled and undereducated labor, at all (Wright 1987:175).

Labor

Convicts leased to harvest timber, around 1915, Florida

Convict leasing

Under convict leasing, those who were convicted of a crime had their labor sold to employers by the prison system; in this case, the control over the prisoner was transferred to the employer, who had little concern for the well-being of the convict beyond the term of the lease (Roback 1984:1170). Ordinary debt peonage could affect any farmer working under the crop lien system, whether due to crop failure or merchant monopoly; however, the criminal-surety system functioned in a similar way, as the worker had little control over determining when their debt was to be considered repaid (Roback 1984:1174-1176).

Economic coercion

During the civil rights era, "economic coercion" was used to prevent participation, by denying credit, causing evictions, and canceling insurance policies (Bobo & Smith 1998:208). In 1973, only 2.25% of 5 million U.S. businesses were owned by African Americans; furthermore, 95% of those businesses employed fewer than 9 people, and two-thirds generated gross annual receipts of less than $50,000 (Bailey 1973:53). In the most extreme analysis, the level of urban residential segregation, along the unidirectional economic dependency of African American communities, presents the possibility that they may be treated as a "national collectivity of internal colonies" (Bailey 1973:61).

From this perspective, small black-owned businesses are seen as the "ghetto domestic sector," white-owned businesses that operate within the internal colonies are seen as the "ghetto enclave sector," and the black laborers that work outside the community are seen as the "ghetto labor-export sector" (Bailey 1973:62). The idea of a black internal colony makes it especially notable that the Jim Crow era was brought to a close not only by the internal influences of the civil rights movement, but also from external pressures brought by international trading partners and decolonized developing nations (Cable & Mix 2003:198).

Labor roles

The second consideration is how laws governing contract enforcement, enticement, emigrant agents, vagrancy, convict leasing, and debt peonage function to immobilize labor and restrict competition in a system where agriculture was the dominant consumer of labor. The South was overwhelmingly based on agricultural production through the postbellum years, only seeing substantial increases in industrial manufacturing starting in the 1930s; and, for those who did not own farmland, the dominant forms of employment were: farm laborer, sharecropper, share-renter, and fixed renter. Throughout this period there were some large landholders that used a set wage for farm laborers; however, the general lack of banks in the South made this arrangement problematic (Parker 1980:1024-1025).

Using a set wage for laborers without contracts presented the problem of either overpaying during periods when labor demands were low, or risking the loss of the laborer during the peak of harvest season (Roback 1984:1172). Thus, the dominant pattern was to contract labor for an entire season which, when combined with the lack of liquid capital, favored the development of sharecroppers who received a share of the profits from the sale of the crops at the end of the season, or share-renters who paid a share of their crops as rent at the end of the season (Parker 1980:1028-1030).

Whether white or black, the wage earned by the tenant farmer was relatively equal (Higgs 1973:151). Moreover, the tenant and the planter class landowner shared in the inherent risks of uncertain crop production; thus, external capital was invested in the merchant transporter who furnished staple goods in return, rather than in the agriculturalists directly (Parker 1980:1035). By the last decade of the 19th century, the planter class had recovered from the Civil War enough to both keep Northern industrialist manufacturing interests out of the South, and to take the role of merchant themselves (Woodman 1977:546).

As the planter class came back to prominence, the rural and urban middle class lost power, and the poor rural tenant farmers were set in opposition based both on race, and the inherent superiority of the wealthy landowner (Nicholls 1964:25). It was in this social climate that the Jim Crow laws began to appear, amidst the Populist challenges of the tenant farmers of both races; thus, the laws may be seen as a tactic to drive a wedge between the members of the lowest social class, by using obvious physical traits to define the opposing sides (Roscigno & Tomaskovic-Devey 1996:568).

Labor laws

Outside of laws that specifically addressed the issue of race, other laws that impacted the tenant farmer were often differentially enforced, to the detriment of African Americans. Enticement laws, and emigrant agent laws were geared toward immobilizing labor by preventing other employers from trying to lure employees away with promises of better wages; in the case of enticement the laws limited competition between landowners to the beginning of each contract season, and the emigrant agent laws created limitations on employers trying to lure out of the region altogether (Roback 1984:1166-1167;1169).

Contract enforcement laws were contingent on demonstration of an intent to defraud the contractor, but often failure to live up to the terms of the contract were treated as intentional; these laws were addressed in the Supreme Court decision of Bailey v. Alabama. Vagrancy laws functioned to keep workers from exiting the labor force entirely, and were often used to forcibly ensure that every able body was engaged in some form of work; in some cases, African Americans were made into misdemeanants, through vagrancy laws, just on the basis of traveling outside the territory where they were personally known (Roback 1984:1168). In any case, African Americans were often disadvantaged in obtaining work contracts outside the areas where they were personally known, due to employers not wanting to pay the cost of having to check on their claims of specific knowledge or skills germane to a task (Ransom & Sutch 1973:139).

Urban labor

The third consideration is how the overall transition from an agriculture-based economy to an urban, industrial economy. In the South, industrial growth started with labor-intensive, unskilled industries; for example, manufacturing employment increased from 14.5% in 1930 to 21.3% in 1960, but the increase was largest for non-durable goods (Nicholls 1964:26-27). For black males, in the South, agricultural employment dropped from 43.6% in 1940, to 4.9% in 1980; in that same time period, manufacturing employment rose from 14.2%, to 26.9% (Heckman & Payner 1989:148). There was also more pressure for African American women to work outside the home, often for low wages in the domestic service sector; for example, in the late 1930s, female domestics earned $3–8 per week, sometimes a bit less in the South (Thernstrom & Thernstrom 1999:35).

For black females, throughout the South, manufacturing employment rose from 3.5% in 1940, to 17.2% in 1980; for that same time period, personal service employment decreased from 65.8%, to 13.7% (Heckman & Payner 1989:1989). One study, looking at non-agricultural employment from 1920 to 1930, determined that black males were losing jobs not to industrial mechanization, but to white males (Anderson & Halcoussis 1996:12).

Finances

Insurance

One of the major sources of wealth transfer is inheritance (Darity Jr. & Nicholson 2005:81). Race-based life insurance rates began in the early 1880s, and included higher rates, reduced benefits, and no commission for the insurance agent on policies written for African Americans. When state laws were passed to prevent race-based differential insurance rates, companies simply stopped selling insurance to black clients in those states (Heen 2009:369). When customers that had existing policies tried to purchase additional coverage from their local agent, at times when the company had stopped soliciting policies in that area, they were told they could travel to a regional office to make their purchase (Heen 2009:390-391).

From 1896, scientific racism was used as the basis for declaring black clients as substandard risks, which also affected the ability of black-owned insurance companies to secure capital to provide their own policies (Heen 2009:387). By 1970, the black-owned insurance companies that had remained in business found themselves targeted for take over by white insurance companies that hoped to increase their number of black employees by acquiring smaller companies (Heen 2009:389). In the first decade of the 21st century, major insurance companies like Metropolitan Life, Prudential, American General, and John Hancock Life were still settling court cases brought by policy holders that had purchased their policies during the Jim Crow era (Heen 2009:360-361).

Property inheritance

Another economic impact of death is seen when the deceased does not have a will, and land is bequeathed to multiple people, under intestacy law, as tenancies in common (Mitchell 2000:507-508). Frequently, the recipients of such property do not realize that if one of the common owners wishes to sell their share, then the entire estate can be put up for partition sale. Most state statutes suggest that partition in kind be preferred over partition sale, except where properties cannot be divided equitably for the parties involved; however, many courts opt to require properties be put up for partition sale because the monetary value of the land is higher as a single parcel than a number of subdivided parcels, and also, to some extent, because the utility value of rural land is higher if it can be used a single productive unit (Mitchell 2000:514-515;563).

This means that a land developer can purchase one person's share of a tenancy in common, and then use their position to force a partition sale of the entire property. Thus, a person who has inherited a common share of a property that they do not personally use, might be inclined to sell their share thinking that they are only selling the rights to a portion of the property, and wind up initiating the displacement of other inheritors that are actually living on the property. African American estate planning is thought to be minimal in rural, economically depressed areas, and developers are known to target properties in those areas (Mitchell 2000:517).

Legacy

Racial inequality

An economic analysis, conducted at the end of the 1970s, concluded that even if the freed slaves had been given the 40 acres and a mule that had been promised by the Freedman's Bureau, it still would not have been enough to entirely close the wealth gap between whites and blacks, to that point in time (DeCanio 1979:202-203). In 1984, the median wealth for black households was $3,000, compared to $39,000 for white households (Bobo & Smith 1998:188). By 1993, the median wealth for black households was $4,418, compared to $45,740 for white households (Darity Jr. & Nicholson 2005:79). The research that underlies public program policy decisions continues to be guided by sensationalistic "failure studies" that focus on communities as liabilities, rather than identifying positive community aspects that programs could build upon as assets (Woodson 1989:1028;1039).

Counting owners and tenants, there were 925,708 black farmers in 1920; in 2000, there were about 18,000 black farmers, which is roughly 11,000 less than the number of black farm owners in 1870 (Mitchell 2000:527-528). As the recent decision of Pigford v. Glickman has shown, there are still race-based biases in way government entities like the United States Department of Agriculture decide how to disburse farm credit. By federal regulation, the local commissions that make the decisions must be elected from current farm owners; in two cases unrelated to the Pigford decision, five different county commissioners were found to have wrongly denied disaster assistance to African American farmers (Mitchell 2000:528-529). Additionally, black farmers trying to obtain credit to purchase farmland being lost by black owners "experienced delays" while funding was being extended to white borrowers (Reynolds 2002:16).

De facto racial segregation

African American residential centralization, which started in the postbellum and Great Migration periods, continues to have a negative impact on employment rates (Herrington et al.:169). In fact, "one third of African Americans live in areas so intensely segregated that they are almost completely isolated from other groups in society" (Mitchell 2000:535). The unemployment effects of residential centralization are twice as problematic in metropolitan areas with total populations over 1 million (Weinberg 2000:116). A one standard deviation reduction in residential centralization could reduce unemployment by about a fifth; and, a complete elimination of residential centralization could reduce unemployment by almost half for high school educated males, and nearly two-thirds for college educated males and females (Weinberg 2000:126).

Censorship in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorshi...