Zone1 It is time to retire a dumb idea and the rhetoric that goes with it.

Status
Not open for further replies.

IM2

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Mar 11, 2015
77,073
34,261
2,330
Blacks were Republicans for 100 years before many of us left tthe Republican Party. We left because the party didn't do a damn thing to stop Jim Crow while expectiing blacks to vote republican forever because of Abraham Lincoln. But we got tired of nothing and switched parties.

The conservative plantation theory holds that African Americans support the Democratic party in exchange for welfare benefits and other handouts, that the Democratic party cultivates black welfare dependency in order to keep black voters firmly in their camp, and that the liberal establishment through either incompetence or cynical calculation frustrates the aspirations of black Americans in critical areas such as education, family life, crime, and economic mobility.

If Democrats were buying votes with welfare benefits, one would expect support for the Democratic party to be less pronounced among high-income blacks and more pronounced among low-income whites. The opposite is the case. Wealthy African Americans, who have no financial stake in welfare benefits other than being taxed to pay for them, are politically very similar to less wealthy African Americans. By some measures, wealthy blacks are more liberal than poor blacks.

Which is not to say that black voters are not keenly interested in the welfare state, economic intervention, redistributive taxation, and the rest of the Democrats’ dependency agenda. They are. As I have shown at some length, it was the New Deal rather than the Democrats’ abrupt about-face on civil rights that attracted black voters. The last Republican presidential candidate to win a majority of the black vote was Herbert Hoover, and the majority of black voters were Democrats by the 1940s — a remarkable fact, given that the Democrats were still very much the party of segregation at that time, with future civil-rights enthusiast Lyndon Johnson fighting laws against lynching. African Americans remain more intensely supportive of New Deal programs such as Social Security and the minimum wage than are whites, even when their personal financial situations ensure that they are unlikely ever to earn the minimum wage or depend upon Social Security.

Conservatives should ask ourselves why that is. Not because it will help the Republican party win more black votes — that is an unlikely outcome — but because our first loyalty is to reality. Across income groups, African Americans are on balance less enthusiastic about free-market economic policies than are Anglo Americans; there is a rich tradition of entrepreneurship and self-improvement in black culture, but that does not translate into sympathy with the traditional conservative rhetoric on these subjects; and, shockingly, when asked by pollsters about their attitudes toward “capitalism” and “socialism” — using the actual words — more African Americans expressed positive views of socialism than of capitalism.

It is not surprising that blacks have less faith in the productive and transformative power of the free-market economy than do whites. Black Americans were for some centuries treated as an economic commodity themselves and were systematically excluded from full participation in the economy for generations after that.



This conservatives speaks to the reality off what blacks have faced instead of the dumb --- rhetoric we see here. Telling us that we are on a plantation because we vote against extremism is not going to get blacks to run to the republican party in large numbers.
 
Blacks were Republicans for 100 years before many of us left tthe Republican Party. We left because the party didn't do a damn thing to stop Jim Crow while expectiing blacks to vote republican forever because of Abraham Lincoln. But we got tired of nothing and switched parties.

Sorry, but you are reading it backwards. It was the Republicans you got you to Jim Crow. That was progress. The Democrats wanted to keep you as slaves. The Republicans fought that, and carried you to Jim Crow. Closer to the goal. It was progress, and you have been trained to view backwards by people who have always wanted to hold you back.
 
Sorry, but you are reading it backwards. It was the Republicans you got you to Jim Crow. That was progress. The Democrats wanted to keep you as slaves. The Republicans fought that, and carried you to Jim Crow. Closer to the goal. It was progress, and you have been trained to view backwards by people who have always wanted to hold you back.
Jim Crow was no different than slavery. That's not progress.

The Corwin Amendment is a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution that has never been adopted, but owing to the absence of a ratification deadline, could still be adopted by the state legislatures. It would shield slavery within the states from the federal constitutional amendment process and from abolition or interference by Congress. Although the Corwin Amendment does not explicitly use the word slavery, it was designed specifically to protect slavery from federal power. The outgoing 36th United States Congress proposed the Corwin Amendment on March 2, 1861, shortly before the outbreak of the American Civil War, with the intent of preventing that war and preserving the Union. It passed Congress but was not ratified by the requisite number of state legislatures.

Senator William H. Seward and Representative Thomas Corwin, Republicans and allies of President-elect Abraham Lincoln, introduced the Corwin Amendment, which was endorsed by the outgoing president, James Buchanan.

"No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State."​

 
IM2 is correct. With the withdrawal of federal troops from the South in 1867, the Republicans betrayed the blacks to the conservative white southerns, segregation, lynching, and an even more desperate life.
 
Everyone in 1867 was what is now considered “conservative”. If the Republicans betrayed the blacks to anyone it was the bitter-losers Democrats. Remember, the party the Republicans had defeated in battle end slavery?

The bitter-loser Democrats started the KKK and waged a guerrilla war against their political opponents in the establishment and a terror campaign against blacks. Something like a third of all the people the KKK lynched were white Republicans.
 
Everyone in 1867 was what is now considered “conservative”. If the Republicans betrayed the blacks to anyone it was the bitter-losers Democrats. Remember, the party the Republicans had defeated in battle end slavery?

The bitter-loser Democrats started the KKK and waged a guerrilla war against their political opponents in the establishment and a terror campaign against blacks. Something like a third of all the people the KKK lynched were white Republicans.

Stop the disingenuous bullshit boy. Todays Republican party carries the confederate flag. So STFU.
 
Blacks were Republicans for 100 years before many of us left tthe Republican Party. We left because the party didn't do a damn thing to stop Jim Crow while expectiing blacks to vote republican forever because of Abraham Lincoln. But we got tired of nothing and switched parties.

The conservative plantation theory holds that African Americans support the Democratic party in exchange for welfare benefits and other handouts, that the Democratic party cultivates black welfare dependency in order to keep black voters firmly in their camp, and that the liberal establishment through either incompetence or cynical calculation frustrates the aspirations of black Americans in critical areas such as education, family life, crime, and economic mobility.

If Democrats were buying votes with welfare benefits, one would expect support for the Democratic party to be less pronounced among high-income blacks and more pronounced among low-income whites. The opposite is the case. Wealthy African Americans, who have no financial stake in welfare benefits other than being taxed to pay for them, are politically very similar to less wealthy African Americans. By some measures, wealthy blacks are more liberal than poor blacks.

Which is not to say that black voters are not keenly interested in the welfare state, economic intervention, redistributive taxation, and the rest of the Democrats’ dependency agenda. They are. As I have shown at some length, it was the New Deal rather than the Democrats’ abrupt about-face on civil rights that attracted black voters. The last Republican presidential candidate to win a majority of the black vote was Herbert Hoover, and the majority of black voters were Democrats by the 1940s — a remarkable fact, given that the Democrats were still very much the party of segregation at that time, with future civil-rights enthusiast Lyndon Johnson fighting laws against lynching. African Americans remain more intensely supportive of New Deal programs such as Social Security and the minimum wage than are whites, even when their personal financial situations ensure that they are unlikely ever to earn the minimum wage or depend upon Social Security.

Conservatives should ask ourselves why that is. Not because it will help the Republican party win more black votes — that is an unlikely outcome — but because our first loyalty is to reality. Across income groups, African Americans are on balance less enthusiastic about free-market economic policies than are Anglo Americans; there is a rich tradition of entrepreneurship and self-improvement in black culture, but that does not translate into sympathy with the traditional conservative rhetoric on these subjects; and, shockingly, when asked by pollsters about their attitudes toward “capitalism” and “socialism” — using the actual words — more African Americans expressed positive views of socialism than of capitalism.

It is not surprising that blacks have less faith in the productive and transformative power of the free-market economy than do whites. Black Americans were for some centuries treated as an economic commodity themselves and were systematically excluded from full participation in the economy for generations after that.



This conservatives speaks to the reality off what blacks have faced instead of the dumb --- rhetoric we see here. Telling us that we are on a plantation because we vote against extremism is not going to get blacks to run to the republican party in large numbers.
It is time for you to stop pretending that whites are some monolithic group of racists.

As you, of all people, are very well aware, racism isn’t limited to just white people

The Democrap Party is the plantation party. And your denials notwithstanding, gave facts. You damn well know it.
 
It is time for you to stop pretending that whites are some monolithic group of racists.

As you, of all people, are very well aware, racism isn’t limited to just white people

The Democrap Party is the plantation party. And your denials notwithstanding, gave facts. You damn well know it.
.

I lived in the ghetto. My black neighbors were the most racist people one could imagine.

.
 
Sorry, but you are reading it backwards. It was the Republicans you got you to Jim Crow. That was progress. The Democrats wanted to keep you as slaves. The Republicans fought that, and carried you to Jim Crow. Closer to the goal. It was progress, and you have been trained to view backwards by people who have always wanted to hold you back.
Exactly. Jim Crow was a sop to Democrats who wanted no rights whatsoever for descendants of their slaves. The hopes freed blacks would sharecrop in debt bondage, keep quiet, and only technically be free. That happened in heavily Democratic counties.
 
Blacks were Republicans for 100 years before many of us left tthe Republican Party. We left because the party didn't do a damn thing to stop Jim Crow while expectiing blacks to vote republican forever because of Abraham Lincoln. But we got tired of nothing and switched parties.

The conservative plantation theory holds that African Americans support the Democratic party in exchange for welfare benefits and other handouts, that the Democratic party cultivates black welfare dependency in order to keep black voters firmly in their camp, and that the liberal establishment through either incompetence or cynical calculation frustrates the aspirations of black Americans in critical areas such as education, family life, crime, and economic mobility.

If Democrats were buying votes with welfare benefits, one would expect support for the Democratic party to be less pronounced among high-income blacks and more pronounced among low-income whites. The opposite is the case. Wealthy African Americans, who have no financial stake in welfare benefits other than being taxed to pay for them, are politically very similar to less wealthy African Americans. By some measures, wealthy blacks are more liberal than poor blacks.

Which is not to say that black voters are not keenly interested in the welfare state, economic intervention, redistributive taxation, and the rest of the Democrats’ dependency agenda. They are. As I have shown at some length, it was the New Deal rather than the Democrats’ abrupt about-face on civil rights that attracted black voters. The last Republican presidential candidate to win a majority of the black vote was Herbert Hoover, and the majority of black voters were Democrats by the 1940s — a remarkable fact, given that the Democrats were still very much the party of segregation at that time, with future civil-rights enthusiast Lyndon Johnson fighting laws against lynching. African Americans remain more intensely supportive of New Deal programs such as Social Security and the minimum wage than are whites, even when their personal financial situations ensure that they are unlikely ever to earn the minimum wage or depend upon Social Security.

Conservatives should ask ourselves why that is. Not because it will help the Republican party win more black votes — that is an unlikely outcome — but because our first loyalty is to reality. Across income groups, African Americans are on balance less enthusiastic about free-market economic policies than are Anglo Americans; there is a rich tradition of entrepreneurship and self-improvement in black culture, but that does not translate into sympathy with the traditional conservative rhetoric on these subjects; and, shockingly, when asked by pollsters about their attitudes toward “capitalism” and “socialism” — using the actual words — more African Americans expressed positive views of socialism than of capitalism.

It is not surprising that blacks have less faith in the productive and transformative power of the free-market economy than do whites. Black Americans were for some centuries treated as an economic commodity themselves and were systematically excluded from full participation in the economy for generations after that.



This conservatives speaks to the reality off what blacks have faced instead of the dumb --- rhetoric we see here. Telling us that we are on a plantation because we vote against extremism is not going to get blacks to run to the republican party in large numbers.
Agreed. End all of the welfare programs. Let nonprofits fill the gap.

No government money for anything unless it benefits every single citizen equally. Stop all transfer payments that only benefit only one citizen at a time.

Let’s put this myth deep in the bottom of the garbage can and let it burn in hell for all eternity hotter and hotter and hotter. I hate this myth. People don’t ever vote to get government goodies. Stop the government goodies and prove this myth untrue once and for all. Nobody votes that way. Let’s prove that shit.

Let’s make sure nobody ever gets a government goody ever again. I love your thinking. I’m usually in disagreement with you but on this I agree.
 
Last edited:
This Republican Conservative quoted in the OP is on to something. Not the whole story, but certainly some of it.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: IM2
Agreed. End all of the welfare programs. Let nonprofits fill the gap.

No government money for anything unless it benefits every single citizen equally. Stop all transfer payments that only benefit only one citizen at a time.

Let’s put this myth deep in the bottom of the garbage can and let it burn in hell for all eternity hotter and hotter and hotter. I hate this myth. People don’t ever vote to get government goodies. Stop the government goodies and prove this myth untrue once and for all. Nobody votes that way. Let’s prove that shit.

Let’s make sure nobody ever gets a government goody ever again. I love your thinking. I’m usually in disagreement with you but on this I agree.

Those like you should really think before you say things.

8 Times the U.S. Government Gave White People Handouts to Get Ahead​


How Today’s White Middle Class Was Made Possible By Welfare

Whites, angered at blacks and immigrants receiving “government handouts,” forget they were lifted out of poverty through racially exclusive welfare programs in the 30s.


Between 2001 and 2010, Westmoreland County, Pa., lost at least 8,000 manufacturing jobs. That’s one explanation for why this once-blue region gave more votes to Donald Trump than did any other Pennsylvania county, helping swing the state in his favor and propelling him to a surprise victory.

Today, the federal government’s role in building and subsidizing the homestead communities—and the larger government programs to subsidize construction of white suburbs across the nation—is all but erased from history.

“We want our jobs back,” John Golomb, a retired steelworker in Westmoreland County and lifelong Democrat who voted for Trump, told the Wall Street Journal, adding that previous presidents from both parties “forgot us.”

A form of historical amnesia also afflicts Westmoreland County. Largely absent from discussions of its decline are the ambitious social welfare programs that once helped its residents climb out of poverty. Two generations ago, this area of rural Pennsylvania was the site of a sweeping — and successful — federal housing program. The New Deal subsistence homestead program, launched in 1933 with $25 million, built modern homes for low-wage industrial workers and gave them plots of land for subsistence farming. In this corner of coal country devastated by dangerous labor practices and low wages, federal officials constructed a new community that gave poor white families a stepping-stone to home ownership and the middle class. The story of this housing program is told by historians Timothy Kelly, Margaret Power and Michael Cary in Hope in Hard Times: Norvelt and the Struggle for Community During the Great Depression.

Norvelt, one of 34 communities in 18 states completed under the Roosevelt administration’s subsistence homestead program, remains today as a village of more than 1,000 residents in Westmoreland County. The median household income in Norvelt is more than $56,000, just above the state median. Fewer than three percent of residents live in poverty, a lower rate than any of the surrounding communities. It’s a monument to the potential for “an ambitious and innovative federal government” to “work positively in people’s lives,” the authors write. But it is also a reminder of the federal government’s inability — or refusal— to address the unyielding racial segregation in America’s housing markets. The authors can document just one African-American family living in Norvelt in the late 1930s, and the community is still largely white today.

Most of the community’s first residents were the children or grandchildren of immigrants from southern or eastern Europe and had lived in “coal patch” communities owned by Henry Clay Frick.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top