I’m giving serious thought to preparing a proposal for a page turner of a book called, In Defense of the Southern Strategy: The Case for the Appeal to States’ Rights During the Civil Rights Movement.
I bet it would be hotter than In Defense of Internment: The Case for ‘Racial Profiling’ in World War II and the War on Terror, by Michelle Malkin (reviews and critiques).
I’d be vilified, of course, and 20 death threats a day would be the norm. But what press such a book would generate, especially written by a black woman! I’d have to start small with a series of well-researched articles first.
One of the myths I want to bust wide open is that the old Dixicrats disbanded and joined the Republican party en masse. I know there’s a story there, just waiting for somebody to tell it. I want to show Americans who weren’t alive then or too young to remember that it’s not only untrue, but a fable Democrats came up with to try to cover up their own embarrassing history and keep blacks dependent on a large, bureaucratic, central government (see Why Courting the Black Vote Won’t Work).
To be “fair and balanced,” I’ve included a Wikipedia entry that’s hopelessly biased against conservatism and two articles biased toward the right:
I think it is a great idea. Over the past few months I have been thinking on the Civil Rights movement and when you compare the actions of our “hero’s”…MLK for example against the bible…
well you come up with a “something went grossly wrong scenario”… they went to bed with the devil and look what was spawned from the unholy alliance.
Comment by Renee — 07.06.05 @ 7:56 am
La Shawn,
Good morning. If I have been missed in the comments section, it is because I just got off 2 weeks vacation, and studiously avoided computers, television and radio as best I could during that time. I will say, about the only thing I really missed was reading your blog daily.
Good grief, you are certainly right about the reaction that will ensue if you choose to write a book in the vein you’ve outlined. Since I do a lot of personal protection type work off-duty, let me be the first to offer the bodyguard sevices you will likely need in the aftermath of its publication. Liberals and race panderers don’t like having their carefully constructed myths challenged
Comment by Montie — 07.06.05 @ 8:09 am
Montie is sooooo correct! I hope you’ll take him, or someone up on that offer!
I started listening to Rush Limbaugh in 1989 because I couldn’t bear to have music on my car radio after a heartbreaking loss of my marriage. I got over the loss, but continued listening to Rush so I could argue with him….until he brought up the fact that Republicans who initiated civil rights legislation. That was NOT what I’d been taught in my Southern California schools growing up, or perpetrated by my Democrat/union parents. So I did my own research, and low & behold, he was right. In fact I learned that the GOP first proposed civil rights legislation as far back as 1888! Moreover, I learned that the president who was “forced” to sign it into law, i.e., LBJ, had voted AGAINST such legislation for all the time, about 20 years, he was a senator from Texas! I hate being lied to, and learning that, I began my gradual journey to the RIGHT! BTW, I still listen to Rush!
Comment by DagneyT — 07.06.05 @ 8:19 am
Renee, you’ll be my special guest at the first book signing party.
Dagney, not only are blacks taught these things in school, we grow up hearing it in our homes and/or from other adults. I got so much bad information as a kid, I was physical ill at the thought of Ronald Reagan in the White House. I thought the world was ending.
Montie, I’m sure I’ll also need body armor. I wonder if bulletproof vests are as uncomfortable as they look…
Comment by La Shawn — 07.06.05 @ 8:21 am
I’m writing a book on the evils of Feminism. The title and chapter titles are named after song titles to make it interesting.
Good luck with your book
Here’s to all the firestorm we’ll create! *raises her glass of cranberry juice*
Comment by Jade — 07.06.05 @ 8:28 am
You can start reading the VDARE archives, they have some pointers over there to defend your thesis.
One of the myths I want to bust wide open is that the old Dixicrats disbanded and joined the Republican party en masse.
So far, no one has done that one. I suspect that if it could be proven otherwise, someone would have done it. But if you’re the first, then you’d strike gold.
Comment by DarkStar — 07.06.05 @ 8:30 am
You go girl! I’ve already learned a lot this morning just by reading your post and the comments.
Comment by Evon Bachaus — 07.06.05 @ 8:35 am
And so far, DS, no one has proven that Dixiecrats fled to the Republican party. “Strom Thurmond, Strom Thurmond” is the common refrain. But I’ve argued on this blog that the man who ran for president as a Dixiecrat was not the same man who joined the Republican party.
Comment by La Shawn — 07.06.05 @ 8:36 am
I am THERE La Shawn
Regarding your comment on how you felt about Reagan…
I remember a conversation with my cousin who talked about Reagan never did anything for her (she was an unwed teenager mother). I asked her “What has ??? (baby’s daddy) done for you… He got you preganant not Reagan”…
needless to say, she changed the subject
Comment by Renee — 07.06.05 @ 8:40 am
La Shawn,
Yes, they are, and hot too at this time of the year. But, like the American Express commercial,
I never leave home without it (and I’m beginning to think that neither should you).
Comment by Montie — 07.06.05 @ 9:08 am
ENOUGH with the “right-wing, evangelical extremist” stuff!!!! People need to start fighting back when “go-along to get along” talking heads and radio talk show hosts (like a certain racist early morning radio host here in the Tampa Bay area)erroneously label people who believe in God and Country as somehow being extremists.
NONSENSE. The fact of the matter is that some of us STILL believe in God and His Son Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour and AUTHOUR and CREATOR OF OUR INALIENABLE HUMAN RIGHTS! Some of us correctly believe that homosexuality is an abominable sin and a filthy, nasty, disgusting, disease-spreading practice that should NEVER be sanctioned as normal. Just because 1% of the population practices this filthy art is no reason to give it sanction. As the old saying goes, “If Jimmy jumped off a cliff…..”
These beliefs do not make one extreme. It just makes them RIGHT, and RESPECTFUL OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION!
It is well established that President Bush, albeit a good man, does not possess a spine nor a stomach for battle in the face of enemy Democrats so what I propose and have been proposing for years will never come to pass, BUT if he had the man-berries, President Bush would nominate none other than former Alabama Chief Justice ROY MOORE to the Supreme Court of the United States. A man who clearly understand the difference between right and wrong and a man who is one of our nation’s greates Constitutional scholars. He is an originalist and a constructionist. He would be the absolute best pick to restore honor to that now dysfunctional institution and remove it at least for the time being from the clutches of the evil left.
CHIEF JUSTICE ROY MOORE FOR SUPREME COURT!!!!!!!!!
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 9:12 am
Funny how the Democrats point fingers at Strom Thurmond, yet get very defensive when Senator Byrd’s past history in the Ku Klux Klan is mentioned. It seems that they think only Democrats can change their viewpoints on race, but Republicans must remain racist for life.
Comment by Montie — 07.06.05 @ 9:12 am
Just a wonder:
What are folks thoughts on where we would be if the civil rights movement had never happened???
Where would Americans be if the “unholy alliance” had never happened (yes, I’m quoting you Renee and being a bit facetious this AM)??
I do think it is is good food for thought though.
Comment by Tiffany In Mpls — 07.06.05 @ 9:19 am
Perhaps not having such a high single family rate…
perhaps not having such a high abortion rate…
perhaps not having such a high AIDs rate…
perhaps not having such a high rate of our young males in prison…
since you asked Tiffany…
it’s called putting the Social Gospel above the Saving Gospel…
as history is shwoing us, we exchanged one form of bondage for another
Since hearts were not changed (0nly man made laws)
Comment by Renee — 07.06.05 @ 9:33 am
The civil rights movement would have happened with or without its leaders. Basic recognition as a human being is a genie that can’t stay in the bottle for long. At some point, someone on one side or the other would just stand up and say, this is wrong and let’s move on.
Now, with that being said, I am sure the homosexual lobby wonders why they are having such a difficult time piggybacking (no pun intended) on the successes of the Civil Rights Movement and the reason is simple. GOD created man and endowed him with CERTAIN inalienable rights. Unfortunatley the right to engage in perverse sexual behavior is not covered as anything GOD created.
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 9:37 am
“But I’d have to start small with a series of well-researched articles first.”
well researched would already put you above malkin.
Comment by actus — 07.06.05 @ 9:43 am
LaShawn,
This sounds like a great idea. Don’t expect the NYT Book Review to be knocking down your door to give a good review, or to get the Bancroft Prize.
I think it’s self-evident that the Dixiecrats did NOT stream to the GOP. The South had been solidly democrat since before the Civil War, and people TEND to keep the same voting patterns throughout their lives, which they often learn from their parents in the first place. For this reason among others, the South remained reliably democrat until the Reagan revolution in the 1980s. Reason: surprising as it may seem, we Southerners think about considerations other than race when we vote.
For example, my family is from East Tennessee, and my ancestors have been Republicans for at least three generations. This is not uncommon in East Tennessee / western North Carolina; the area was strongly pro-Union during the Civil War. It had nothing to do with race, and much to do with socio-economic considerations.
I’d also like to point out that the Republican Party as we know it today is not that similar to the Republican Party that existed after World War II: strongly isolationist and rather elitist. The modern Republican Party, I think, traces its roots to Barry Goldwater in 1964; this is about the time when Reagan switched parties from democrat to Republican.
Comment by docjim505 — 07.06.05 @ 10:01 am
Ahh…actus,
I haven’t had to take my heartburn medication for the entire two weeks I was on vacation, and today, back at work, I thought I might even get by without it. Looks like that’s not going to be the case now that I’m back to reading your comments here. Oh well (as I take a gulp of water to wash down my Aciphex, hoping it will take effect before I get involved in a back and forth exchange with you).
Comment by Montie — 07.06.05 @ 10:08 am
Tiffany in Mpls wrote (# 12):
“What are folks thoughts on where we would be if the civil rights movement had never happened???”
An interesting question. I’ve often wondered what would have happened if the South had not lost the Civil War, or if it had never been fought in the first place. Would slavery have died on its own? If so, would Jim Crow have ever happened? Would voluntary manumission have resulted in a political climate in which ‘the bloody shirt’ and the spectre of miscegenation would have had no potency with the (white) Southern electorate? What if the war had lasted a couple of more years, long enough for black soldiers to be enlisted into the CONFEDERATE army (there were plans afoot to do this, incredible as it may seem).
Who knows?
If you’re interested in alternate history, Harry Turtledove has a series of well-written books that are set in a divided America, the result of the South winning the war and its independence from the United States (a horrible thought!). In his books, slavery is officially ended in the CSA in 1880 at the time of the Second War Between the States, but blacks are kept a permanent and despised underclass. During World War I, they stage a communist revolution. I haven’t read farther than that…
Comment by docjim505 — 07.06.05 @ 10:09 am
Other racist policies/institutions implemented or at least championed by Democrats:
- Welfare
- WIC
- Housing Prisons (aka Projects)
- Government schools (social indoctrination and stifling of competitive fires)
- Only party with racially and gender exclusive caucuses in Congress.
- Education philosophies that allow wrong answers as long as the “thought” process is sound.
- Affirmative Discrimination (Action) and quotas
I would classify any program that destroys rather than builds a person’s chances for success as racist.
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 10:13 am
Let’s take it a step beyond…
How bout if our ancestors were not brought to America as slaves?
I know I am just hopping with enthusiasm to be in the Sudan, Ethiopia, etc., etc., etc…..
Comment by Renee — 07.06.05 @ 10:15 am
Renee: LOL!!! You do have a point there.
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 10:18 am
Renee,
You don’t need to take it there…I was just posing a question.
Good grief!
Comment by Tiffany In Mpls — 07.06.05 @ 10:19 am
To be honest: I think that black folks would be in much better shape than we are now just as Renee proposed above. I think it would be like 2 contries in one as blacks and whites would rarely mix in public and definitely not date or marry, worship together(hell it’s like that now). It would be two separately societies all together.
Comment by Tiffany In Mpls — 07.06.05 @ 10:23 am
Tiffany: You mean like all of the other immigrants (legal and illegal) are doing now? Segregating themselves that is and creating their own little countries away from home. Refusing to assimilate. Wanting to be a vegetable in a salad bowl rather than a blended ingredient in the melting pot?
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 10:26 am
“Since hearts were not changed (0nly man made laws)”
If hearts were not changed, is it accurate to say that white america remains as racist as it was?
Comment by actus — 07.06.05 @ 10:39 am
I can name at least 10 ethnic groups off the top of my head who would make the white brand of racism pale in comparison and they are of course championed by the left.
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 10:46 am
Raymond: Personally I think you’re a bit ’special’ (all my southerners know what I am referring to) so I’m not going to even go there with you this morning, dear.
Comment by Tiffany In Mpls — 07.06.05 @ 10:59 am
La Shawn wrote, “One of the myths I want to bust wide open is that the old Dixicrats disbanded and joined the Republican party en masse.”
That would take away the entirety of some poster’s talking points !!
Comment by Baklava — 07.06.05 @ 11:01 am
Darkstar wrote, “So far, no one has done that one. I suspect that if it could be proven otherwise, someone would have done it.”
Just like the Internment during WW2. Nobody thought for the longest time that they’d have to set the record straight. What happens over time is the “lie” gets repeated so often that history is misunderstood (on this issue by people like you DS). There comes a point in time where the record needs to be corrected.
So. Chronologically speaking you have it backwards. You imply someone would’ve done it but why would someone have done it BEFORE people like you misrepresented history? Game. Set. Match.
Comment by Baklava — 07.06.05 @ 11:05 am
I doubt SERIOUSLY if anyone here is more Southern than I! LOL!!! You just can’t get any more Suthun.
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 11:05 am
So, actus, if your pappy had hate in his heart, so must you? Is hate a genetic trait?
Comment by SCSIwuzzy — 07.06.05 @ 11:07 am
#14, Quite the perspective.
Comment by Baklava — 07.06.05 @ 11:16 am
#16 Actup wrote, “well researched would already put you above malkin”
Nice untrue accusation there Actus. Same ole same ole pattern.
Comment by Baklava — 07.06.05 @ 11:18 am
“So, actus, if your pappy had hate in his heart, so must you? Is hate a genetic trait? ”
Id’s say hearts have changed between my dad and me. But fine. Is the poster saying that white people who were alive then are still just as racist?
Comment by actus — 07.06.05 @ 11:19 am
Tiffany wrote, “I think it would be like 2 contries in one as blacks and whites would rarely mix in public”
I disagree. Things would’ve happened differently but I don’t think in America you could’ve prevented non-poor blacks from moving to suburbs nor could anyone have prevented Equal Opportunity (read EEOC). To have such little faith in America’s evolution shows little faith in America’s FUTURE evolution. You have the right to that perspective Tiffany I just want to say I don’t see things that way.
Comment by Baklava — 07.06.05 @ 11:26 am
My My My… Now black people are complaining about the Civil Rights Movement. I could understand it though. What gave them the right to think that they should be treated equally and have the right to live where they wanted to live and to expect the laws of the land to apply to them equally? The nerve of those people not to be thankful for not being left behind in Africa. They messed everything up for us. What they should have done is just shut up, continued to live under Jim Crow and waited for white folks to see the error of their ways. At least white folks wouldn’t be so mad with us now.
Comment by James Manning — 07.06.05 @ 11:27 am
But James, the law isn’t applied equally. As long as “affirmative action” exists, blacks are not treated equally. They have special rights and privileges based on the color of their skin.
And about the Africa crack, I’m thankful beyond WORDS that I’m not in Africa under brutal, ignorant dictators, modern-day slavery, and extreme poverty, AIDS, and famine.
Sarcasm noted, but you miss something very important. I am grateful beyond WORDS that blacks generations before me were willing to give their lives so I could have the right to live as a first-class, American citizen. But to go so far beyond that and demand entitlements because I’m black and act surprised and offended when white people complain about it?
Repugnant in the most egregious, race-hustling sense of the word.
Comment by La Shawn — 07.06.05 @ 11:31 am
The problem with the majority of you is that you frame racism as a ‘morality only’ issue, when in reality it is an economic spawned issue that has economic implications.
To answer the fella above about enclosed ethnic communities, virtually all immigrants do this, and this leads to the success of that particular immigrant group (study cubans in florida, arabs in detroit) as it allows them to consolidate power, acquire wealth, and do the things necessary to become successful in a capitalistic society.
You have suckered blacks into think integration integration integration, as opposed to capitalization and control. Boooooooooooooo.
Finally, I have updated my blog, and talk about the ‘black concussed conservative’. Click my name.
I am still waiting for individuals to call into my show on Thursday nights and discuss their conservative positions on race. Let me know so I can set up a schedule.
What’s the number? - Admin
Comment by Dell Gines — 07.06.05 @ 11:36 am
“As long as “affirmative action†exists, blacks are not treated equally.”
There is also evidence of implicit bias pervasive in our society.
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/
Comment by actus — 07.06.05 @ 11:36 am
La Shawn,
Do you really think that it is because of Affirmative Action that black are not treated equally? And exactly who has special rights? I know a few kids that got in college and a couple of firms that government contracts because of AA. But 99% of black people get their jobs the way everyone else gets theirs… they earn it.
I’d like you to walk through the Ford plants in Detroit and the meat packing warehouses in Chicago figure out how many black people are not qualified to do their jobs and are only their because of the color of their skin.
I’d like to see a study that shows what percentage of working black people got their jobs simply based on the fact that they are black. Then show me how many are not qualified to do the job that they are doing. I work with a lot of black people and I’m sure I’d be hard pressed to find one that felt they were unqualified to do their job.
Comment by James Manning — 07.06.05 @ 11:42 am
James, as long as race preferences are in place, particularly as practiced by our own government, the “equality” fable will remain so. I will dig up studies about the scores of black college students and graduation rates as compared with whites and Asians, and you’ll see the stark reality of race preferences in action.
I’m not sure about that 99 percent, but it makes for a good sound bite. If someone conducting a study were allowed to scour government employment records and those of companies doing business with the government, I predict the conclusions would be rather bleak.
The POINT is this: as long as skin color preferences are in place, there will be doubt about blacks’ qualifications. Is it fair? Of course not! But that’s just the way it is, and the blame rests directly on the bozos who put such policies in place, not on individual whites or blacks who have the courage to call it what it is: wrong.
Comment by La Shawn — 07.06.05 @ 11:48 am
Oh, please write this book!
Comment by Rhymes With Right — 07.06.05 @ 11:48 am
La Shawn said:
“I’m not sure about that 99 percent, but it makes for a good sound bite. If someone conducting a study were allowed to scour government employment records and those of companies doing business with the government, I predict the conclusions would be rather bleak.”
So your assumption is that most black people are not qualified to do the jobs they are doing?
I think Affirmative Action is particularly important when it comes to government contract. There are a lot of studies that show the gains the minority owned contractors (MOC) have made because of AA. Although the study I read did report that MOC still lag, those lags are attributed to firms not being qualified for the job (meaning experience, number of employees, bonding, and ability to hand the scope of the job). The city of Chicago breaks their contracts down to allow smaller MOC the ability to qualify for the jobs. Chicago mandates that 35% of any city contract be set-aside for a qualified MOC. There are a lot of black owned businesses in Chicago that got their start with the city and was able to build and grow their companies because of AA. And if you know the history of Chicago, you know that MOC didn’t get city contract until Harold Washington came to office.
As for education, I don’t know. Most of the people I know graduated for HBCU’s so there never was an issue.
Comment by James Manning — 07.06.05 @ 12:39 pm
There are a lot of studies that show the gains the minority owned contractors (MOC) have made because of AA.
Don’t you see the irony, man? You write that as if it’s a good thing that blacks get business through skin color preferences rather than on the quality of their services. I, as a business owner, should be proud that the government coerced somebody in to giving me a contract, even though I wasn’t the lowest bidder, because I’m black? Oh, brother…
Comment by La Shawn — 07.06.05 @ 12:42 pm
La Shawn,
Don’t you get it that many of these businesses were locked out from the process to begin with. Certainly it would be nice to get the contracts based on merit, but that wasn’t happening even as recent as the mid 80’s. So, something was done about it.
There were MOF’s capable of doing the jobs, but they weren’t getting the work. What would have been your solution? You live in a city that is 40% black but only 3% of the contracts go to MOF’s. Would you find that odd? Or would you say that they are not getting the contracts because they can’t do the work? Would you wonder why the same network of business owners get all of the bids? Harold Washington did something and the result is an explosion of MOC.
Chicago also has limits on revenue so if you are a MOC grossing more that so many millions per year, you cannot be a part of the program. But those are companies that have grown to the point where they have access to an array of projects. I’m sure because they’ve gained the experience and have the capacity to take on more complex jobs.
The fact is that there is a problem and AA may not be the best solution but it is much better than doing nothing and wait for racism to disappear on its own.
Comment by James Manning — 07.06.05 @ 1:23 pm
Who says they weren’t getting jobs even though they merited the jobs, James?
So you support racial discrimination as long as it favors blacks? (The “legacy of slavery,” and all) You have nothing against the concept itself, I conclude. I’d rather not have or earn it on my own or find a way to get it without the government forcing somebody to give it to me. But that’s just me, and Jesse Jackson’s PR machine is much bigger than mine.
Here’s a newsflash, James: You are not entitled to a thing. People are not required to give you something simply because you ask for it. If large numbers of blacks aren’t getting certain jobs, let’s examine why. Are their scores lower? Did they go to a school with lower standards? Perhaps their performance at a previous job was subpar. Let’s try to raise expectations and increase the level of competition instead of “defining deviancy down” and shuffling along with the old “racism” excuse. It’s tired! It’s a sorry lesson to teach our children, one that I wish I’d never learned!
Here’s another newsflash: The paucity of blacks in a particular profession or place of employment is not evidence of racial discrimination, despite what the EEOC says.
And maybe, just maybe, a private business owner doesn’t want to hire blacks, or women, or whites. Who are you or the government to them whom they should or should not hire?
Comment by La Shawn — 07.06.05 @ 1:31 pm
Have you read Under God by Toby Mac and Michael Tait? It has a lot of good essays of racism during our history. There is also a list of resources in the back. Also, check out Peter Marshall’s books on American History–you’ve never read it like this before!
Go for it! I will be praying if you do!
Comment by Helen — 07.06.05 @ 1:41 pm
“success of that particular immigrant group”?
Success here in the United States? hmmmmm. Just think if all of these distinct ethnic groups closed ranks in THEIR OWN countries and made THOSE countries better instead of coming to THIS country and infecting it with their own brand of racism and cultural snobbishness.
For example, there are MILLIONS of Cubans now infecting Miami with their brand of RABID racism. There are MORE than enough of them down their to return home and overthrow Castro but nooooooooo. They want US to do their dirty work and return their EQUALLY oppressive, RACIST regime to power while they sit on their fat butts watching, ready to go in and reclaim the prize beach front property the US ultimatley will have liberated. The catch is that they will still want to claim Miami as well.
Am I the only one who gets annoyed when you see another country’s flag waving from or stuck on the windshield of a person’s vehicle.
If that country is so great, WHY DIDN’T YOU STAY THERE?
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 1:47 pm
Democrat indoctrination doesn’t exist?
True story: While working on another degree at a famous, large HBCU in Tallahassee, FL (LOL!!). A student actually raised his hand and asked the professor “What do I need to do to get a “C” in this class?”
My jaw hit the floor.
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 1:50 pm
You might want to second-thought the “success” of Chicago-area MOC gains. A recent (May or early June)”guilty” verdict with jail time and huge fine for one of the players (use the name “Duff” to search Tribune and/or Chicago Sun-Times articles) using minority “fronts” to qualify for those lucrative contracts was just the tip of the iceberg. Minority “fronts” were being put in place before set-asides were set aside.
That’s a Chicago tactic that probably pre-dates any Civil Rights considerations — even used by “the Mob” for a popular Bingo hall (Brown’s Bingo, fronted by a black minister named Brown), presumably because Italian names tended to attract closer scrutiny.
I hope you do write that book, La Shawn, I’ve already put it on my “must read” list. And in case you weren’t aware of this, you’re quoted in Bernard Goldberg’s new book, “100 People Who Are Screwing Up America.” Goldberg’s #98, Sheila Jackson Lee, gained the spot by her complaint that hurricanes were not being named after black people.
“What could she have been thinking?” (you asked on America’s Voices), “That black children watching ‘Hurricane Denzel’ wreak havoc in their neighborhoods would gain higher self-esteem? That seeing a family member lost in a flood brought on by ‘Tropical Storm Tanisha’ would fill them with racial pride?”
Merry
Comment by Merry Whitney — 07.06.05 @ 1:52 pm
Merry: That one by “Mr. Lee” was CLASSIC!
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 1:54 pm
In a sense, logically and idealistically the notion of equal opportunity for all is a good thing. I agree with the conservative viewpoint that society should provide everyone a chance at equal access and then be free to succeed or fail on their own merits. That works for me, really it does.
But knowing that I am a realist, many people are apathetic and as long as it doesn’t directly affect them or their livelihood/families then it tends to be ignored. That’s why I feel that if it wasn’t for a courageous few whites and blacks and LAWS put in place (probably reluctantly at best) that the Civil Rights movement would have never happened.
So Bak, you are right, I am a pessimist.
Comment by Tiffany In Mpls — 07.06.05 @ 2:04 pm
“And maybe, just maybe, a private business owner doesn’t want to hire blacks, or women, or whites. Who are you or the government to them whom they should or should not hire?”
If they’re government contractors then the government is telling them how government money will be spent. If they’re not contractors then they’re simply in violation of civil rights laws.
Do you really think that there ought to be whites only and blacks only workplaces?
Comment by actus — 07.06.05 @ 2:06 pm
I agree somewhat with Tiffany. I do think Affirmative Action WAS noble in concept only, but its application created more problems than it solved as ANY government program is apt to do.
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 2:15 pm
La Shawn,
Note: No one is talking about being entitled to anything except equal opportunity, which is a basic principle of our country.
You seem to think that there is not such thing as discrimination. True, nothing should be given, but we are talking about opportunity. The fact is that many MOC weren’t even given the opportunity to compete. So if you don’t even believe in providing equal access, then what are we debating here? It would be nice if every firm had an equal opportunity at bids… but that wasn’t the case. Your solution seems to be to allow it to happen and do nothing about it. Sorry, your racial utopia doesn’t exist. I hate the fact that you automatically assume that black people are not qualified.
As for the problems that Chicago has… it’s still a connected city so I’m not surprised by anything that goes on.
Comment by James Manning — 07.06.05 @ 2:25 pm
James: Would you agree however that providing “equal” access by definition denies access to some equals?
The late great Rev. MLK Jr. said “You cannot cure discrimination with discrimination.”
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 2:39 pm
The civil rights movement would have happened with or without its leaders. Basic recognition as a human being is a genie that can’t stay in the bottle for long.
Yep, just like in Saudi with woman’s rights.
If anyone cares, do some research on the group “Annoited” and what they have gone through in being a “Black group” and how they face barriers in getting played on “white” Christian stations.
I’m sorry, but when there is racism and/or prejudice in the church, I hold little hope for society at large.
What happens over time is the “lie†gets repeated so often that history is misunderstood (on this issue by people like you DS).
Baklava, I’ve presented supporting information, from white, conservative Republicans no less, to support “my lie”.
I’ve tried hard to be respectful of you. But you have, regularly, misrepresented what I’ve written.
Dell, pass that number to my email address please.
Have I benefited from AA? Yes.
Do I care? No.
I bet the employees of Radio One and now TV One don’t care that affirmative action in media regulations allowed Kathy Hughes to establish the base of her network.
Comment by DarkStar — 07.06.05 @ 2:48 pm
Sorry, James. I’m just not buying what you’re selling. Skin color preferences are an identifiable and unconstitutional form of discrimination. How you prove skin color discrimination based on the number of blacks in a particular business is tricky. But the solution is not to endorse blanket racial discrimination in the other direction because there might be discrimination against blacks. If you can’t see the injustice and condescension in that, you and I will never agree.
Tell me, why is it that dark-skinned immigrants succeed where black Americans fail? Perhaps because they don’t walk around with their hands out, knowing that if they want something in this world, they’d better be prepared to earn it. Just a guess.
Comment by La Shawn — 07.06.05 @ 2:49 pm
STOP comparing gender to race!!!!!
Saudi women seem to be quite accepting of their assigned roles. It is not fair to project American feminist values onto other cultures no matter how barbaric they may seem to YOU!
There is a lot of merit to how the Saudis interact with each other in terms of gender.
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 2:52 pm
Your #60 comment hits the nail right on the head La Shawn. What about Asians? South Indians are very dark, but they have no problem getting into Harvard despite reverse dicrimniation. It’s values & hard work that lead to success.
Comment by NYgirl — 07.06.05 @ 2:58 pm
MY Girl: GREAT POINT! Vijay Singh is darker than all but one or two Black folk I know and he and others like him seem to do quite well inspite of their BLACK skin.
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 3:01 pm
La Shawn,
Thinking about your post took me back to the first political convention I listened to with my Mother in 1948. I was quite young and literal and remember the fight amongst the Democrats about “seating” the delegations from the South. I magined all these Black [the word used was Negro, back then] people being forced to stand around the edges of a large auditorium not being allowed to sit down. Hubert Humphrey of my home state of Minnesota became my hero after that.
After reading your post, I realized that the reason for the fight in 1948 was that those segregationists were welcome participants in the Democratic Party until then.
Montie mentioned Senator Robert Byrd. I wonder, was he at that 1948 convention? Did he have a role/reaction?
I don’t plan to read his book but it sounds to me as though he pretty much passes over his participation in the Klan. Perhaps he doesn’t want to offend other former Klan members in West Virginia and possibly other states who are in high positions in the Democratic Party.
I wonder, what happened to his Klan kostume? Has it been passed down as a family heirloom? Will we see it in the Robert Byrd Memorial Library?
As a woman, I wonder, who washed, starched and ironed those Klan kostumes? That chore seems beneath anyone with the high rank of Kleagle.
Byrd talked about his book on CSPAN. He has served his state long and mostly well. To borrow advice from Senator Kennedy, he needs to retire. Perhaps he could find a place in West Virginia’s tourism bureau. He could invite people from the other forty-nine states to come and see where their tax money has gone.
His slow candence in speaking has gotten waaay slower. His illustrations often don’t illustrate and sometimes don’t make sense at all. He’s well into his dotage…about two sheets and a pillow case shy of a full linen closet.
Comment by Evon Bachaus — 07.06.05 @ 3:12 pm
Re. 60 and 61.
Check out the immigration preferences for the U.S. You will find that it’s biased towards professionals. Added to that, people who emmigrate from a country are more likely to be stellar in the first place.
My father, a poor Jamaican, wouldn’t be given the chance to immigate today vs. in the 50s when he came here.
Comment by DarkStar — 07.06.05 @ 3:13 pm
#65 Neither would any of my Irish, Polish and Czech ancestors. The rest came in before the US was a country, or before Europe found their way here, so I guess they were grandfathered in, so to speak.
Comment by SCSIwuzzy — 07.06.05 @ 3:48 pm
“And maybe, just maybe, a private business owner doesn’t want to hire blacks, or women, or whites. Who are you or the government to them whom they should or should not hire? - LaShawn”
LOL…
The government has THE RESPONSIBILITY to correct what in economics are called the negative externalities caused by freedom and the free market. For example, we have rules against toxic waste dumping that causes profit reduction in plants because of the necessary clean up. Externality correct via government regulation.
Why was Jim Crow wrong? Why was segregation wrong? Why was sharecropping wrong? Why was redlining wrong?
Take your arguments to their logical conclusion and you can justify any form of none physical behavior as perfectly acceptable in a ‘free’ society and a ‘free’ market system.
For example, if I have a black and white equally qualified, or a black more qualified than the white, yet I like white people better therefore hire the white, why is that wrong? Is it wrong?
If I am a bank owner and I decide not to lend to a black because I don’t like blacks even if the ones are applying are credit worthy, should that be OK in a free market democracy? It is the banks money and their loss of profit. If endemic in a society is a polarized racial attitude that arbitrarily effects one race and benefits economically or psychologically another is this wrong? And how do you correct it in a free market democracy?
There is a book out called the economics of discrimination. The fact of the matter is markets aren’t rational, and people DONT always do things in the best interest of the business irrespective of emotion.
So how do you solve this dilemma?
————————————————-
I am going to email the phone number out to you who asked for it. I will clear up the schedule for the 21st cool?
Comment by Dell Gines — 07.06.05 @ 3:48 pm
So how is a white business owner in VERMONT supposed to meet a federal quota on the number of Blacks he has to hire?
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 3:58 pm
“Tell me, why is it that dark-skinned immigrants succeed where black Americans fail? Perhaps because they don’t walk around with their hands out, knowing that if they want something in this world, they’d better be prepared to earn it. Just a guess - LaShawn”
Your guess is partly right, but limited in scope. Read any analysis on developing immigrants and you will see a consistent pattern that was denied the African Slave in the development of culture.
Remember the largest FORCED migration in the history of the world occurred during the 200 years of slavery. We didn’t asked to come here. So that shifts a variable.
Secondly, there was no homogenous ‘BLACK’ culture, and no corresponding sense of original nationality and unity. An analysis of any developed immigrant in this country shows a deep attachment to their indigenous culture that is modified to maximize American capitalism. The Black American has no indengous identifiable history, or at least on that is taught and can be embraced.
Third, insulation of language was not in place for the black. This variable provides insulation and cohesiveness in purpose and economic development for the specific immigrant group whose native language is NOT English. It provides a barrier to entry to outside businesses.
Third, traditionally, the human capital of immigrants is/was higher, for example much of the non-refugee immigration is of individuals from affluent and educated overseas families.
European settlers, although many (like the Irish) had a rocky start, they were able to assimilate much easier into the mainstream American culture due to skin color accessing the majority stream of wealth.
For many of you who haven’t studied African American history, there would be times during segregation where a visiting African would be allowed to sit in a restaurant that excluded indengous American blacks.
The point being that to compare Black Americans to any other immigrant population is an incorrect comparison all the way around. The black American experience must be evaluated according to the experience of the black American as no other people group in the world were subject to the same or even similar variables.
Until you do that and create solutions based upon that data, you analysis will always be cliche’d, limited, and of questionable value.
Comment by Dell Gines — 07.06.05 @ 4:01 pm
Oh noooooo. Not the “weeez still slavez” excuse.
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 4:17 pm
Alright Dell, if it is the forced migration during slavery & cultural destruction that lies at the heart of the problems plauging the black community in American now, why is that blacks are doing worse now, than in the pre-Civil Rights era.
The levels of education, employment, marital rates, out-of-wedlock-birth rates, as well as mortality & morbidity rates are much, much worse for the black communtiy than it was fifty years ago. Surely you can’t blame this on slavery & JIm Crow?
Comment by NYgirl — 07.06.05 @ 4:24 pm
PS: La Shawn, I can’t wait for you to write this book. We need it.
Comment by NYgirl — 07.06.05 @ 4:25 pm
Raymond LOL, your insight on current social situations is always brilliant and jam packed with hardcore analysis, heck, you could be the next Al Franken of the republican party if you work a little harder at using words larger than one syllable. Dat dawn sof ejication is paying big dividends huh?
Where are SCSI & Andy, when you need an intelligent conservative. Sigh.
Comment by Dell Gines — 07.06.05 @ 4:27 pm
The difference between liberals and conservatives. Liberals see a problem think there are many many unexplored angles to approach it from IF they are able to even identify the problem at all. Then the incessant nuancing and pontification and deliberation leading to analysis paralysis begins.
Conservatives on the other hand see a duck, call it a duck and then shoot the duck. Problem solved.
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 4:36 pm
Ny Girl, thank you for an intelligent question. The problem was…gulp…sorry Martin Luther King….integration.
As you stated, during segregation, there was forced insulation and economic self-reliance such as was seen in movies such as Rosewood (with Ving Rhames). The problem was that seperate but equal was seperate and unequal, but there were benefits to segegration.
As mentioned above with new immigrants, segregation forced blacks to a large degree, to create run and manage their own institutions. That doesn’t mean there wasn’t classism, but the fact of the matter was that a black doctor was right down the street from the black blue collar worker. This forced mutual reliance on in certain ways between classes within the black community as economic existence was interdependent upon the black members of the community. Etc. money circulated hands in the black community and if you know about economics recirculated wealth benefits the community it recirculates in.
Of course external problems such as redlining, and the composite effects of Jim Crow and racism in the supply chain limited the growth of urban enclaves and black communities, but the enclosed communities in many instances like you suggest were improving.
Bam, integration provided options for middle class and affluent blacks to move away from urban centers thus destabilized the developing communities. Now you had no immediate socialization role models of doctors, as the doctors left the community, as well as lawyers etc. It became more important for the black professional to demonstrate his status by moving next to whites or the pure economics of ‘going where the money was’. When there is an absence of history developed culture that demands certain communal behaviors, integration reduces community partipation. It was legal, but not necessarily healthy.
Now what you have are urban centers that produce blacks after their own kind, poverty begats poverty irrespective of race. Inept public education that doesn’t train for the economic and social realities the urban blacks face today, lack of sustain economic development initiatives that create community control and ownership are not in place and a general economic discombobulation and lack of understanding of the negative influences of capitalistic materials have us for the most part locked in a spiral of uncompetitiveness in relative terms.
That is why if you ever read the post where I outlined my solutions, I attempted to address these core issues in our urban communities.
One final note. It sucks when you have one people group with a project 33% of all of its males projected to spend some time in the prison system in the next 30 years, with females projected to have 50% of all the abortions within the next ten years, with two million more women then men because of early death and other dilemma’s and 40% of that groups children born in poverty TODAY, and all the conservatives can say is ‘It’s a black problem’. I would think it would be an American problem don’t you?
Remember, blacks didn’t control legislation, or major economic areas that were external to their communities, and were excluded through policies from ever developing to that point.
Comment by Dell Gines — 07.06.05 @ 4:46 pm
Raymond, I am a conservative. I just think.
Comment by Dell Gines — 07.06.05 @ 4:53 pm
Reply #75:
I am glad that you are here.
Comment by James Manning — 07.06.05 @ 5:02 pm
Dell, you put make several good points, I am sure you have heard of William Julius Wilson, his arguments are much along the same line of reasoning.
However, class divisions are found in all ethnic groups. Indian doctors don’t live down the street from Indian cab drivers, and yet the cab drivers children go to college too & don’t end up going to jail. Many of the Indians who come to America are from the lowest of casts in India, they are very much discriminated against in India. People in India can easily tell a person’s cast by sight in the same way that Hutus & Tutsis can tell each other apart.
I concur with you on your final point that the tragedy of the black community is an American problem, not a black problem. That is why I don’t think that racism is the biggest factor here, because blacks are not the only ones affected by racism, Asians are too.
However, the problem is that whenever a non-black person tries to say or do anything to ameliorate the situation, they are immediately attacked & told to leave ‘our community alone’. If what that person is doing is counter-productive, why not just say so, & suggest a better method, why attack the person & call them names?
Comment by NYgirl — 07.06.05 @ 5:06 pm
Dell, OK, you are conservative, but there really is no need for the ad hominems. Even though I behave like a “blacksheep conservative” at times, I respect all opinions here. Try not to get too hyped by the rhetoric. Seems like making enemies and having your conservative credentials called into question comes pretty easy around here when people disagree with you. It’s all good. Your points are well taken, but I simply don’t need to hear that story over and over again.
I suppose my jab at you is that while you covered the bases, some of us have move beyond the problem identification stage and are now in the solution implementation stage.
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 5:14 pm
NY I don’t think that is the truth in terms of non-blacks working to help the black community. The problem is this, to say an old cliche, they don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care. So many whites come into the community in arrogance, with authoritarian and patronizing attitudes instead of a let’s build this thing attitude.
The fact of the matter is this, the Republican Party has done a great job of telling black people they are stupid, thugs, lazy etc. But have done a horrible job of rolling up their sleaves and working with community leaders at local levels SHOWING the benefits of conservative ideology. I wrote a proposal once showing (in Omaha) how the Republicans could dramatically increase their black vote in ten years through relationship building at the local level through presence and activism. As dumb as democrat policy is, their people are on the street, rubbing shoulders on a day to day basis.
Look at the posters on this site, honestly, if they said some of the stuff to my face that they say in message board anonymity I would have been detached their retinas and you wonder why more blacks don’t buy in? I want to truly, I was raised publican and am about 75% plus aligned I would say. Like I wrote in a recent blog article (shameless plug) about the “black concussed conservative”, I as well as many blacks have a ton of ideological similarities to the conservative agenda, but that is not translating into a republican base. The question a true strategist should ask is why?
Comment by Dell Gines — 07.06.05 @ 5:22 pm
raymond:” there really is no need for the ad hominems”
This one I like.
Comment by actus — 07.06.05 @ 5:22 pm
“solution implementation stage. - Raymond”
Raymond, so what are your solutions. I am open to hearing them.
Comment by Dell Gines — 07.06.05 @ 5:25 pm
I must agree with you Dell, the Repbs are not doing enough community outreach. Not that this is an excuse, but one of the hurdles to that is, the entrenched ‘leaders’ of the black community i.e. Sharpton, Jackson et. al. attack those who don’t kowtow to them.
However, you are right, conservatives should have the courage to defy these bullies & get involved. Thanks to your shameless plug (bad, bad)I will check out your site ASAP
Comment by NYgirl — 07.06.05 @ 5:30 pm
Dell, in due time, but for succinctness’ sake, how about if you pose an identified problem (that we could both agree on) and I offer one of my half-cocked cyber-solutions (since any serious solution we would need to debate, would be best done in a more fitting and less imflammatory setting).
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 5:32 pm
NYgirl,
I think many people are attacking the solution offered. Conservatives remedy for black people is to end AA so white people won’t think black people got a position they “think” the black person is not qualified to do. Many black people disagree with that solution offered. The solution that black people offer is AA and more funding for education and community development incentives. A lot of conservatives disagree with that. So what’s the solution.
Personally, I agree with vouchers but when Chicago tried the program it didn’t work because there were too many students and not enough slots in other schools for parents to choose from. Less than 20% of eligible students were able to move to different school. So what did Chicago do? They went back to try and improving all of the schools.
There may be a lot of solutions available but in this political environment, I don’t think any good ones will fly.
Comment by James Manning — 07.06.05 @ 5:34 pm
Dell, I must leave and go jump in some traffic right now, but NY Girl hit the nail on the head. A lot of what the GOP has senstively tried to accomplish has been met with skepticism not caused by the message, but by the lies told by the so-called Black “leaders” the Democrats and their flunkies in the media and you may want to check your stats again. Black membership in the GOP is growing slowly but steadily. It was that growth that doomed Democrats in the last two Presidential Elections. Even blowhard moron Tavis Smiley had to acknowledge that Blacks have been getting played by the Democrats.
Blacks are indeed listening to the Republican message. The problem is that the GOP message is beginning to sound sadly like the Democrat message.
Republicans need to show more strength and conviction if they are to earn the Black vote. One thing Blacks do NOT respect is lack of a spine and cowardice.
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 5:37 pm
Thanks for the reply, James. I agree that there is too much partisan bickering over vital issues.
What do you think of the role of the MSM in all this?. You hardely ever hear anything other than the Sharpton, Jackson lines on issues in the black community. This situation is mirrored in educational institutions such as universites too.
Comment by NYgirl — 07.06.05 @ 5:48 pm
“It will probably be asked, Why not retain and incorporate the black into the State [instead of colonizing them]? Deep rooted pejudices entertained by the whites, ten thousand recollections by the blacks of the injuries they have sustained, new provocations, the real distinctions which nature has made, and many other circunstances will divide us into parties and produce convulsions which will never end but in the extermination of the one or the other race”
Thomas Jefferson 1782
I read this blog several times and had come to the same conclusion as #37.
LaShawn, I was greatly relieved with your response #38.
I believe that the nation’s golden opportunity to deal openly with the problem of race should have occured when this nation was founded. Well that never happened.
Now as a Southerner, born in Birmingham, Alabama I am most thankful for the civil rights movement. I was born the year before Sixteenth Street Baptist Chruch was bombed. I mean a mother sent her daughter to church early one Sunday morning only to have to send her to Davenport and Harris by sunset.
I don’t think we’ll exterminate one another. I do believe that we tolerate one another. There will never be any love lost.
Whites believe that Affimative Action is unfair. Blacks believe that they have seen too many unprepared, incompetent whites who have taken positions prepared for them by blacks.
I could go on and on about blacks I know that score excetionally well on standardized test only to be re-tested. Why? blacks aren’t suppose to score well on standardized test.
Oh, yes, the assassination attempt on George Wallace sounded the death knell of the Dixiecrat Party.
I believe that Jefferson was right. Yet, we all know that even Thomas Jefferson had very, very serious issues which he either couldn’t or wouldn’t allow himself to face. this
Comment by Stephanie — 07.06.05 @ 5:48 pm
Plus, how many times can a conservative show up with a conservative solution, and not be welcomed (or worse) before he stops going back?
I’ve seen it first hand, working with groups like habitat for humanity and the knights of columbus. There is plenty of racism to go around, plenty of bigotry and prejudice.
However, I am curious Dell, Raymond aside, what has been said that would induce you to rip out someones eyes? I’ll admit, my hackles can go up when all whites get lumped together, as if they are a monolithic group. Like Howard Deans many comments… it does make me wonder which party he is trying to get into the Whitehouse in ‘08.
Comment by SCSIwuzzy — 07.06.05 @ 5:51 pm
James,
Personally, what I hear from most conservative I interact with, is not a call to cut off AA. But to stop growing AA and similar programs. Maybe set some metrics, and determine when AA is no longer benefiting the way it used to, or was supposed to.
But from many liberals, any questions about the effectiveness or lifespan of these programs is met with a kneejerk reaction, and quite often accusations of racism. And they are very quick to exagerate the issue, taking the question of “when do we stop?” and turning it into “They want to cut off the support! They HATE”.
Not that some cons don’t take lib proposals and run them to a logical yet absurd conclusion, ala “Gay MArriage will lead to NAMBLA getting legal rights to the sex they want, or man-man marriage wil lead to man-sheep mariage”. These aren’t impossible, but it is just a touch extreme when some say it will happen as a natural consequence…
As for more funding for education, I think we need smarter funding. Lok at the many school districts, like Philadelphia and DC, that have increased the funding while performance is still dropping. More money may be beneficial, but the money must be spent where it is needed.
Again, like AA, many questions about how to determine how and where the money should be spent (or talks of accountability) are met with kneejerk reactions. Cons are labled anti-education, or anti-teacher. Or racist. Go down the list.
Comment by SCSIwuzzy — 07.06.05 @ 6:06 pm
I must agree with you Dell, the Repbs are not doing enough community outreach. Not that this is an excuse, but one of the hurdles to that is, the entrenched ‘leaders’ of the black community i.e. Sharpton, Jackson et. al. attack those who don’t kowtow to them.
Funny thing, the same thing was said before Reagan went to the union strongholds to say what he stood for.
The fact is, the paternalistic and prejudiced mentality of people who believe that Blacks follow the “Black leaders” is the problem. Oh, and those who know otherwise but push that message for their own gain.
Comment by DarkStar — 07.06.05 @ 6:11 pm
NYgirl,
The Jesse and Shapton ploy is so old and tired that it’s not worth mentioning. However, the MSM is full of crap and I think everyone on both sides of the political spectrum knows it. Jesse and Sharpton are only TWO voices but they are the only one anyone cares to discuss. I like both men for what they do, but they are media men that have the ability to capture and audience. They are not head of any movement in the black community and most black people see them as psudeo politicians, not activist. I will say that when there is a need to spotlight an incident in the black community, Jesse and Sharpton are the only two black people that can accomplish it. On that point, they serve a purpose… although a limited one.
Reply #88:
I agree, we won’t exterminate each other… we’ve evolved to the point where we exist in silent animosity.
“Whites believe that Affimative Action is unfair. Blacks believe that they have seen too many unprepared, incompetent whites who have taken positions prepared for them by blacks.”
Almost every black child heard, “you have to work twice as hard to get half as far.” I’ll bet this happens far more often than an unqualified black person getting a job over a white person.
reply #89:
How about we start talking about some of the solutions. And I don’t mean conservative talking points. Real solutions. I’m willing to listen. We’ve bantered back and forth all day and outside of ending AA, none offered from anyone. I would like to hear the conservative’s “political” agenda for the black community. no preaching, no insults, no cliche’s… just policy.
Comment by James Manning — 07.06.05 @ 6:16 pm
James: You’re on FIRE today, baby!
Comment by Tiffany In Mpls — 07.06.05 @ 6:22 pm
Reply #90:
Ok, I can see the point in providing some metrics, but I guess the concern would be who is the measurer. This comes down to a trust factor.
School funding… man that is a mess because there is so much more to education than funding.
Comment by James Manning — 07.06.05 @ 6:23 pm
DarkStar, you said:
“The fact is, the paternalistic and prejudiced mentality of people who believe that Blacks follow the “Black leaders†is the problem.”
Tell that to the people who have been vilified by false accusations from “Black leaders”. Tell that to the companies who have endured shake downs by these guys.
True, not all Blacks follow them, but many do, or at least it looks like most do, as these groups tend to be more visible & politically powerful.
Comment by NYgirl — 07.06.05 @ 6:24 pm
NYgirl,
They are powerful… but I can tell you that unless black people see them on the tube or are talking politics, Jesse and Sharpton don’t come up. And you said it right, it looks like many people follow them. We support them at times… and maybe the fact that I’m from Chicago and have heard Jesse Jackson speak at length my entire life I have a different opinion of him. I’m the same way with Minister Farrakahn.
Comment by James Manning — 07.06.05 @ 6:31 pm
James, if I may ask, what is your opinion of Jesse Jackson?
If Blacks disagree with them at times, why are not vocal in expressing it?
Comment by NYgirl — 07.06.05 @ 6:37 pm
For those who want to label themselves conservatives, and for those who believe that conservatives are “people who think vs. feel”, I want you to think about the following questions:
1. It’s well known that the membership numbers of the NAACP has been steady since about the 70s. Given that the American Black population has grown, essentially, the NAACP membership has fallen. If the NAACP is a group that “leads thoughts” of Black people in the U.S., how is it that its membership numbers are steady with the average age of NAACP members rising?
2. With question #2 in mind, how is that public Black conservatives only point out the membership troubles of the NAACP, but never publically point out the criticisms of the NAACP by “non-conservative” Blacks?
3. With questions #1 and #2 in mind, why is it when it is reported that Blacks who have been polled favor “conservative” ideas like vouchers or support heterosexual marriage only, none of the conservative critics of said “leaders”, try to find out other areas of disagreement?
4. With #3 in mind, do you believe that the images of Blacks, by “news media” is accurate?
5. With #4 in mind, if you do NOT believe the images of Blacks are totally accurate, have you ever wondered why conservatives, of any race, have tried to give a more complete picture of the Black community.
6. To go further, if there is indeed a “silent conservative Black population”, why are there no efforts by conservatives to profile the everyday “conservative Black population”?
7. If you believe that “standard” conservative image of Blacks, do you believe that Earl Graves, publisher of Black Enterprise is someone who is castigated or cheered?
Bonus questions:
1. Why is it that the biggest critics of the NAACP, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton, are not white conservatives or Black conservatives, but the general Black population?
2. Why is it that the biggest critics of Blacks in the U.S., are Blacks?
Comment by DarkStar — 07.06.05 @ 6:37 pm
NYGirl, is “your” — general your — ignorance the responsibility of “you” — general you — or Blacks?
Keep reading. Wait until LB approves my list of questions.
James Manning in #96 nails it. Now, if you really are an independent thinker, ask yourself why it’s not reported when Blacks disagree with said “leaders”?
Comment by DarkStar — 07.06.05 @ 6:40 pm
The “Free Thinker” Challenge
Based on an intentionally provocative post from LaShawn Barber, and the comment thread I’ve become a part of, I’ve come up with the following questions. For those who want to label themselves conservatives, and for those who believe that conservatives…
Trackback by Vision Circle — 07.06.05 @ 6:44 pm
Dell wrote (# 80):
“The fact of the matter is this, the Republican Party has done a great job of telling black people they are stupid, thugs, lazy etc.”
We have? Did President Bush say this to Colin Powell or Condi Rice when he asked them to join his administration? Or perhaps you think that those of us who think Condi should run for president in ‘08 are using “Run, Condi, run!” as code words for “You’re a lazy, stupid thug!” Maybe you’re thinking of when we called judicial nominees including Janice Rogers Brown “neanderthals.”
Oh, wait… Sorry. That was Teddy Kennedy.
Sheesh…
(# 67):
“The government has THE RESPONSIBILITY to correct what in economics are called the negative externalities caused by freedom and the free market.”
It does? I’m not intimately familiar with all the writings of the Founders, but I’m pretty sure that they didn’t mention this. This theory of government as a counterweight to the market is, I think, of fairly recent vintage. As I recall my history, most Americans felt that the government really had no role to play vis a vis the market until the late 19th century (laisez faire).
What the government DOES have the responsibility to do is to enforce the law. As a nation, we’ve decided to make law that (for example) companies must control their pollution emissions, pay a certan wage… or hire people based on skin color or gender. We can argue over whether or not these are good laws; making the ultimate decision is what elections are for.
(# 75)
“integration provided options for middle class and affluent blacks to move away from urban centers thus destabilized the developing communities.”
Move to where? And why would they want to? Under Jim Crow, the appearance of a ‘middle class’ black person in the wrong neighborhood would probably result in a lynching. So why would they leave their own communities?
Could it be that “integration” and especially The Great Society DESTROYED those developing communities? That by effectively subsidizing births from wedlock, unemployment, and destruction of property, blacks lost much of their impetus to make, maintain, and even improve their communities?
We see this repeated on a macro scale with foreign aid.
I know that AA and EO and MOCs and all the other alphabet soup is popular in some quarters because there’s an ingrained belief among liberals (black and white) that white racism will ALWAYS prevent blacks from going anywhere.
Happily, some black leaders in the past didn’t take that attitude. I don’t say that they didn’t face obstacles that would have caused me and many other lesser men to quit. I don’t say that they had to work twice as hard as a half-as-qualified white person to get the same position.
What I DO say is that they showed the way to blacks AND whites: that black people can be competent and successful. I can testify from my own family history:
My grandfather went to his grave believing that black people have tails (like monkeys, you know).
My father’s heart surgeon is a black man, and Pop wouldn’t have anybody else.
How things have changed.
Comment by docjim505 — 07.06.05 @ 6:46 pm
For those who care to follow up on my questions
http://www.visioncircle.org/archive/004232.html
Comment by DarkStar — 07.06.05 @ 6:52 pm
If the media distorts the picture of Black conservatives, and the media distorts the picture of progress of American Blacks, why trust the picture of Blacks following “Black leaders”?
Comment by DarkStar — 07.06.05 @ 6:58 pm
Reply #97:
Because most blacks don’t have the media platform to do so. Several years ago Jesse Jackson got involved with some kids that got kicked out of school for fighting. We all saw the video tape of the brawl. Most black people agreed that most of the kids deserved the punishment.. some didn’t but Jesse moved for all the kids to return to school. But Jesse got the camera and those who disagreed with him did so with no spotlight. That’s the way the media works.
Comment by James Manning — 07.06.05 @ 7:01 pm
to add onto #104, it was a white man who got Jesse Jackson involved in that case.
Comment by DarkStar — 07.06.05 @ 7:08 pm
If Blacks disagree with them at times, why are not vocal in expressing it?
And my answer: Because the media won’t report it.
My follow up question to you: Why do you assume that if the media doesn’t report it, it doesn’t happen?
Comment by DarkStar — 07.06.05 @ 7:10 pm
DarkStar, I don’t assume that, but I have not seen demonstrations by Blacks who disagree as I have seen by Black who do agree. The media can only be silent for so long.
However, the Internet is making a difference, & helping to shed light on differing views.
Comment by NYgirl — 07.06.05 @ 7:18 pm
Reply #101:
There have always been black people to succeed in the face of insurmountable odds. We’ve always saluted those that achieved great things. Condi Rice and Colin Powell are no exception – although I disagree with their politics. I believe my father achieved a great deal just surviving the rampant racism of southern Arkansas in the 60’s. I think we can appreciate what prior generations accomplished and we are able to eat some of the fruits of their labor. And yes, some of us have squandered that fruit.
But I’m still waiting on some conservative policies.
Reply #103:
You can’t.
Comment by James Manning — 07.06.05 @ 7:22 pm
#105
“to add onto #104, it was a white man who got Jesse Jackson involved in that case.”
So Jesse is the “da man’s” puppet… just like we thought
Comment by Renee — 07.06.05 @ 7:25 pm
What a blog thread this one is. You know, one of things I enjoy about blogging, especially at CONSERVATIVE blogs is that the onion is peeled back, and the tart, tear-jerking layers of the ideology spews out. Oh, you get your occasional quacks and whack-jobs, but for the most part, I enjoy seeing the non-politically correct mental process of right-wingers. There is little room left for doubt after that. That’s why I post FACTS and RESEARCH to bolster my opinions, saw the unfettered ID is revealed for all the eyes to see. Nobody responded to this research by Devah Pager I posted on another thread about equal opportunity, but I would LOVE to hear NYGirl’s take on this:
>>>“These were equivalent job applicants in every respect, with the exception of the fact that within certain teams we assigned one of the job applicants a felony conviction,†says Princeton sociologist Devah Pager.
After the testers applied to some 1,500 employers for 3,500 jobs as busboys, couriers, deli clerks and more, they found, according to the Pager: “The effect of race was just as large if not larger than the effect of a felony conviction. So blacks with NO criminal background were no more likely to receive a call back or a job offer than a white FELON. And it really suggests that being black in America today is equivalent to having a felony conviction.â€
…All things being equal, a black man with no criminal record was about half as likely to get the job as an equally qualified white man, and had the same, or slightly less of a chance of getting the job as a white man with a criminal record. That is despite laws making it illegal to discriminate on the basis of either race or criminal history in New York.â€
http://www.ny1.com/ny1/content/index.jsp?stid=6&aid=51561
Dagney writes:
>>>In fact I learned that the GOP first proposed civil rights legislation as far back as 1888! Moreover, I learned that the president who was “forced†to sign it into law, i.e., LBJ, had voted AGAINST such legislation for all the time, about 20 years, he was a senator from Texas! I hate being lied to, and learning that, I began my gradual journey to the RIGHT! BTW, I still listen to Rush!â€
Here’s something I would love for Dagney to comment on. An infamous quote from LBJ that is not only contradictory to his statement, but deflates the sails of most arguments about mindset of the Southern Strategy:
>>>>>>David Halberstam, in his book on the Civil Rights movement entitled “The Children”, quotes Lyndon Johnson talking with Bill Moyers right after the Voting Rights Act of 1965 had passed by large margins in the Congress of the United States. This positive vote followed the arousing of the public’s consciousness by the Abu Ghraib-like use of dogs and fire hoses on black citizens in Alabama. Klan groups, under the direct protection of Southern State Troopers and local police, had also attacked blacks with baseball bats and lead pipes in public places, which had been seen on national television. Moyers expected to find President Johnson jubilant over this legislative victory. Instead he found the President strangely silent. When Moyers enquired as to the reason, Johnson said rather prophetically, “Bill, I’ve just handed the South to the Republicans for fifty years, certainly for the rest of our life times.”
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:EVxelBcQvrkJ:users.erols.com/kmdavis/lbj.html+Lyndon+Johnson,+Civil+Rights+Act+1964,+quotes&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Well, hey…that’s “angry old white men†politics, right? I mean—it’s not like there’s some “white power†movement trying to infiltrate the youth of America, right? And if there is, nobody affiliated with the GOP would have anything to do with it I’m sure.
Whoops.
>>>The Washington notables lunching at D.C.’s exclusive University Club one day last summer were doubtless unaware that America’s leading neo-Nazi and a couple of gussied-up Skinheads were dining in their company.
But there they were, National Alliance leader Dr. William Pierce at a table along with two Skinheads and his host Todd Blodgett, a former Reagan White House staffer, GOP strategist and associate of national socialists, finalizing Pierce’s takeover of the most lucrative white supremacist enterprise in North America: Resistance Records.
By October, Pierce had paid out nearly $250,000 to acquire the “white power” music label’s compact disc catalogue, inventory, mailing list and publishing arm — an enterprise that, all told, could inject hundreds of thousands of dollars into Pierce’s wide-ranging neo-Nazi operations…
Although Resistance has been dormant for close to two years now, at its height it was selling an estimated 50,000 racist CDs a year and grossing, according to one of its original founders, $10,000 a month….
The purchase positions Pierce extremely well.
Not only could Resistance put serious money into the Alliance’s coffers, but it is very likely to help America’s preeminent neo-Nazi organization bring in many new followers, both in the United States and in Europe, where racist rock ‘n’ roll is booming.
“As Resistance Records regains strength, that acquisition should add an increasing number of younger members in the 18 to 25 age range, to our ranks,” Pierce wrote recently. â€
Like I said, you folks can follow anything you wish. That’s the beauty of America. But I certainly wouldn’t consciously associate MYSELF with movements like above, or any of the following folks:
>>>Democrats on Wednesday denounced a Republican lawmaker quoted in a newspaper as saying the GOP would fare poorly in this year’s elections if it failed to “suppress the Detroit vote.”
State Rep. John Pappageorge, R-Troy, acknowledged using “a bad choice of words” but said his remark shouldn’t be construed as racist. Pappageorge, 73, was quoted in July 16 editions of the Detroit Free Press as saying, “If we do not suppress the Detroit vote, we’re going to have a tough time in this election.”
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:PUaatKxhrKIJ:www.freep.com/news/latestnews/pm20777_20040721.htm+%22suppress+the+black+vote%22,+Pappageorge&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Umm…Pappageorge is something else alright….but he sounds like a low budget UPN sitcom next to 2004 GOP Congressional Candidate from Tennessee, James L. Hart:
>>>Our cities are being destroyed by dysgenic welfare and immigration. Why does Detroit look like it was hit by a nuclear bomb and Hiroshima look like it was on the side that won the war? Everyone knows the answer but is afraid to say. Because genes have a more devastating effect on civilization than nuclear bombs, and the reason for Detroit’s decline is that there are less ‘favored races’ in Detroit with an average IQ of 85 and more ‘favored races’ in Japan with an average IQ of 104. (It is noted there are less ‘favored races’* in Africa south of the Sahara with an average IQ of 70-75, which accounts for the extreme poverty there.) Richard Lynn’s book, ‘IQ and the Wealth of Nations’ has clearly shown that the prosperity of a nation is determined in large measure by the average IQ of the population. The poverty genes of less ‘favored races’*, which are spread by welfare and immigration, are destroying our cities no less than if they were hit by a nuclear bomb. Massive uncontrolled and illegal immigration portends not just the destruction of a few cities but of our whole civilization itself. If we had integrated with less ‘favored races’* centuries ago, there would have never been an electric light. There would never have been an airplane. Unless we stop dysgenic welfare and immigration policies, the US will look like one big Detroit.â€
http://www.jameshartforcongress.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1&Itemid=2
What about more upscale Goppers? How ‘bout good ol’ Haley “don’t take my picture down from the CCC website†Barbour?â€
>>>When he ran for the Senate in 1982, a New York Times report said:
“The racial sensitivity at Barbour headquarters was suggested by an exchange between the candidate and an aide who complained that there would be `coons’ at a campaign stop at the state fair. Embarrassed that a reporter heard this, Mr. Barbour warned that if the aide persisted in racist remarks, he would be reincarnated as a watermelon and placed at the mercy of blacks.”
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:yJQ2lseJYO8J:www.commondreams.org/scriptfiles/views03/1029-04.htm+GOP,+racist&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
You may ask yourself, “Why does Cobra go there? Why does he dredge up all this stuff about Republicans. Well, It’s your party, and I’ll pry if I want to.
http://www.thecobraslair.com/images/GOP-CHESS.gif
–Cobra
You know, Cobra, breaking up the paragraphs with space would make your posts more readable. - Admin
Comment by Cobra — 07.06.05 @ 7:31 pm
James,
So far I have just been responding to your talking points, and those of others, telling us what whites and conservatives think.
Here’s a question for you: Why do conservatives need a special policy for blacks?
For more general issues, like education (which goes beyond any one community or ethnicity), what would you call NCLB and vouchers? Welfare to work?
If you’re going to complain, and say in effect, that cons need to put up or shut up, I recomend you do the same my good son. What are your solutions, aside from more funding?
Comment by SCSIwuzzy — 07.06.05 @ 7:38 pm
I gave up after the so called “reasearch project” that was done in the controlled environment…
back to my popcorn and reading
Comment by Renee — 07.06.05 @ 7:38 pm
James, so I take it that you’re off the DNC/NAACP/Jesse/Al plantation? Instead of waiting for conservative policies, why aren’t you engaged in formulating those policies? Afterall, waiting on the MSM to accurately report the policies is bound to be futile.
Dell, I’d engage, cuz you’ve tossed a few doozies again, but my time is short and besides you don’t send me replies anymore
To most everyone else, (you too DS) pretty good give-n-take going on here. Maybe I’ll revisit later.
Don’t recall ever going to a book signing before, but there’s a 1st time for everything.
Comment by Andy — 07.06.05 @ 7:43 pm
# 75
No, that is how it is mischaracterized. Try, it is an American problem, and blacks need to be active participants in the solution. That is the conservative posistion. And there are plenty of blacks stepping up and doing just that.
Here is a challenge: Find me one republican office holder (county dog catcher and the like don’t count) or prominent conservative scholar, who takes the “It’s all up to the blacks now, time to abandon them” posistion you imply (in more than just post 75).
If you find one, I bet I can find at least 10 others who land on him/her with both feet in their disagreement.
Comment by SCSIwuzzy — 07.06.05 @ 7:50 pm
Reply #111:
Think of it as marketing. There are hundreds of political demographics: elderly, suburban, rural, business, unions, conservatives, liberals, Republicans, Democrats, environmentalist… blacks. Just as there is a policy for the US, there is a policy for specific needs of folks in Iowa and those are different from folks in Oregon. The same way with black people. There is an interest as Americans, but there are some things that impact black people far greater than any other demographics. Unemployment, health, poverty, urban issues, education access to capitol. All politics are local.
Solutions: I have my ideas but I opened my mind to hear some from a conservative perspective. I’ll be glad to offer them. As a matter of fact, I will post them on my blog tomorrow. In the meantime, I’m still open.
I’ll check later. Right now I have a 3 year old that wants to play. Feel free to email me those policies at: blaquejimmy@yahoo.com
Comment by James Manning — 07.06.05 @ 8:00 pm
Cobra, as near as I can tell with your screech, if you had more column space, you would have gone back far eneough to cover Jesus. And gleefully point out to us that Jesus’ message is pointless and the epitome of hypocrisy cause he was personally close to Judas Iscariot.
That Jesus would promote Judas to Chief Treasurer of his Fishers of Men party, prior to Judas’ betrayal is simply shocking. Shocking indeed.
But that’s ok. Where we tend to disown our prodigals, the other side wraps theirs ever closer and elevates them. I guess it’s just a matter of time before your ship comes in as the official White House Artiste. A matter of long, long time.
Comment by Andy — 07.06.05 @ 8:10 pm
Ultra long posts? Are usually glanced over and/or skipped entirely (at least by lazy old me).
In the words of Bloviatus Maximus Bill O’Reilly, keep it pithy for better conversation flow.
Comment by Raymond — 07.06.05 @ 9:31 pm
James Manning wrote (# 108):
“But I’m still waiting on some conservative policies.”
I think that this is sort of the point that libs don’t really get: conservatives don’t believe in tailoring policies (read: pandering) to specific groups. The object of across the board tax cuts, NCLB, Social Security reform, etc. is to help EVERYBODY.
What would you like to see? Congressional districts in several states are gerrymandered to all but guarantee that those states will send at least one black American to Congress (I live in such a district). The Supreme Court ruled that law schools are perfectly within their rights to accept less qualified applicants in order to get ‘diversity’. There’s a US Civil Rights Commission and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, both of which exist in great measure to provide extra protection to black citizens. What more do you want? Reparations for slavery?
I’ll attempt to answer your questions, D