In Defense of Black Republicans

[NZA]

maybe those "complicated politics" are already here and you are not seeing it

very possible. maybe 2016 will verify that. we might see actual policy and rhetoric changes in the right wing that will make more minorities give them a look. i doubt it will happen this fast, i think they will lose a third national election before enough of the old cacs die off and the younger ones compromise a bit.

my whole thing is that i am focused on policies, not the color of a few token hand picked appointees. when you see platforms evolve, that is when i would be confident enough to think that things are becoming more complicated. nothing shows me that it has changed enough.

 

[daze23]

maybe those "complicated politics" are already here and you are not seeing it

because if you concede now is the time, you might not be able to lean on the excuse of waiting for the 'right time'

 

[theworldismine13]

very possible. maybe 2016 will verify that. we might see actual policy and rhetoric changes in the right wing that will make more minorities give them a look. i doubt it will happen this fast, i think they will lose a third national election before enough of the old cacs die off and the younger ones compromise a bit.

my whole thing is that i am focused on policies, not the color of a few token hand picked appointees. when you see platforms evolve, that is when i would be confident enough to think that things are becoming more complicated. nothing shows me that it has changed enough.

That's fine but I think the "black agenda" is to be dominant force in both parties, so the IMO the "black agenda" is platform neutral, your preferred policies is a personal choice

black people need to be pro active not reactive to politcs

 

[Serious]

Man wtf, is this black agenda(nationalism) sh*t. The only thing the general populace should push for is a more "just"(equality)and heavily educated society.


The world is changing. The rise in intermingling on a soon to be caclysmic international scale, will surely compose, a rather race less society in the near future. As much of human skin complexion and culture will derive from heterogeneous(mixed) entities. "Theoretically "this "should" eliminate many primitive prejudices and stereotypes. Human perception "should" evolve into assessments on a case by case analysis.

Basically what I'm saying is, quit with this Black Agenda talk. Modern day blacks in America, are in no way organized on a colossal level. Improving overall human quality of life, seems like a more attainable goal...

 

[NZA]

That's fine but I think the "black agenda" is to be dominant force in both parties, so the IMO the "black agenda" is platform neutral, your preferred policies is a personal choice

black people need to be pro active not reactive to politcs

that's impossible in democracy. platform neutral doesnt really make sense if platforms have consequences. the consequences themselves may either hurt or help black people as a whole, therefore advocacy of certain platforms is always an issue. the platform is the whole point of voter politics. it's not meant to be a club or sport. you vote on policies you think will further your interests. i think tea party's platform is harmful to my agenda, therefore i oppose them, i dont join them and help them further their agenda. that would be retarded. the moment there is neutrality is the moment we have a sham government.

 

[Un-AmericanDreamer]

Gundam raised a valid point awhile back and people dismissed him for whatever reason, though I suspect it was because he is a conservative, I was surprised at the time because what he said actually made sense . If stricter gun control laws were implemented, young black males would be the unintended primary targets of such legislation. So to me, any black person who supports gun control is supporting the prison industrial complex that disenfranchises black males. So yeah, not all liberal positions are benign to our interests as a people. This is why people need to be careful in cosigning everything coming from a two-party platform. This is some of the insanity that goes on out here. Then at a later date, you'll have people like Michael Eric Dyson sitting up complaining about disproportionate gun sentencing rates when they supported the measure being recognized in the first place.

 

[theworldismine13]

Man wtf, is this black agenda(nationalism) sh*t. The only thing the general populace should push for is a more "just"(equality)and heavily educated society.


The world is changing. The rise in intermingling on a soon to be caclysmic international scale, will surely compose, a rather race less society in the near future. As much of human skin complexion and culture will derive from heterogeneous(mixed) entities. "Theoretically "this "should" eliminate many primitive prejudices and stereotypes. Human perception "should" evolve into assessments on a case by case analysis.

Basically what I'm saying is, quit with this Black Agenda talk. Modern day blacks in America, are in no way organized on a colossal level. Improving overall human quality of life, seems like a more attainable goal...

there isnt any black agenda, that's why i put it in quotes

but the thing is if people say that tim scott for example is going against black people, how exactly is he going against black people? what is the logical basis for that?

 

[theworldismine13]

that's impossible in democracy. platform neutral doesnt really make sense if platforms have consequences. the consequences themselves may either hurt or help black people as a whole, therefore advocacy of certain platforms is always an issue. the platform is the whole point of voter politics. it's not meant to be a club or sport. you vote on policies you think will further your interests. i think tea party's platform is harmful to my agenda, therefore i oppose them, i dont join them and help them further their agenda. that would be retarded. the moment there is neutrality is the moment we have a sham government.

the reason why i say its neutral is that IMO the "black agenda" is to increase the political and economic power of black people, period

that might be your conclusion that the democratic party is the way but what if a black person comes to the conclusion that the democratic platform is harmful to black people and the tea party or the republican party is the way?

 

[theworldismine13]

Gundam raised a valid point awhile back and people dismissed him for whatever reason, though I suspect it was because he is a conservative, I was surprised at the time because what he said actually made sense . If stricter gun control laws were implemented, young black males would be the unintended primary targets of such legislation. So to me, any black person who supports gun control is supporting the prison industrial complex that disenfranchises black males. So yeah, not all liberal positions are benign to our interests as a people. This is why people need to be careful in cosigning everything coming from a two-party platform. This is some of the insanity that goes on out here. Then at a later date, you'll have people like Michael Eric Dyson sitting up complaining about disproportionate gun sentencing rates when they supported the measure being recognized in the first place.

pretty much, people forget that the people most responsible for the huge increase in the jail population and the drug war are democrats named joe "the homeboy" biden and bill "first black prez" clinton (admittedly they did it with republican support) but they also had some black politicians demanding high sentences for drug dealers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_Crime_Control_and_Law_Enforcement_Act

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/102/s1241 oh thats interesting, so biden go together with strom thurmond in 1991 too

http://stopthedrugwar.org/speakeasy/2008/aug/24/joe_bidens_awful_record_drug_pol

 

[NZA]

the reason why i say its neutral is that IMO the "black agenda" is to increase the political and economic power of black people, period

that might be your conclusion that the democratic party is the way but what if a black person comes to the conclusion that the democratic platform is harmful to black people and the tea party or the republican party is the way?

then he should vote that way. i wont immediately label him a tom based solely on that. i respect differences in strategy, the way i respect your POV. i know you are the opposite of a tom

like i explained to CACtain planet, i always take other factors into consideration for tom status. i would always listen to that person's rhetoric, how they speak when invited on the hannity show and whatnot. i would focus on that person's goals and affinities, and then use that knowledge to interpret why they support any given policy. i may be wrong in my analysis. i hope not, and i dont want to accidently offended innocent black folks who simply disagree with me on politics.

and let me just state, on "democrat party is the way" i dont care about the party, i view it as convenient to my interests within the system. the moment i no longer see it that way, i will abandon it. i dont hold a flag with a donkey on it and get all emotional. i know that in america's short history, we have had several parties, some are extinct, and the two remaining have completely switched their platform based on civil rights. this is why i tend to say "conservative" or "tea party" instead of just republican. i am really focused on the ideologies more than the name of the parties.

 

[DEAD7]

The whole issue is lose-lose.

Acknowledge the GoP racism
or
Pretend the racism doesn't exist

Either way its a L.

 

[Born2BKing]

And How exactly has the democrats furthered this "black agenda"? Increased food stamps?

What kind of racist shyt is this mutha fukka.

 

[superunknown23]

Bullshyt. Black republicans today are certified c00nS... Why would you vote for a party that works completely against your interests (when they're not too busy trying to disenfranchise you from voting)?
Putting token black or latino faces out there while spewing birther crap at Obama and "self-deportation for illegal aliens" at latinos won't change anything. It's about the policies, not the messengers.
Today, black folks either have to vote democrat or stay home. We just go with the lesser of evils.
Of course, black people supported the GOP in the old days (it was the party of Emancipation!) The most racist folks in this country were southerners. Republicans were considered liberal northerners, while the South was solidly conservative democrat.
Then things changed dramatically in the 50s and 60s.
Despite the political risks, LBJ pushed for civil rights legislation, angering southern conservatives along the way (dems and dixiecrats).
The result? Them racist southern voters flocked to the desperate GOP, which was in disarray after LBJ won the 1964 election in a landslide over the segregationist Republican Barry Goldwater.
Is it a coincidence that Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina and other southern states went republican for the first time EVER in the 1960s and have remained so? In 1964, Mississippi went from solidly democrat to 86% republican after just ONE election cycle! What the fukk happened? You'd think the Civil Rights Act had nothing to do with this sudden switch?

The GOP stopped being the party of Lincoln in the 60s and became a Goldwater-Thurmond-Helms-Falwell-Nixon-Duke-Limbaugh-Reagan-Bush-Palin group. Why would any self-respecting black person associate with these bigots?
Do you honestly believe that men like Rockefeller, Everett Dirksen, Ike or even Teddy Roosevelt would still feel at home in the current GOP? This is the party of Jefferson Davis now, not Lincoln.

Also, it's so funny when republicans keep referring to MLK to obliquely criticize black people. Conservatives absolutely DESPISED him when he was alive (especially William Buckley, Falwell, Reagan, Helms, Nixon and others who called him a dangerous communist)... but now that he's sanctified (and safely dead) some republicans are even trying to claim him (didn't he vote for JFK and LBJ?)
Sorry, but that shyt doesn't fly.

"The Republican Party geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism. All people of goodwill viewed with alarm and concern the frenzied wedding at the Cow Palace of the KKK with the radical right. The "best man" at this ceremony was a senator whose voting record, philosophy, and program were anathema to all the hard-won achievements of the past decade."
- MLK, July 16, 1964 (after segregationist Barry Goldwater won the GOP presidential nomination)

"The war has given the extreme right, the anti-labor, anti-Negro, and anti-humanistic forces a weapon of spurious patriotism to galvanize its supporters into reaching for power, right up to the White House. It hopes to use national frustration to take control and restore the America of social insecurity and power for the privileged. When a Hollywood performer, lacking distinction even as an actor can become a leading war hawk candidate for the Presidency, only the irrationalities induced by a war psychosis can explain such a melancholy turn of events."
- MLK, November 1967 (on Vietnam and Ronald Reagan)

You can’t talk about solving the economic problem of the Negro without talking about billions of dollars. You can’t talk about ending the slums without first saying profit must be taken out of slums. You’re really tampering and getting on dangerous ground because you are messing with folk then. You are messing with captains of industry… Now this means that we are treading in difficult water, because it really means that we are saying that something is wrong…with capitalism… There must be a better distribution of wealth and maybe America must move toward a Democratic Socialism.
- MLK

"You start out in 1954 by saying, '******, ******, ******.' By 1968 you can't say '******' - that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is blacks get hurt worse than whites.
"And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me - because obviously sitting around saying, 'We want to cut this,' is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than '******, ******.'
- Lee Atwater, on the GOP's Southern Strategy

 

[theworldismine13]

Bullshyt. Black republicans today are certified c00nS... Even Barkley had to flee that cac association. Why would you vote for a party that works completely against your interests (when they're not too busy trying to disenfranchise you from voting)? Today, black folks either have to vote democrat or stay home. We just go with the lesser of evils.
Of course, black people supported the GOP in the old days (it was the party of Emancipation!) The most racist folks in this country were southerners. Republicans were considered liberal northerners, while the South was solidly conservative democrat.
Then things changed dramatically in the 50s and 60s.
Despite the political risks, LBJ pushed for civil rights legislation, angering southern conservatives along the way (dems and dixiecrats).
The result? Them racist southerners flocked to the desperate GOP, which was in disarray after LBJ won the 1964 election in a landslide over the segregationist Republican Barry Goldwater.
Is it a coincidence that Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina and other southern states went republican for the first time EVER in the 1960s and have remained so? In 1964, Mississippi went from solidly democrat to 86% republican after just ONE election cycle! What the fukk happened? You'd think the Civil Rights Act had nothing to do with this sudden switch?

The GOP stopped being the party of Lincoln in the 60s and became a Goldwater-Thurmond-Helms-Falwell-Nixon-Duke-Limbaugh-Reagan-Bush-Palin group. Why would any self-respecting black person associate with these bigots?
Do you honestly believe that men like Rockefeller, Everett Dirksen, Ike or even Teddy Roosevelt would still feel at home in the current GOP? This is the party of Jefferson Davis now, not Lincoln.

Also, it's so funny when republicans keep referring to MLK to obliquely criticize black people. Conservatives absolutely DESPISED him when he was alive (especially William Buckley, Falwell, Reagan, Helms, Nixon and others who called him a dangerous communist)... but now that he's sanctified (and safely dead) some are even trying to claim him (didn't he vote for JFK and LBJ?)
Sorry, but that shyt doesn't fly.

This is just reactive stance that will lead to stagnation, this argument is really "oh dem libruls is some good white folk, dem republicans is bad white folk"

I don't think that type of simplistic analysis will serve black people well, either the policy ideas are good or they aren't, it's irrelevant who is proposing it

At some point in time we have to stop being runaway slaves looking for friendly white folk and start being actors on the world stage, the reason why a black person would associate with these racists is for increasing the raw political and economic power of black people

 

[superunknown23]

At some point in time we have to stop being runaway slaves and start being actors on the world stage, the reason why a black person would associate with these racists is for increasing the raw political and economic power of black people

LOL
Wow, I've never heard of that one before: Associate with racists (while discriminating against your own people), so you can increase your power... Are you as dumb as you sound or you're just trolling?
That's akin to suggesting that MLK should've banded with Strom Thurmond so he could have nice cushy benefits for himself (and somehow obliquely for black people). Maybe jews should've supported the NSDAP in the 30s and black folks should've done the same with the Apartheid regime in South Africa.
Yeah, we definitely should've supported the GOP's efforts at suppressing our vote this year and embraced Romney/Ryan's economic policies.