Why do blacks vote Democrats?

[Moonbeam]

davmat787: Other homes of slavery existed around the globe, Morocco and the wholesale enslavement of Europeans comes to mind. The south WAS, not is, the home to American slavery.

M: Is the place of where slavery was in the US.

d: I have never been to the South, I should point that out. However over the years I've seen countless examples of the south of today being convicted for crimes that occurred hundreds of years ago. How can current southerners move forward and shed the dark cloak of the past when assholes always throw it back in their faces as if people of today have any culpability for sins committed centuries ago?

M: You said:
"Population demographics, anecdotal hearsay from that conversation I mentioned, and some assumptions.

Not sure which, if any, metrics could prove or disprove this notion but given the percentage of blacks living in the south versus all other regions it stands to reason that more blacks and whites coexist respectfully and peacefully there than any other region.

The demographics and population figures does not allow the degree of racial separation that is common to other regions that have a much lower percentage of blacks in their respective populations.

Make any sense at all?"

Why do you have a problem assuming that bigotry will be strongest where bigotry has always been found as opposed to bigotry will be less where people associate everyday with those they are supposedly bigoted against. You said contact lessons bigotry and I suggested it maximizes where it's traditional. I'm only supplying something else that could make sense.

d: It's very depressing just how many people automatically assume everyone in the south of today is as racist as their counterparts of 100 or 200 years ago. The level of stereotyping and acceptance of it is incredibly damning of those participating in it.

M: You are making an equal automatic assumption that the south isn't as racist as it once was.

d: And I love how you built in a "if you disagree with me you're racist and proves me right too!" clause to your comment. Classic moonbeam.

M: I provided an explanation for the White Guilt charge, the assumption that people who can see racism today see it only because of guilt. I say they see it because of their own guilt.

d: The amount of hubris needed to even think of some of the things, let alone post, things you say is mind boggling.

M: What you call hubris I call self knowledge. The funny thing about knowing yourself when you know yourself is that you know you know yourself because you know you know nothing.

You don't know you don't know anything which is why you believe what you think. You are the one with the hubris.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

You did, and you wouldn't be able to show otherwise if your life depended on it. Remember you originally said "Namely, the recession didn't have one bit of an affect on us [Texans]."

Herp a derp.



Aw, this is sad to read. I will just assume you are purposefully trying to embarrass yourself and this is why you're citing a nominal number and ignoring a full 2-year period where half a million jobs were lost. 2 yrs is a "bump in the road" for working families? Yikes. See below:

lol - you basically just ZOOMED in to the graph I posted (reverse, obviously, since it's based on unemployment instead of employment) but also cut off the years following the START of the recession, because that would cause everyone to laugh at your stupidity.

Keep it coming, whatever helps you sleep at night.

 

[Vic]

The republican ideals themselves are fairly noble, but it's really hard to side with republicans when the party is filled with retards, assholes, and hypocrites. That includes anti-gay people who are closet homosexuals. That includes Family Values men who cheat on their wives. That includes people who think the earth is younger than the human artifacts we can date to about 12000 years ago (Gobekli Tepe). That includes a guy bringing a snowball into congress.

I can't remember who it was, but a black comedian said black people are forced to defend Obama just because the people against Obama are retards. There are thousands of legit arguments against Obama. What are the ones people stick to? Claiming he's Muslim and claiming he's Kenyan. Islamophobia and xenophobia (it's actually racism - they never accuse white politicians of being secret Muslims or Canadians). A lot of black people can't be republicans simply because it would mean siding with racist idiots.

Pretty much this. But don't forget the hypocrites living off some fat government pension or disability but rant that any form of government spending (no matter how reasonable, like fixing potholes or getting enough textbooks in the schools) is socialism. That's like half of the tea party right there.

 

[davmat787]

davmat787: Other homes of slavery existed around the globe, Morocco and the wholesale enslavement of Europeans comes to mind. The south WAS, not is, the home to American slavery.

M: Is the place of where slavery was in the US.

Every state, whether north or south, had slaves and slave owners at one point. Slavery didn't magically stop at the north-south border.

New Jerseys original constitution granted additional land to settlers for each slave owned, source below.

If a slave was convicted and sentenced to death the state of New Jersey gave the owner financial compensation!

I'm not contesting or minimizing the horrible and shameful period of slavery in our country's history at all. To the contrary I'm simply pointing out the historical fact that slavery was alive and well in northern states too. We just never hear of it.

Salon.com article:
Secret History Of A Northern Slave State: How Slavery Was Written Into New Jerseys DNA - http://www.salon.com/2015/07/29/secret_history_of_a_northern_slave_state_how_slavery_was_written_into_new_jerseys_dna/

 

[davmat787]

Prejudice, like racism, is fine when directed at the appropriate targets.

I don't disagree with this statement. What I do disagree with is the wholesale assumption that everyone of a certain race in the south are racist.

Don't you ever get the impression those outside the south still to this day hold current southerners as nearly culpable for the slavery era, or at least it's legacy?

 

[First]

lol - you basically just ZOOMED in to the graph I posted (reverse, obviously, since it's based on unemployment instead of employment) but also cut off the years following the START of the recession, because that would cause everyone to laugh at your stupidity.

Keep it coming, whatever helps you sleep at night.

Huh? Are you slower than usual today? The recession "officially" started in 2007 and ended in 2009. No matter what period you start in 2007 and end in 2009, Texas loses hundreds of thousands of jobs. So not only did you use the wrong graph (nominal employment #'s not controlling for population growth), you failed to cite the graphs I did. On purpose. So, again, please try to keep up with what's going on here because you're getting badly left behind.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I don't disagree with this statement. What I do disagree with is the wholesale assumption that everyone of a certain race in the south are racist.

Don't you ever get the impression those outside the south still to this day hold current southerners as nearly culpable for the slavery era, or at least it's legacy?

Someone wrote recently -- op-ed or letter to editor -- they had moved to a new neighborhood, and a new acquaintance there had remarked about Obama -- "That goddam ******!" This was in California.

I'd often wondered about the origins of folks in my own county down here in So-Cal, or places like Barstow or Bakersfield. There's probably a sense to the idea that the traditional white southern population went elsewhere. Maybe if they were already in the sunbelt, they just exchanged east for west.

Then there's the component if "new" people who moved to the south.

But there's also another thing going on there, which shows up in the red-blue election-results map.

Gerrymandered districts. Large counties with sparser populations dominated by "rich horse people" and any of various, vague or inaccurate cultural simplifications.

You do make a valid point, though. It is so easy to demonize a whole state. Everybody overgeneralizes; another type of mental laziness. It's just that your Dylan Roofs and similar types are still there. They're probably a much smaller or at least attenuated vestige of the white populations in the 50s or 60s.

But it only takes a few to set a national perception. And like I said -- there are subtle aspects, such as what seemed exposed with the juror in the Zimmerman trial.

If you look at the red states with greater detail, you find red rural counties, and blue blobs coinciding with the big cities.

 

[Spungo]

Pretty much this. But don't forget the hypocrites living off some fat government pension or disability but rant that any form of government spending (no matter how reasonable, like fixing potholes or getting enough textbooks in the schools) is socialism. That's like half of the tea party right there.

That's certainly an entertaining aspect when it comes to cognitive dissonance. Get the government hands off my medicare! Being pro-socialism and being anti-socialism are both reasonable positions to argue, but I don't think anyone wants to be pro-retard.

I get a little bothered when liberals try to take it a step beyond that and claim it's hypocritical to suck on government tits while arguing against these programs existing. I think woman-only scholarships are bullshit, so does that mean I shouldn't apply for them? That's ridiculous. If you want to give me free stuff, I'll take it. I'll vote to end the free stuff if possible, but I'm going to take as much as I can get in the mean time.

 

[nickqt]

Someone wrote recently -- op-ed or letter to editor -- they had moved to a new neighborhood, and a new acquaintance there had remarked about Obama -- "That goddam ******!" This was in California.

I'd often wondered about the origins of folks in my own county down here in So-Cal, or places like Barstow or Bakersfield. There's probably a sense to the idea that the traditional white southern population went elsewhere. Maybe if they were already in the sunbelt, they just exchanged east for west.

Then there's the component if "new" people who moved to the south.

But there's also another thing going on there, which shows up in the red-blue election-results map.

Gerrymandered districts. Large counties with sparser populations dominated by "rich horse people" and any of various, vague or inaccurate cultural simplifications.

You do make a valid point, though. It is so easy to demonize a whole state. Everybody overgeneralizes; another type of mental laziness. It's just that your Dylan Roofs and similar types are still there. They're probably a much smaller or at least attenuated vestige of the white populations in the 50s or 60s.

But it only takes a few to set a national perception. And like I said -- there are subtle aspects, such as what seemed exposed with the juror in the Zimmerman trial.

If you look at the red states with greater detail, you find red rural counties, and blue blobs coinciding with the big cities.

Georgia is a red state, with a massive blob of blue in Atlanta, where I live. Outside Atlanta, Georgia is typically southern in how people from the north think of the south. Inside Atlanta it is very liberal/progressive and not particularly "southern", except for the heat and humidity and palmetto bugs. Hell, half the people who you meet in Atlanta aren't from Atlanta or Georgia.

Carpetbaggers and scalawags are changing the landscape down south, and we hear the traditional southerners crying and complaining about it on a daily basis. The only thing I really agree with them on is the shit-tier state of the roads down here. They're definitely not built to hand the population, but that's what happens when a smaller city balloons up fast.

 

[Rakehellion]

Because https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYVtB-33aNg

Also, OP doesn't understand what racism is, like most Republicans.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Georgia is a red state, with a massive blob of blue in Atlanta, where I live. Outside Atlanta, Georgia is typically southern in how people from the north think of the south. Inside Atlanta it is very liberal/progressive and not particularly "southern", except for the heat and humidity and palmetto bugs. Hell, half the people who you meet in Atlanta aren't from Atlanta or Georgia.

Carpetbaggers and scalawags are changing the landscape down south, and we hear the traditional southerners crying and complaining about it on a daily basis. The only thing I really agree with them on is the shit-tier state of the roads down here. They're definitely not built to hand the population, but that's what happens when a smaller city balloons up fast.

Another contradiction -- not yours, but of those you describe as "traditional" in the second paragraph. Another twist on the red-blue map of the states: Who pays more in federal taxes than they get back, and who pays less. As a rule, the blue states pay more, get less in federal subsidies, so the ratio of paid/received is > 1.0. As a rule, the red states pay less -- get more: taxes/subsidies < 1.0.

So there are federal highway subsidies to states, and I can't tell if they're allocable to state roads as well as the federal highway system. I'd think there would be federal money subsidizing state roads.

This seems to be more than just a southern problem. Governor Edmund G. Brown built a world-class road system in CA, and coupled with Eisenhower's federal highway initiative, it was a wonder to behold.

Now, people are complaining of the deterioration. Of course, there's a tight budget. Right now, there are some 15 wildfires burning in the state, and in places where they'd be less likely to occur. We just came to the end of the Lake fire up in the San Gorgonio wilderness -- 40,000 acres at least.

I'm guessing the cost of containment is astronomical. I just saw another news item posting 134,000 acres now burning.

And you have these chuckleheads now, flying their hobby drones over the fires to take pictures, delaying air delivery of fire retardant.

And of course, people have been complaining about the roads over the last decade.

Also, OP doesn't understand what racism is, like most Republicans.

I wore myself out trying to explain that.

I see the Forum Meister turned my use of the "word" that Obama used in the objective discussion to asterisks. OK. If I ever see that sort of thing at the public library in a hardbound edition of Twain's "Huckleberry Finn," I swear I'll wanna kill someone. Here -- perhaps that's a reasonable judgment.

I was trying to explain that the vitriol about my President isn't all about policy, and when you see unreasonable refusal of compromise offers using Republican ideas, the basis of it isn't policy disagreement. It's the folks with the N word rattling around in their heads, who I'd be proud to sell out to International Communism, Hell's Angels, and any other interested party for a nickel and willing to pay shipping. Just like my ancestors the "Polish Greys" did, when drafted into the Army of the Confederacy, to desert and run to exchange the grey for blue.

 

[HomerJS]

Another contradiction -- not yours, but of those you describe as "traditional" in the second paragraph. Another twist on the red-blue map of the states: Who pays more in federal taxes than they get back, and who pays less. As a rule, the blue states pay more, get less in federal subsidies, so the ratio of paid/received is > 1.0. As a rule, the red states pay less -- get more: taxes/subsidies < 1.0.

So there are federal highway subsidies to states, and I can't tell if they're allocable to state roads as well as the federal highway system. I'd think there would be federal money subsidizing state roads.

This seems to be more than just a southern problem. Governor Edmund G. Brown built a world-class road system in CA, and coupled with Eisenhower's federal highway initiative, it was a wonder to behold.

Now, people are complaining of the deterioration. Of course, there's a tight budget. Right now, there are some 15 wildfires burning in the state, and in places where they'd be less likely to occur. We just came to the end of the Lake fire up in the San Gorgonio wilderness -- 40,000 acres at least.

I'm guessing the cost of containment is astronomical. I just saw another news item posting 134,000 acres now burning.

And you have these chuckleheads now, flying their hobby drones over the fires to take pictures, delaying air delivery of fire retardant.

And of course, people have been complaining about the roads over the last decade.



I wore myself out trying to explain that.

I see the Forum Meister turned my use of the "word" that Obama used in the objective discussion to asterisks. OK. If I ever see that sort of thing at the public library in a hardbound edition of Twain's "Huckleberry Finn," I swear I'll wanna kill someone. Here -- perhaps that's a reasonable judgment.

I was trying to explain that the vitriol about my President isn't all about policy, and when you see unreasonable refusal of compromise offers using Republican ideas, the basis of it isn't policy disagreement. It's the folks with the N word rattling around in their heads, who I'd be proud to sell out to International Communism, Hell's Angels, and any other interested party for a nickel and willing to pay shipping. Just like my ancestors the "Polish Greys" did, when drafted into the Army of the Confederacy, to desert and run to exchange the grey for blue.

Perfect example birtherism. Hyped by Republicans and Fox News

 

[cubby1223]

I don't disagree with this statement. What I do disagree with is the wholesale assumption that everyone of a certain race in the south are racist.

Don't you ever get the impression those outside the south still to this day hold current southerners as nearly culpable for the slavery era, or at least it's legacy?

It's human nature. People held all Germans and Japanese responsible for World War II for a very long time. Many will continue to regard the U.S. as nation invaders several presidents removed from dubya.

It may be very unfair, but it's the way human nature works and will continue to work.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

It's human nature. People held all Germans and Japanese responsible for World War II for a very long time. Many will continue to regard the U.S. as nation invaders several presidents removed from dubya.

It may be very unfair, but it's the way human nature works and will continue to work.

What if you look at it as a judgment of history? For instance -- in a manner parallel to a Law and Order defendant getting either 5 to 25 or life without parole?

See, I can't easily succeed at some goofy economic theory about "moral externalities." That sort of pursuit would have to transcend the boundary between the world and either the Unknown or Providence -- the spiritual realm, if there is one.

So one is going to obviously see a tug of war about whether it's a good idea or a bad one to explore some earthly determination.

Take for instance Bush and Cheney. Almost before it was ever mentioned, I think the President had made himself clear about any legal actions against members of the former administration.

So . . . that's a good Mr. President.

I'm not running for office, and I get so mad I could arraign, try convict and sentence B and C to 99 years in the electric chair.

And here's some factual history. If Bush hadn't won the 2000 election, Janet Reno's DOJ/FBI litigious investigation in Chile would've continued into a Gore administration. At the appeal of the Letelier, Moffit and Tarpan families, they wanted to extradite Augusto Pinochet and possibly others to the US, and put them on trial for the murder of Orlando Letelier, a pregnant Ronni Moffit, and her husband -- blown to bits in the Sheridan Circle bombing of about September 20/21 in 1976, Washington DC. The day after it happened, the Post published tomes, pushing back other news to later pages of the morning edition. The frenzy went on for so many days. Until the facts were known it was just any terrorist bombing with an unknown perpetrator, which would understandably make the entire Metro Area a bit tense.

Unfortunately, Pinochet was progressively addled by dementia. If a race against time had succeeded, he might have been lucid enough to provide details of what the Director of Central Intelligence that year knew before it happened.

He would be suspect and possibly guilty of a serious felony: Misprision of a felony.

And then we go back further. To Wilbur Mills, "Rubbers," and "Mr. Rubbers." It will suffice if you go to Tarpley and Chaitkin's "Unauthorized Biography" Chapter X: "Rubbers Goes to Congress."

The other is a most illuminating innocently fictional spy novel. Authorship traces from two real world, agency-vetted memoirs of two Langley careerists and colleagues since 1954 -- one a Watergate burglar, the other I will call Citizen X.

For those who are familiar with this pursuit, the book contains its own author as a character whose nickname is "Mack the Knife," David Sanchez Morales as "Emiliano Zapata Gonzalez," Jake Esterline as "Hyphenated Jake," possibly Frank Wisner, an oil executive, but -- most certainly, "Mr. Rubbers" with a bit part.

Whatever the old so-and-so knows -- you know -- "Jorge" HWB, I think he's showing the same symptoms as Pinochet. One picture, with a great-grand-child, shows him toothless. And in a world of pseudonyms and secret projects, it would be possible that only Citizen X knew the entire story.

But I'll stop there.

 

[cubby1223]

What if you look at it as a judgment of history? For instance -- in a manner parallel to a Law and Order defendant getting either 5 to 25 or life without parole?

See, I can't easily succeed at some goofy economic theory about "moral externalities." That sort of pursuit would have to transcend the boundary between the world and either the Unknown or Providence -- the spiritual realm, if there is one.

So one is going to obviously see a tug of war about whether it's a good idea or a bad one to explore some earthly determination.

<snip>

I have to apologize, I'm not really sure what you're saying...

All I was saying is it's part of human nature for traits to stick with groups. It's why stereotypes exist and why they are so difficult to break. I quoted someone who seems bothered over stereotypes attributed to people in Southern states. And was responding to say it's not the south that's being specifically targeting for stereotyping, that same thing happens to a lot of other people - namely having blame attributed to them for actions carried out by someone else.

 

[davmat787]

I have to apologize, I'm not really sure what you're saying...

All I was saying is it's part of human nature for traits to stick with groups. It's why stereotypes exist and why they are so difficult to break. I quoted someone who seems bothered over stereotypes attributed to people in Southern states. And was responding to say it's not the south that's being specifically targeting for stereotyping, that same thing happens to a lot of other people - namely having blame attributed to them for actions carried out by someone else.

What you suggest as the cause of the behavior I take exception to makes a lot of sense. Perhaps I was over thinking the situation.

What could be unique to this behavior towards the south versus similar stereotyping of other groups is the seemingly free pass people have when disparaging the south and the intensity of the slander. Bashing white southerners who are assumed to also be Christian and conservative doesn't create the backlash or sympathy that other target groups would garner.

It seems like much of the south has moved on and looking to the future yet so many insist on judging southerners for the past that today's population had nothing to do with.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I have to apologize, I'm not really sure what you're saying...

All I was saying is it's part of human nature for traits to stick with groups. It's why stereotypes exist and why they are so difficult to break. I quoted someone who seems bothered over stereotypes attributed to people in Southern states. And was responding to say it's not the south that's being specifically targeting for stereotyping, that same thing happens to a lot of other people - namely having blame attributed to them for actions carried out by someone else.

I was thinking of the stigma that lingers as a shared consequence -- something like atonement, to which nobody is going to agree as to deserving the stigma to this degree or that degree. You can't cast blame or liability wholesale on groups for old crimes and evils of 150 years ago. You can only adjudicate it for crimes and evils in the present -- when those who slip through the raindrops are still alive.

My attitude toward the South is shaped a bit by family history. But I lived in Dallas (for instance) for two years. The urban areas don't betray anything close to the stereotype, but the rural parts still seem to. But you find a great degree of charm in those rural areas, also.

So when political outcomes seem to follow the wishes of a traditional, stereotypical "South," the inclination to demonize whole states is easy. It's just not the proper view of things.

 

[Atreus21]

I don't disagree with this statement. What I do disagree with is the wholesale assumption that everyone of a certain race in the south are racist.

Don't you ever get the impression those outside the south still to this day hold current southerners as nearly culpable for the slavery era, or at least it's legacy?

Well yes. There's nothing we can do about it. And that's the value of it. It's a stick to beat the south with. And I suppose that's the price of violently supporting so vile an institution. It will take Germany centuries to live down nazism (although to be fair, nazism was almost exclusively German, whereas slavery was practiced the world over for the majority of human history).

It's like what Longstreet said. The south should've freed the slaves then fired on Ft. Sumter.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Well yes. There's nothing we can do about it. And that's the value of it. It's a stick to beat the south with. And I suppose that's the price of violently supporting so vile an institution. It will take Germany centuries to live down nazism (although to be fair, nazism was almost exclusively German, whereas slavery was practiced the world over for the majority of human history).

It's like what Longstreet said. The south should've freed the slaves then fired on Ft. Sumter.

I've got to retrench my meta-thoughts about my own day-to-day behavior on this.

Since I've grown more partisan since 1999, and watched election outcomes for some four presidential and the additional midterm elections, I gripe about the South in this way.

The racism angle was less important until 2008 and later. Actually, my attention was focused during the summer of 2010 -- demonstrations with placards showing Obama as "chief witchdoctor."

Since then, all these incidents have piled up, which I've also watched intently. The initial one (off top of my head) was the arrest of Obama's old Harvard professor -- in Massachusetts. More generally, there's always been a racial taint to anything involving status-quos and government intervention: If I recall, various working-class neighborhoods in Boston exhibited a real backlash over school busing.

I've already explained my observations about Trayvon-Zimmerman, and I think elements of juror-bias affected the outcome.

When the Ferguson incident and shooting of Michael Brown occurred, I began to look at all the details while the media was sorting it out.

In my own community in 1971, three innocent men were railroaded for the Christensen-Teel cop-killing, and there was a mass-psychology afoot with a background hysteria about black militancy in that period.

In Ferguson, the mass psychology occurred on part of the black population there, amplified to the national population through the media.

The underlying situation arose from two things: entrenched white dominance in the local government that had carried over from a time before demographic changes in the St. Louis suburb, and a low voter turnout in Ferguson and the black community which simply stalled any chance of wresting control from the white establishment.

So there was the convenience store tape of Brown; his behavior -- thoughtless in the aftermath of his "strong-arm shoplift" -- walking down the middle of the street. You know all the rest.

But I think the evidence was strong that Brown was aware of unfolding events just an edge faster than Darren Wilson was coming up to speed with them. He assaulted Wilson; shots were fired within the car; Wilson's vision may have been impaired -- and again, you know the rest.

Today, Wilson's remaining life has prospects of tasting like dirt, regardless of his racial attitudes of any kind. Brown is dead. Perhaps now Ferguson has awakened to the issues which originally brought animus to police-community relations in the first place. Really, even if Wilson harbored any sort of racial bias on the wide spectrum I'd discussed before here, the events that occurred had such a robust overlying explanation that it would be hard to justify bias as the most meaningful factor.

Attention would then be drawn to Missouri's history going way back in time. It did -- and does more recently -- have a "history." It's also the birthplace of a Titan in our literature -- Sam Clemens aka Mark Twain.

If you read Twain's books, perhaps at least a few including Huck Finn and Pudd'nHead Wilson, you see an author more detached from the sentiments of the times, with great insight into "the Negro question" as it might have been articulated in those days. We've seen conflict in recent years over "the book" and "the word" in our school systems.

Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court is really a satire about the Confederacy and old chivalric thinking and traditions carried forward from the Middle Ages in the face of modern warfare and its carnage. At the end of the book, with bodies of Knights piled high like corpses in Auschwitz, you're really looking at Gettysburg in the author's thinking.

What about Harper Lee? What about Faulkner? Or Thomas Wolfe?

I think if there's any concern for an unfair stereotype of the South, a wider appreciation of these other things has as much to offer in seeing the South with a different perspective. But on the various sides of all these issues, it's convenient or easy to generalize, and generalizations may often seem unfair.