Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well,I do admit that the immigration stance of blacks puzzles me,but many are waking up.
Many black Americans now see that some immigrants do not respect them,and at times are more anti-black than some whites.
I find it incredibly rude to disrespect an American citizen who has had ancestors in the Usa since the 1700's just because they happen to be black.
Despite what many say,I do not think anti-blackness came from whites in respect to some immigrant groups.
Many will blame white colonialism but take India for example and their hatred for the "Untouchables" who were of darker skin.
Common misconception. Untouchables have little to nothing to do with skin color. Caste is something that is determined by birth, not by race. Indians are like blacks and many many other minorities in that they can have a variety of skin tone. So a darker India can conceivably have. You are essentially an untouchable till the day you die, and skin color won't save you from that caste. Caste are worse, way worse than racism. I know people want to draw paralells, but it's a false comparison.
I'm convinced that neither party cares about Black Americans all that much. I can point to some Republicans who have basically talked down to Blacks.
This is where I stand. I don't think this is about the "wellbeing of Black people". I think this is about fear, this is about "because of them, the politician I want isn't in office".
It's about pandering. Every political party does it.
It's ALL pay for play anymore which means votes or campaign contributions. If you want to do a little google action you can find that Obama's "reversal" on gay marriage was just to open up the check-books for 2012.
Sooo, although there are many wealthy black donors and votes out there, they're typically already just gonna give to the democrats. It devalues their leverage, especially when there are legitimate issues to address and BLM has some of them.
I've honestly reached a point in my life where I've quit caring and I'm not proud of it. Laquan McDonald was kinda the last straw for me. MLK marched on Chicago before I was born. If a new MLK was around today and tried that he'd have his funding cut and would be ignored in the press and by even black politicians.
It's about pandering. Every political party does it.
It's ALL pay for play anymore which means votes or campaign contributions. If you want to do a little google action you can find that Obama's "reversal" on gay marriage was just to open up the check-books for 2012.
Sooo, although there are many wealthy black donors and votes out there, they're typically already just gonna give to the democrats. It devalues their leverage, especially when there are legitimate issues to address and BLM has some of them.
I've honestly reached a point in my life where I've quit caring and I'm not proud of it. Laquan McDonald was kinda the last straw for me. MLK marched on Chicago before I was born. If a new MLK was around today and tried that he'd have his funding cut and would be ignored in the press and by even black politicians.
It's a sad state of affairs.
As a black man, I think MLK was very overrated, and I would even argue that he did nothing for black people. In my opinion he was an agent and a pawn.
It's funny that people often conflate civil rights with integration. Two very very different issues here, but they're always lumped together historically. Why? Why is integration considered so essential to the civil rights movement. I'll tell you why. What happens if I'm a corporation in 1962 and I try to move my busienss to the south?
Give up?
I can only engage half of it's customer base. The other half aren't likely to patronize my business because well, Jim Crow. See I don't believe government is actually sympathetic. I follow the money, because money is the real reason why things happen.
It seems there had always been a push to desegregate the south so larger chain stores could move in and scope up some of these black dollars. Blacks even back then made up a significant consumer base, and the south had the largest black population.
Seems like King was just chosen to be the guy to do this.
Guys like New Gingrich or Rick Santorum aren't idiots. They know how many black people are hard working in this country. But see they have constituents, and that is what their constituents like to believe. So they love to play on that. There are poor, unskilled, and poorly educated white people who life suck. They're losers in life, and in everything else. So what gives them hope every day is the fact they wake up white and can be secure in the fact that they're superior to black people.
This isn't real conservatism of course. They love to call themselves conservatives, but they don't exalt any of the principals. This is why I became a libertarian years ago. I could no longer support either party because both of them have incredibly contempt for black people. And I've long stop believing that solutions for black people was in the hands of some politicians who never stepped foot in some of these neighborhoods.
In 2012, I really wanted to believe that there could be a bridge between certain Republican leaders and Blacks. Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum pretty much blew it for themselves. Part of me wonders if they even care. I say this. If you want votes, do not talk down to the persons you are looking to vote for you.
I went to middle school and high school in an area where a sizable part of the population is working class/working poor Whites. Some of the worst bullying I experienced came from those who fit the "redneck" subculture. Some of those types likely thought of themselves as above Black people. However, that is not the constituents of Newt Gingrich. Gingrich was the Representative of Georgia's 6th congressional district. That is one of the more affluent parts of Georgia.
I don't claim to be anything politically anymore. I have normally looked at things from a "what's best for me" point of view. I don't live in the ghetto, I don't have children. Being someone who works, my concerns, fiscally, are local. My teen years, issues like LGBT rights, immigration, none of that was stuff that came on my radar. It was nothing I thought about. College years is when I heard about this stuff. As a side note, I did vote for a Republican in my first election. It did nothing for me, and I found myself regretting my decision after Hurricane Katrina.
Many politicians never set foot in predominantly Black neighborhoods. Truth is, I haven't even heard of Libertarians setting foot in Black neighborhoods. As a side note, I've grown up in predominantly White areas most of my life. I grew up in a middle class home. Problems found in the ghettos were not really issues I was familiar with. The violence I dealt with were from the bullies in school. For me, it is a matter of "what are my individual needs based on who I am and where I live".
At this point, it wouldn't hurt me to vote Libertarian. I voted for Gary Johnson in this election. However, I did it on my choosing. I said if both Clinton and Trump were the two standing, I would vote Libertarian. I made good on that.
What I'm seeing borders on complaining. I see more than curiosity going on. Thread after thread about this subject comes up.
I honestly don't need to know who votes for whom. With the past election, I did not want to know who voted for whom. However, I was running into people who desperately wanted to talk politics with me.
And the 90%+ rate has only been off and on, and that can vary by voter turnout.
There's nothing odd about interest in demographics and voting. Race, gender, income, education, etc. are all studied, polled, talked about. When a large demographic group like black people consistently votes 85+% for the D party presidential candidate, I don't know why you're surprised at --- why ? Maybe it is complaining as you see it.
There's nothing odd about interest in demographics and voting. Race, gender, income, education, etc. are all studied, polled, talked about. When a large demographic group like black people consistently votes 85+% for the D party presidential candidate, I don't know why you're surprised at --- why ? Maybe it is complaining as you see it.
I see it as complaining because that is what it is. I see it in the comments in the threads. What I see are individuals things as "the Black vote is our business". Whenever there are comments like "Democratic plantation", "free stuff", a thread with the title "Blacks are useful idiots for the Democrats", and the like, what else am I suppose to think?
As a black man, I think MLK was very overrated, and I would even argue that he did nothing for black people. In my opinion he was an agent and a pawn.
It's funny that people often conflate civil rights with integration. Two very very different issues here, but they're always lumped together historically. Why? Why is integration considered so essential to the civil rights movement. I'll tell you why. What happens if I'm a corporation in 1962 and I try to move my busienss to the south?
Give up?
I can only engage half of it's customer base. The other half aren't likely to patronize my business because well, Jim Crow. See I don't believe government is actually sympathetic. I follow the money, because money is the real reason why things happen.
It seems there had always been a push to desegregate the south so larger chain stores could move in and scope up some of these black dollars. Blacks even back then made up a significant consumer base, and the south had the largest black population.
Seems like King was just chosen to be the guy to do this.
Why? Mostly because racial supremacy is a helluva drug.
The belief that some are superior to others & should therefore dominate society.
As a black man, I think MLK was very overrated, and I would even argue that he did nothing for black people. In my opinion he was an agent and a pawn.
It's funny that people often conflate civil rights with integration. Two very very different issues here, but they're always lumped together historically. Why? Why is integration considered so essential to the civil rights movement. I'll tell you why. What happens if I'm a corporation in 1962 and I try to move my busienss to the south?
Give up?
I can only engage half of it's customer base. The other half aren't likely to patronize my business because well, Jim Crow. See I don't believe government is actually sympathetic. I follow the money, because money is the real reason why things happen.
It seems there had always been a push to desegregate the south so larger chain stores could move in and scope up some of these black dollars. Blacks even back then made up a significant consumer base, and the south had the largest black population.
Seems like King was just chosen to be the guy to do this.
As a Black man, I disagree with this. It was Dr. King who helped lead a boycott to get the buses integrated. He helped spearhead alot changes. Civil rights was part of the reason we started having integration.
Why is integration so important? It's about CHOICES. It is about being able to live wherever you want, travel, eat, go to school, in the places of your own choosing, not of the racial hierarchy choosing. Dr. King challenged the people who said "you can't live here, you're Black". This is the USA. We should be able to live wherever we want. He played a major role in getting Jim Crow dismantled. Dr. King essentially took down elements of a dictatorship. Before the Civil Rights movement, Blacks were essentially in a quasi-dictatorship.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
