Skip to main content

quote:
Originally posted by Constructive Feedback:

Political parties are nothing more than an American creation.



You can't seriously believe this statement.

Formation of political parties, in England for example, pre-dates that of the formation of PPs in the U.S.

Furthermore, not related to your claim but certainly of importance to Black Americans, is a phenomenon common to our two-party system known as "First-Past-the-Post". It is a term borrowed from horse racing and means "winner-take-all".

In a "Democracy", it can leave as much as 49.9% of the population unrepresented. This can be seen in the past Presidential Election where at least 48% of Americans are unrepresented, polorizing the country.

And of even more importance to African Americans or African-American Americans as JWC prefers, a FPTP form of Democracy encourages what is called "tactical" voting" or "compromise" voting.

Voters are pressured to vote for one of the two candidates they feel are most likely to win, even if they ideally do not want to elect either of them. Voting for any other candidate will be a wasted vote and have no impact on the final result.

Thus, as I share Nmaginate assessment of both American Political Parties, what is left to do except not vote?
.
.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Nmaginate:
quote:
Washington, D.C. -August 10, 2005 – A group of African American Republican activists, and their supporters from around the country, will announce the formation of a national grassroots organization...

"The creation of the National Black Republican Association is the product of the dreams and efforts of scores of black Republicans across the nation," said interim Chairperson Frances Rice, co-founder of a black Republican group in Sarasota, Florida. "Black grassroots activists have always been involved locally and nationally within the Republican Party, but there was always agreement that we needed a national organization to represent the interests of Republicans in the black community. We also needed an organization that will effectively counter the disinformation concerning Republicans..."

http://www.nbra.info/press_release_2.htm


Okay, let's get some real, honest explanations for this:

Click on BLACK GOP and you get these luminaries listed under the banner of "Celebrating Black Republicans"

Yes, that's right.

  • Martin Luther King Jr. = BLACK REPUBLICAN
  • Carter G. Woodson = BLACK REPUBLICAN
  • Frederick Douglass = BLACK REPUBLICAN
  • Mary McCleod Bethune = BLACK REPUBLICAN
  • Harriet Tubman = BLACK REPUBLICAN
  • Ida B. Wells = BLACK REPUBLICAN
  • Sojourner Truth = BLACK REPUBLICAN
  • A. Philip Randolph = BLACK REPUBLICAN
... Talk about MISINFORMATION!! "WE'RE" going to need a TRUTH & RECONCILATION organization just for this one. I mean... I've heard the typical Booker T. Washington claims and even Frederick Douglass... but DAMN!! MLK???
Are they serious? sck

Sad.... just sad....



The Democrat and Republican parties are not the same since the civil rights era...... You should know this........ The republica party (some of the people) helped end slavery as well.......
quote:
You can't seriously believe this statement.

Formation of political parties, in England for example, pre-dates that of the formation of PPs in the U.S.


Popcorn:

I should have more accurately said "these political parties......" (the Democrats and the Republicans).

Man!!!
quote:
Originally posted by Constructive Feedback:
quote:
You can't seriously believe this statement.

Formation of political parties, in England for example, pre-dates that of the formation of PPs in the U.S.


Popcorn:

I should have more accurately said "these political parties......" (the Democrats and the Republicans).

Man!!!


Okay, no problem.
.
.
quote:
The Democrat and Republican parties are not the same since the civil rights era...... You should know this........ The republica party (some of the people) helped end slavery as well.......
And if you actually read the thread, you would know how not only did you contradict yourself in your own statement but how off your statement is because we've covered that and how that is beside the point.

Hmmm.... If the parties are not the same?
Then, honestly, how can those patriarchs, etc. be called "Black REPUBLICANS" with a straight face and without such qualification?

And umm... you should know how odd that sounds:
"the parties are not the same..."
"the [DIFFERENT] Republican Party helped end Slavery..."
sck

That's like saying Michael Jackson got convicted of Child Molestation but only
saying it was some other Michael Jackson and not the once crowned King Of Pop.


As I said: Talk about MISINFORMATION!!


Also... Do you have the VOTING RECORDS of all those listed?
(Since that is the unofficial - i.e. illegitimate - standard we're using to judge "party loyalty" by?)

Please.... Don't respond without it! bsm

...
quote:
Originally posted by Nmaginate:
quote:
The Democrat and Republican parties are not the same since the civil rights era...... You should know this........ The republican party (some of the people) helped end slavery as well.......
And if you actually read the thread, you would know how not only did you contradict yourself in your own statement but how off your statement is because we've covered that and how that is beside the point.

Hmmm.... If the parties are not the same?
Then, honestly, how can those patriarchs, etc. be called "Black REPUBLICANS" with a straight face and without such qualification?

And umm... you should know how odd that sounds.

"the parties are not the same..."
"the [DIFFERENT] Republican Party helped end Slavery..."
sck

As I said: Talk about MISINFORMATION!!

Do you have the VOTING RECORDS of all those listed?
(Since that is the unofficial - i.e. illegitimate - standard we're using to judge "party loyalty" by?)

Please.... Don't respond without it! bsm

...


Modern Day Republicans are not the same as Republicans Pre-civil rights

I came late to the discussion, and I was commenting on the first post.......
quote:
I came late to the discussion, and I was commenting on the first post.......
I realize that... But what I don't understand is why you approached even my initial post with the idea that I was ignorant of that history.

And....
Modern Day Republicans are not the same as Republicans Pre-civil rights
... this is being rather redundant wouldn't you say? I mean, you said that already.

quote:
The Democrat and Republican parties are not the same since the civil rights era
What does rephrasing your statement add to your comments? My response, my counter is still the same:
If the parties are not the same?
Then how can those patriarchs be called "Black REPUBLICANS" with a straight face
and without explicitly stating that historical caveat?


You will also note where I questioned the motive of NBRA of placing those patriarchs in a caption along with modern day Black CONservatives, again, without explanation -- without qualification, without caveat. You will also see how VOX already basically stated what you have about the change of the parties.
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:
Most blacks, from my understanding, supported Eisenhower. Most of us know about the Dixiecrat switch that happened, as well. The problem is, this Black Republican group acts like they don't understand the switch. They act like they didn't know... These people need to get a clue...


It is interesting that when it comes to political parties "the switch" in sentiments (as you perceive them) is enough to have the previously offending organization (the Democrats) wiped clean as the undriven snow.

When it comes to CORPORATIONS and the subject of Reparations though - no amount of SWITCHING in management in 2006 will allow you to forgive their previous offenses. They must pay!!!

Simply put the Southern Democratic Party was the political arm of the KKK who was the street terrorist organization for White supremacy.

The book "When Affirmative Action Was White" clearly lays out the case against the Democratic Party. Even the northern White progressive Democrats prioritized their "progressive agenda" for White folks above a confrontation against their southern brothers which would have threatened their entire agenda. They sacrificed "black interests" as a result.
quote:
Originally posted by Constructive Feedback:
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:
Most blacks, from my understanding, supported Eisenhower. Most of us know about the Dixiecrat switch that happened, as well. The problem is, this Black Republican group acts like they don't understand the switch. They act like they didn't know... These people need to get a clue...


It is interesting that when it comes to political parties "the switch" in sentiments (as you perceive them) is enough to have the previously offending organization (the Democrats) wiped clean as the undriven snow.

When it comes to CORPORATIONS and the subject of Reparations though - no amount of SWITCHING in management in 2006 will allow you to forgive their previous offenses. They must pay!!!

Simply put the Southern Democratic Party was the political arm of the KKK who was the street terrorist organization for White supremacy.




You are illustrating Vox's point.

No ... we're not forgetting the history of the Democratic party.

We ARE remembering that many of the people who were in that party became Republicans:

Ronald Reagan was a Democrat at one point:

"In the 1930s Reagan was a Democrat, but by the early 1960s he was closely associated with the Republican Party, and he spoke on behalf of Republican presidential nominee Barry Goldwater in the 1964 presidential election. In 1966, he ran for and won the governorship of California, defeating the incumbent Democrat Pat Brown. He was re-elected in 1970. During his time in office he cut welfare rolls by making the eligibility requirements for receiving benefits more stringent, and he took a hard line against Vietnam War protesters at state colleges. He did, however, sign a liberal abortion rights law, displeasing conservative supporters."


http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/reagan_ronald_w.shtml
Last edited {1}
quote:
George S. Schuyler photo taken by Carl Van Vechten, 1941


First, don't worry about the traveling, resident idiot. Someone posted an article where NBRA's tactic was taken apart bit-by-bit. I reminded him of his, now, violated statement of "position" here:

"I value Black Repulicans who promote their party as the means of Black Salvation equally as I do Black Democrats who do the same. They both should be attacked equally." (from Page 2)

Now, onto George...

quote:
George Samuel Schuyler was born on Providence, Rhode Island in 1895 as the son of a black chef, spending much of his childhood in Syracuse, New York. In 1912 Schuyler enlisted in the US Army and was promoted to the rank of 1st Lieutenant. Schuyler served in Seattle and Hawaii before going AWOL after a Greek immigrant who was supposed to shine his shoes refused to do so because of his skin colour. After turning himself in, Schuyler was convicted by a military court and sentenced to five years in prison. He was released after nine months as a model prisoner.

...After his discharge, Schuyler moved to New York City where he worked as a handyman, doing odd jobs. During this time he was able to read many books which led to his interest in socialism. Although not entirely engrossed by socialism, Schuyler engaged himself in a circle of socialist friends, including the black socialist group Friends of Negro Freedom. This connection led to Schuyler being employed by A. Philip Randolph and Chandler Owen's magazine, The Messenger, which was the journal of the group. Schuyler's column Shafts and Darts: A Page of Calumny and Satire caught the eye of Ira F. Lewis, manager of the Pittsburgh Courier. In 1924, Schuyler took up a job at the Courier, where he was required to write a weekly column.

[........]

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


NBRA calling MLK a "Republican" makes about as much sense as calling Schuyler a SOCIALIST! sck


____________________________________________________________________

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×