Skip to main content

January 14, 2003
The Worst Case Republican Scenario

if patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels, then the republican party is the last refuge of white racists. it's important to know, however, that while desparate scoundrels get patriotic, not every patriot is a scoundrel. likewise not every republican is a racist. nevertheless, i will assume the worst for the sake of argument, and that is that america is 15% racist and that every last one of them expresses their politics through the machinery of the republican party. this only encourages my integration plans.

so why don't blackfolks integrate the republican party? to my eyes there are three reasons. the first, and most important, is that they simply don't care. insinuating oneself into party politics is not appealing to most people. in this blackfolks are just typical americans who don't have time to wonk any policy, don't attend enough mixers and conventions and don't blog or otherwise soapbox their way into hearts and minds. party politics is not a working class sport, it's not even a middle class sport. it's a chatting class sport (you know who you are), and like most americans, blackfolks don't engage that much in chatting class activities. especially not when there is so *much* on tv.

the second reason is moderately important. blacks are politically opposed to the policies and practices of the republican party. i won't belabor the point because i think we can all offer a halfway decent guess on what some of these policies and practices are, and since i don't have any statistics handy, i don't want to be on record as saying something incredibly stupid. (aside from the fact that i am hedging this conversation in the colloquial lower case.)

the third and least important, yet most significant reason is that to which i have alluded: the republican party has a WHITES ONLY sign over it, erected by all of its dumbass white racists. so what is a negro to do when faced with a whites only sign? stick with the other negroes of course. black men such as myself have different plans.

i should point out that in the era of jim crow, even whitefolks in the south could be shocked into a recognition that the evil done in their name (yes, virginia, white racists are protecting *your* virginity. you are white aren't you?) was partially their fault. i haven't read any of shelby steele's recent screeds but rest assured that he remains popular because his paying audience are whitefolks who wish to assuage themselves of the guilt imposed upon them by their evil cousins. the answer is rather simple: defect. then those like matt hale will have nobody to defend. but whitefolks are fat, lazy, intellectually sloppy americans just like the rest of us. (well not me of course). and, well, it's nice being white. nice whitefolks don't like the klan but they figure they can keep the klan out of their neighborhood without inviting blackfolks in. nice whitefolks also don't assume that their neighbors are closet klanners. nice whitefolks don't ask, racist whitefolks don't tell. the same holds true for nice republicans.

as defenders of all that is sacred in the sausage-making business of lawmaking and campaign fundraising, party bosses and top dawg congresscritters have developed strong stomachs. since america is a nice place full of nice people, it comes as no surprise that when somebody steps over some line, the bosses make nice. so it came as no surprise to me that trent lott's cross-in-mouth comments were defended at the outset. there are a lot of ugly things out there for which there is no zero-tolerance policy. the republicans know they have a lily white suburb, but if one of their neighbors is an actual racist, it's not nice, but to republicans it can't be tragic. racist votes count as much as any other kind, and who is going to go through all the trouble to prove this 'racism', hmm? the realpolitik of political racism is that the pain is already priced out of the polls for the republicans and they're all sleeping just fine.

strong stomachs and those cute little sleeping blindfolds make for gaffes of biblical proportions which we witness from time to time. occasionally somebody gets hurt, but it's generally somebody's feelings. these hurt feelings, unfortunately, tend to be the leading indicators of black unwillingness to integrate. and while it's true that they don't make blackfolks as robust as they used to and we're all getting soft now that we don't have to battle the klan so often, there are still a good number who are hard as nails.

it may come as a surprise to the lay reader that we in the old school have a strong sense of noblesse oblige, despite the fact that we may not spell it properly. sue me, i'm writing at quarter to two in the morning, what are you doing? this willingness to do battle marks us among humanity's better examples if you ask me. so there is something of a selfless sense of sacrifice involved here, and that's about as aggrandizing as i'm going to get about it.

any questions?
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Intersting post. Thanks! A few comments . . .

quote:
Originally posted by Cobb:

so why don't blackfolks integrate the republican party? to my eyes there are three reasons. the first, and most important, is that they simply don't care.


I think this statement is disparaging in nature and tremendously misrepresents African American concern and interest in building our communities and our country. By saying that we don't care about politics you say that we are not interested in our future. Respectfully, I don't see how this can be seriously posited. Furthermore, African Americans have gotten quite involved in Democratic party politics. In fact, as you remember, Maynard Jackson was a serious candidate to be national party chair. It's not party politics that we eschew, it's Republican party politics! There's a reason for that.

quote:
it's a chatting class sport (you know who you are), and like most americans, blackfolks don't engage that much in chatting class activities. especially not when there is so *much* on tv.


Again, the disparaging, self-critical thrust is, well, let's just say . . . odd.

Most politics is conducted at the local level. There are plenty of black folks who are involved in party politics in their communities.

quote:
the second reason is moderately important. blacks are politically opposed to the policies and practices of the republican party.


Why understate what (to me) has to be the most critical factor? What has the Republican Party done to earn the black vote and black participation? Anything?

Since our community has already demonstrated the ability to vote (an move) our interests/votes en masse - and change parties if necessary to do so - then why suggest that the Republican agenda is somehow only partly responsible for our lack of support and interest in it? Without the benefit of modern communications and the internet, black folks ALL changed from Republican to Democrat in the past. If Republicans made it worth our while, don't you think we'd do it again? I do . . . in a heart beat!

quote:
the third and least important, yet most significant reason is that to which i have alluded: the republican party has a WHITES ONLY sign over it, erected by all of its dumbass white racists. so what is a negro to do when faced with a whites only sign? stick with the other negroes of course. black men such as myself have different plans.


I'm not sure whether this is explicitly, or even implicitly, the case any more. I have no doubt that if African America was made up of Clarence Thomases and Condi Rices, then they'd be quite happy to have us around. I just don't think they can stomach moderating their views to invite us. Sure there are plenty of Trent Lotts around, but even Trent might turn into George Wallace to get/retain power.

I'm VERY curious about your "different plans". Can you say more?
I found your site very interesting.

so what is a negro to do when faced with a whites only sign? stick with the other negroes of course. black men such as myself have different plans.Cobb

I, too, have different plans.

Puruant to MBM's question, though not direct to me, I plan to develop a viable alternative, namely the African American National Committee.

The goal is to have a viable alternative in every State.

That's politics embryonic though it is.


PEACE

Jim Chester
quote:
Originally posted by Cobb:

so why don't blackfolks integrate the republican party? to my eyes there are three reasons. the first, and most important, is that they simply don't care.



I think this statement is disparaging in nature and tremendously misrepresents African American concern and interest in building our communities and our country. By saying that we don't care about politics you say that we are not interested in our future. Respectfully, I don't see how this can be seriously posited. Furthermore, African Americans have gotten quite involved in Democratic party politics. In fact, as you remember, Maynard Jackson was a serious candidate to be national party chair. It's not party politics that we eschew, it's Republican party politics! There's a reason for that.



It's reality. Black voter turnout is what, 30%? That means 70% don't care. You vote maybe once a year. So who is going to talk about the issues and attend meetings the other 364? Very very few. Because what? Because they don't care enough. Now compare the popularity of the black political sites on the web vs black entertainment sites. It's no contest. Simply stated, only a minority of blackfolks care enough about politics to show up. Even this site, which has an admirable about of traffic is dwarfed by non-political black sites.

Party politics is even more arcane. Take it from me. I've met the powers that be in the California Republican Party. The average blackfolks don't even believe that what I've done is EVEN POSSIBLE, much less done on the regular. And if they find out that it has been done, what do they ignorantly think? 'They're on the payroll of their white puppet masters'.

They don't know because they don't care to know.
quote:
Why understate what (to me) has to be the most critical factor? What has the Republican Party done to earn the black vote and black participation? Anything?

Since our community has already demonstrated the ability to vote (an move) our interests/votes en masse - and change parties if necessary to do so - then why suggest that the Republican agenda is somehow only partly responsible for our lack of support and interest in it? Without the benefit of modern communications and the internet, black folks ALL changed from Republican to Democrat in the past. If Republicans made it worth our while, don't you think we'd do it again? I do . . . in a heart beat!


#1. It doesnt' matter what the Republican Party *does* it matters what they *appear* to do. It's not fair but that's the situation. Just like it didn't matter what Bill Bennett actually said, or what he was actually trying to say - it matters what 'the black community' believes he was implying.

This isn't fair. It's patently wrong, but it's like that and that's the way it is. When you have liberals who fear losing black votes and support, they will use every opportunity to make their points. Hell, Farrakhan's march had speakers talking about Katrina. What the hell does a natural catastrophe have to do with black politics? Nothing. Nothing at all. The point is that regardless of the long term interests and principles of the GOP, there is a large segment of the AFrican American public which is only willing to believe the worst. These people are spun.

Understand that situation. Only lies work for these people, because they are too lazy to find out the truth. So they will always be lied to. Among political campaign managers this is the 80/20 rule (although it's more like 88/12). Only 12% of the voting public is truly informed, motivated and actively participating in the political process. The rest just watch TV ads, and vote some of the time. So there's nothing special about the black vote in this regard, it's Americans, period. The dynamic is the same, and because it is the same, neither party has to spend any extra money to move the black crowd.

#2 The Republican Agenda already is pro-black, except there's just not visible black people saying it. This relates back to #1 in that if Denzel Washington (Republican) got up and stated the Republican Agenda, you'd move the crowd. Instead, only those African Americans who are motivated to ask the tough questions honestly are willing to switch. I'm cool with that.

Think about it this way. Every black Republican is there from a grass roots perspective - because they've looked carefully at the alternatives and made a thoughtful decision. You can't say that about black Democrats.
quote:
I'm not sure whether this is explicitly, or even implicitly, the case any more. I have no doubt that if African America was made up of Clarence Thomases and Condi Rices, then they'd be quite happy to have us around. I just don't think they can stomach moderating their views to invite us. Sure there are plenty of Trent Lotts around, but even Trent might turn into George Wallace to get/retain power.

I'm VERY curious about your "different plans". Can you say more?


Do you know what Trent Lott does when a strong black man shows up? He shuts up. To a man, every white Republican I meet is damned happy to know me, because to them I'm the embodiment of what they want to believe about blackfolks but never get a chance to see. Why? Because millions of African Americans are skeptical of Democrats and white liberals, but still standing on the sidelines.

The reason the Republicans rely so much on Armstrong Williams is because Armstrong Williams stands alone (for the most part). And again, only 12% are serious about politics.

Bottom line, you look at somebody like Joseph C. Phillips or Michael Steele, and it's a no brainer. All of us are perfectly welcome into the Republican Party, but these days it's exactly like integration of predominatly white colleges in the 60s and 70s. The mass of blackfolks aren't doing it, are afraid to do it. The few blackfolks who do it, do it mostly alone, but in a few years it will be no big deal.

When I was in college in the early 80s, and younger folks might be shocked to hear it, but it was a big fat hairy deal that black students were going to predominatly white universities and not HBCUs. Now everybody's mad because Affirmative Action is dying - as if black people always wanted to go to 'white' colleges.

I've seen this before.
quote:
Originally posted by Cobb:

Simply stated, only a minority of blackfolks care enough about politics to show up. Even this site, which has an admirable about of traffic is dwarfed by non-political black sites.


First, most people are too busy putting food on the table to involve themselves in much of anything else these days. Political participation, in general, is low. So what?

To you comment about the popularity of sites, AA.org is a private endeavor with no business or corporate attachments or objectives. I am just a guy who created a message board. Is it fair to compare this site with, say, BET.com?

Bottom line - as with Maslow's heirarchy of needs, people take care of the most pressing needs first. Those who can particpate in politcs - do. Whether one is involved in party politics, in my view, is immaterial to whether they are concerned with their community. There are plenty of ways to make an impact. Beyond that, all of this has nothing to do with whether blacks are involved in the Republican party.
quote:
Originally posted by Cobb:

All of us are perfectly welcome into the Republican Party, but these days it's exactly like integration of predominatly white colleges in the 60s and 70s. The mass of blackfolks aren't doing it, are afraid to do it. The few blackfolks who do it, do it mostly alone, but in a few years it will be no big deal.


Your use of the word "integration" is misleading - at best. Of course it makes me think that it is yet another conservative tactic to try to dupe black involvement in the R. party. Ain't gonna work! The black vote must be earned! Little slogans about 'not putting all our eggs in one basket' aren't even cute anymore. They're insulting.

Give us something to vote for and they'll have black votes. It's really rather simple.
I'm not particularly interested or concerned whether or not blackfolks are involved with their communities. I'm interested to know what black politics are as they inevitably recognize that Civil Rights is a done deal.

I expect the rank and file to check themselves briefly and follow the leaders of various political movements. The leaders of those political movements are people who do have time to do other things than put food on the table. That's why I mentioned 'the chatting classes' previously.

You obviously have time to think up the idea for and build a website and encourage political discussion there. That's a chatting class activity. Most blackfolks don't do that - they're not engaged at that level. Which just underscores what I've been saying.

The masses of blackfolks are not going to integrate the Republican Party because the Republican Party is something that is percieved to be wrong, and they don't see themselves as willing or able to change that wrong. You have to be an extraordinary kind of individual to go there. That's all I'm saying. Most blackfolks don't care that much.
It's also not about votes. It's about Party activity. It's about organizing campaigns, registering voters, debating and framing issues, creating vehicles for communications, raising funds, following current events. ORGANIZING. As your quote from Douglass states, you can't get crops without plowing the ground.
quote:
Originally posted by Cobb:

#1. It doesnt' matter what the Republican Party *does* it matters what they *appear* to do. It's not fair but that's the situation. Just like it didn't matter what Bill Bennett actually said, or what he was actually trying to say - it matters what 'the black community' believes he was implying.


BS - again you infer that blacks are not smart enough to understand the issues and to vote in their best interests. Why take the onus off the R. party to earn our vote? Why is that in your best interest to argue that?

quote:
This isn't fair. It's patently wrong, but it's like that and that's the way it is. When you have liberals who fear losing black votes and support, they will use every opportunity to make their points.


As I've already mentioned, we have shifted party loyalty completely once. What makes you think we could not do that again? If someone really wants votes - or does not want to lose votes - then they act accordingly, no?

quote:
Hell, Farrakhan's march had speakers talking about Katrina. What the hell does a natural catastrophe have to do with black politics?


Uh, if you hadn't heard there were a lot of black folks who lost their lives and property in Katrina. Some contend that there was an inadequate response, in some part, due to the fact that the victims were black. It seems quite relevant for a black march in DC to talk about Katrina.

quote:
Nothing. Nothing at all. The point is that regardless of the long term interests and principles of the GOP, there is a large segment of the AFrican American public which is only willing to believe the worst. These people are spun.


Funny - so you contend that in the absence of a better deal elsewhere that blacks are tied to Democrats. Why? You know this makes NO sense whatsoever. What have the Dems done for us? As you know, we vote for them as the better of two evils.

STOP MAKING EXCUSES AND COME UP WITH AN AGENDA TO EARN OUR VOTES!

quote:
The dynamic is the same, and because it is the same, neither party has to spend any extra money to move the black crowd.


Strategically this makes no sense. With the split between Dems and Repubs as close as ever, if that 12% of black votes could be shifted it would have monumental consequences. Just face it, your party has no interest in doing what it takes to earn our vote. It seems odd that you would support them despite their interest in supporting "you".

quote:
#2 The Republican Agenda already is pro-black, except there's just not visible black people saying it.


laugh

Sorry. I'm trying to be respectful. Some of my brothers here won't be. In fact, I'll jsut let them have at it.

quote:
This relates back to #1 in that if Denzel Washington (Republican) got up and stated the Republican Agenda, you'd move the crowd. Instead, only those African Americans who are motivated to ask the tough questions honestly are willing to switch. I'm cool with that.


WELL THEN WHY AREN'T CLARENCE THOMAS AND CONDI RICE UNIVERSALLY LOVED WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY? Confused Why aren't their pictures on plates mounted on our walls (next to Jesus and MLK!) all over black America? C'mon - I don't even think you believe this stuff.

quote:
Think about it this way. Every black Republican is there from a grass roots perspective - because they've looked carefully at the alternatives and made a thoughtful decision. You can't say that about black Democrats.


Again - you seem to default to a position that attacks your people but props you up as someone who 'has the answers'. Why do you feel the need to do that?

PLEASE ARTICULATE WHAT ABOUT THE REPUBLICAN AGENDA BLACK PEOPLE SHOULD BE EXCITED ABOUT? WHY ARE BLACKS BETTER OFF WITH THE REPUBLICAN PARTY THAN WITH DEMOCRATS?
quote:
WELL THEN WHY AREN'T CLARENCE THOMAS AND CONDI RICE UNIVERSALLY LOVED WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY? Confused Why aren't their pictures on plates mounted on our walls (next to Jesus and MLK!) all over black America? C'mon - I don't even think you believe this stuff.


This is the very idea that is wrong. I don't expect that the majority of African Americans should or will join the Republican Party, but until a sizeable percentage do, the GOP can afford to be more racist (among other things) than it ought to be. Maybe it just ends up being the ones like me who were born outside of the South, who are second and third generation college educated, and who work as professionals.

But having been very active online for a number of years in this mode, I know that there is a broad cross-section of black opinion within the GOP and conservative ranks.

What I believe is that steadily rising standards of living among the broad African American middle class will naturally lead them to the Republican Party, and that motion will break the relative stranglehold of monolithing left politics on African America as a whole.

I've already put down ten reasons in the Conservative Policies thread and those are simple one-liners that anybody can see. It's not that complicated.

Fundamentally, blacks are better off with Republicans because Republicans are pro-business and pro-private sector, and these are the only significant avenues for growth that a post Civil Rights generation of African Americans can use. The other grass roots politics and Democratic orientation of black politics does very little in the interest of self-actualized African Americans. You have heard such comments here, and I've only been here a week, of the sort that say - "hey you are privileged and don't have to work three jobs...". The conclusion is patently obvious - our politics can't do nothin' for you man. Believe me, I've been there.

If African Americans accept the challenge of freedom, it must accept that there cannot be one monolith, one love, one god, one politics, or one neck for one rope. We need to acknowledge our class and regional differences with respect.

I would suggest that 'the black commmunity' is a provincial and ultimately petty view of African America, and that the politics we have succeeded with in the 20th century do not fit with either African American nor global reality today. My work is addressed to those who are bored of and not served by that old time religion.

Understand that I don't mind being without the majority of African Americans.
quote:
i will assume the worst for the sake of argument, and that is that america is 15% racist and that every last one of them expresses their politics through the machinery of the republican party.
Boring... Boring because I, for one, won't, for the sake of argument, just go along with your lame definitions and correlations.

15%... huh?
I can't get past the arrogance inherent in your position (whether it was your intent or not):

That you are enlightened and liberal Blacks are not. That you have carefully investigated the GOP platform and found much to be excited about, and again liberal Blacks have not bothered to look. That if we would only open ourselves up to the message we would see the light.

It never occurs to you that many of us may have seen the infomercial and consciously made a decision not to buy that product.
quote:
I've gone through the trouble of conducting a survey. Have you?
And that is relevant HOW? And, I must say RELEVANT/RELATED to what? How you define "racist"?

Exactly what kind of survey did you give to effectively gauge "racism"? What? You "surveyed" people to test whether they are "racists" - i.e. people who think or act on "racism"?

Like I said elsewhere, maybe that stuff resonates with you but your disconnect with the clear historical evidence that racism has always been above and beyond what mere individual people in the public believed, etc. is so underwhelming.

So with all your survey experience? Have you gauged people's stated self-interest via politics and determined their actual effects? Or did you ask simple questions about whether they held certain beliefs according to some Slavery or Segregation type of Racial Attitudes paradigm?

Regardless, your stat amounts to jack crap nothing because you didn't gauge how racist "AMERICA" is... No doubt, you surveyed some individuals. Individuals who hardly tell the whole story about American Racism. Slavery in America was RACIALIZED (as it is becoming a habit for me to say, and not be choice)... Slavery became RACIALIZED at a time where there was no "racism" as we know it today and well before the pseudo-scientific ideas of "race" (and hence "racism") were born.

So, unless you somehow feel the systematic and structural reality of American RACIALIZED Slavery was somehow not "racist" because there were not widespread, tangible "racist" beliefs, then please excuse me calling BS on your little "survey".
Take the test yourself and tell everybody what it says about you. If you DARE, (nyahhahahahaha!!!)

http://www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=raceman

When you're done with that have a bite into the real sandwich at the Race Man's Home Companion.

http://www.mdcbowen.org/p2/rm/index.htm

I've been over the river and through the woods with race. The bottom line is this. White racists and instutional racism is incapable of stopping a million cellular capitalist black families. But they can bomb the NAACP and cut the head off the cobra. So are you going to be cell-based or group based? Are you going to take marching orders from Farrakhan whose agenda is public or are you going to use the capitalist system of America which will never fail as long as America IS America.

You talk about how racist America is. Have you ever been to Idaho, son?
quote:
Are you going to take marching orders from Farrakhan whose agenda is public or are you going to use the capitalist system of America which will never fail as long as America IS America.
Even more boring... If everything you say and support is so self-evident, then you would have to try to sell it with bloated, silly rhetoric.

quote:
You talk about how racist America is.
Actually, on this thread, I've said very little about "how racist America is". I have said, however, that your survey ain't about $hit. Now that was pretty clear...

quote:
White racists and instutional racism is incapable of stopping a million cellular capitalist black families.
And thank you for saying your survey isn't/wasn't about $hit. But I'll look and see how much Institutional Racism you measure in your "survey"... lol
quote:
1. Race can be traced through bloodlines and divides the human species.

2. Race is exclusive and biological but has no moral component.

3. Race is biologically fixed but may change over time.

4. Your race should determine how society views your potential

5. Your race should not be considered at any time.

6. Race is socially determined, not genetically.

7. Racial profiling is rational.

8. It is wrong to recognize or identify someone's 'race'.

9. It is not my responsibility to concern myself with the problems of other races.

10. Races are naturally antagonistic.

11. There is nothing special about racial discrimination - if it wasn't race it would be something equally stupid.

12. Institutional racism and individual prejudice are morally equivalent.

13. It is a citizens duty to fight racism at all levels of society.

14. Mentioning race just reinforces racism.

15. One must be very specific about racial terminology.

16. Racial minorities are just fine in America.

17. If I could change my race, I would.

18. Interracial marriages are morally superior to same-race marriages.

19. Racial hate crimes should be punished more forcefully than those that don't involve race.
20. I'm proud of my racial identity.

21. The average person knows enough to correctly identify race.

22. Every race has its own special message to the world.

23. No racial identity is neutral.

24. You can and should be a credit to your race.
Please point out where you gauged "Institutional Racism" and people's, individuals perceived self-interests that can and do, no doubt, have "racist" effects but may not be expressed in "racial" or "racist" terms.

So, that 15% that you stated was a generous gauge for Racism In AMERICA (not among Americans), is exactly what I said...
I take Glenn Loury's position on institutional racism, which is essentially that personal bias and colorblindness is not sufficient to erase the structural poverty of the ghetto. The inevitable consequence of that, given the political environment of the nation, is that the ghetto is a dead end. So there is basically one solution to the ghetto, GET OUT.

The question then of institutional racism, which ought to be the subject of it's own thread has nothing to do with the racism of the Republican party, which is essentially personal bigotry and cultural dissonance.

If you care to dispute that, then I would welcome any discussion of legislation passed in the last 20 years by Republican led congress that qualify as racist. In a separate thread.
quote:
So there is basically one solution to the ghetto, GET OUT.
And so now enters STRUCTURAL RACISM.

quote:
The question then of institutional racism... has nothing to do with the racism of the Republican party...

If you care to dispute that...
Listen, I don't particularly "care" Wink about either party of which both are obviously implicated in the racist nature, structure and culture of the American polity. So policies are not the sum total.

But if you can show how the Republican party fosters a different solution for the ghetto instead of one that evokes your response which says, essentially, that the Structually Racist Route is the only effective choice... Well, let's just say you've stabbed you own survey in the heart.

15%... huh?

Oh the wonders of the Republican Party!!
Though the " colorblindness" it promotes (neo-racism) has little interest in "erasing the structural poverty of the ghetto" Black people should be shiftin'. I guess it's your position that the Republican Party [THE OTHER WHITE MAN] has the tickets "out"?

I guess they are supplying the soap & water for Black people to wash their $$$ with. sck
quote:
Originally posted by Cobb:

I don't expect that the majority of African Americans should or will join the Republican Party, but until a sizeable percentage do, the GOP can afford to be more racist (among other things) than it ought to be.


Interesting. So you admit support of a group that does not have your interests at heart. Can you please explain this?

I guess what you are saying is that matters of race (i.e. racism) is not of concern to you, or of lesser concern than other criteria. Again, interesting. Even if you believe that they have a better economic plan, the fact that they are racist (i.e. discriminate against you) is not fundamentally important to you. Confused

quote:
Maybe it just ends up being the ones like me who were born outside of the South, who are second and third generation college educated, and who work as professionals.


Uh, no. I was raised in the northeast and my family is blessed such that I am the 4th generation to be college educated. Personally, I see nothing about the Republican party that is attractive or worth my support. This and I consider myself a "capitalist" - albeit a "compassionate capitalist"!


quote:
What I believe is that steadily rising standards of living among the broad African American middle class will naturally lead them to the Republican Party, and that motion will break the relative stranglehold of monolithing left politics on African America as a whole.


This infers that our interests are singularly attached to economics. I do not believe this to be the case. It is possible to want to do the best one can for their family but also want to do the best for one's community. Entering the middle class and rising the ranks of corporate/business/professional America has little to nothing to do with one's position on many of the social issues which define a progressive/liberal agenda.

quote:
Fundamentally, blacks are better off with Republicans because Republicans are pro-business and pro-private sector, and these are the only significant avenues for growth that a post Civil Rights generation of African Americans can use.


Friend, in general, business is not "pro-African America". Business exploits black labor, exploits black consumers, exploits black communities, soils the environment, discriminates against black labor, etc., etc., etc. While business may be an avenue for blacks to devote evergy and time (particularly in building their own), historically, to say that a pro-business stance is inherantly a pro-black stance is nonsensical.

quote:
The other grass roots politics and Democratic orientation of black politics does very little in the interest of self-actualized African Americans. You have heard such comments here, and I've only been here a week, of the sort that say - "hey you are privileged and don't have to work three jobs...". The conclusion is patently obvious - our politics can't do nothin' for you man. Believe me, I've been there.


So, why is Ted Kennedy, for example, a liberal? Political ideology transcends economic interests.

quote:
If African Americans accept the challenge of freedom, it must accept that there cannot be one monolith, one love, one god, one politics, or one neck for one rope. We need to acknowledge our class and regional differences with respect.


OK - so the truth seeps out. You feel the need to separate yourself from the masses of black people and do so with your Republican attachment. If that's the only thing behind your politics, then that seems rather sad to me. It seems like you are turning your back on black people - trying to show the white man that you aren't like other black folks - you're special!

td6

quote:
Understand that I don't mind being without the majority of African Americans.


It seems quite clear that your identity is, in fact, wedded to the belief that you are different from the core of African America. Everyone is entitled to their beliefs, but - respectfully - to want to be different because you are uncomfortable with your own people - is an illness.
quote:
Originally posted by Nmaginate:
quote:
Everyone is entitled to their beliefs,
but to want to be different from the core of African America because you are uncomfortable with your own people is an illness.

Truly one of the most quoteable...


Whoa. It was put so succinctly, it almost brings me to tears. Whoa!

I don't see much co-signing around here, but I can't help myself this time; forgive me.
First of all, I am disappointed with your lack of imagination in the suggestion that I am somehow invested in divorcing myself from blackfolks. I expected better.

It's a difficult matter for me at this minute because that reaction is so stereotypical I don't know whether I should bother to continue. In some ways it's very much like being called a nigger. Basically "we know what you're all about and we are in the process of dismissing you."

But you know what. I came here with a purpose and I won't leave until I've made myself clear. Whatever nonsense I have to suffer through, hey. That's the price of the ticket. Don't say I never walked the line.

Understand what you have done. You have called me a sick betrayer of black people. There's no walking back on that. No sugar coating. No 'my bad'. That's where you stand.

I've read Gwaltney enough times to know not to second-guess blackfolks, and I have met a sufficient number of righteous blackfolks to be perfectly comfortable in dismissing any I think are trifling and/or wrong. So know this, if I end up dismissing the whole lot of you in this forum, that's just you. Don't act as if you represent anything more that this little website. I've got too much family to heed your threats, and I didn't need to leave the comfort of the blogosophere. You're all expendable.

That said, I'm toning down and coming correct. Starting with staying on point with the thrust of the argument. For this thread it's simple. The entire point of this is to say exactly it doesn't matter what the Republican party IS it matters what I MAKE IT. And when it comes to African Americans, there are two kinds. The kind who are bold enough to change the Republican party, and those who are chickenshit and throw bottles from across the street. If you are convinced that the GOP is the Abyss and that blacks are hopeless within it, you are entitled to that opinion. But you're wrong, and you won't get away from this discussion unchallenged.
quote:
Fundamentally, blacks are better off with Republicans because Republicans are pro-business and pro-private sector, and these are the only significant avenues for growth that a post Civil Rights generation of African Americans can use.

Friend, in general, business is not "pro-African America". Business exploits black labor, exploits black consumers, exploits black communities, soils the environment, discriminates against black labor, etc., etc., etc. While business may be an avenue for blacks to devote evergy and time (particularly in building their own), historically, to say that a pro-business stance is inherantly a pro-black stance is nonsensical.


I take exception to this. Outside of your insult, this is a great point of contention.

First of all, I have to ask if you or any of your family members has ever been responsible, as a business owner, to pay employees. I have, and I would say that it is a singularly bracing reality.

While a great deal of hot air is expended, some of it righteous, about the responsibilities that black men and women have to themselves and their families, think how much more responsibility a business owner has, when families are dependent on the success of his endeavors.

For every one of us here that earns a paycheck, there is somebody whose responsibility it is to insure that the money is there, and that is indeed how business works. Sen. Kennedy didn't build a business - he didn't earn that money, his father did (not very righteously either). He inherited it. That's why he's called a limousine liberal.

Yes I am saying that historically being pro-business is pro-black. Take it back to Tuskeegee. That's what Booker T Washington was saying. He built his school on the premise that black tradesmen would make economic progress and that was key to the success of the race. I go back to Booker.

If you have a smidgen of sentiment for the black victims of Rosewood or the Tulsa Riots, is it not enhanced because those people proved themselves to be financially independent? It wasn't only because they were black that they were targets of racist attacks, it's because they were financially successful. They had "Go to Hell, whiteboy! money".

There are all kinds of businesses, all kinds of business plans. If you personally lack the imagination to see how a black business might exist without exploiting labor, despoiling the environment, and ignoring black communities, then that's your problem. But it is not the problem or an accurate representation of the business community.

Aside from all that, business and technology happen to be my specialty, so I take that primary angled because it's something I can do something about. But it's not the only reason I think people should be attracted to the Republican party. Having been active with black conservatives I recognize that they come at it from different angles, so don't presume that mine is the only black reason, or that I don't recognize others. I've only been here less than a week. You'll get to hear more in due course.
quote:
I came here with a purpose and I won't leave until I've made myself clear.
Nobody asked or otherwise requested you to leave. And you were called "N*gger" because of what you communicated. Now, pun intended, Wash Your A$$ and Take Responsibility for what you said.

Noted by the MBM responses, this is where you stand:
  • I think this statement is disparaging in nature and tremendously misrepresents
  • Again, the disparaging, self-critical thrust is, well, let's just say . . . odd.
  • Why understate what (to me) has to be the most critical factor?
  • Your use of the word "integration" is misleading - at best... Little slogans about 'not putting all our eggs in one basket' aren't even cute anymore. They're insulting.
  • BS - again you infer that blacks are not smart enough to understand the issues...
  • BS - again you infer that blacks are not smart enough to vote in their best interests.
  • Again - you seem to default to a position that attacks your people but props you up as someone who 'has the answers'.


    Oh and...
    STOP MAKING EXCUSES AND COME UP WITH AN AGENDA TO EARN OUR VOTES!

    Apparently, that's not your purpose. So, yes, I'm still bored because of typical Smoke & Mirrors game self-important, self-absorbed and obviously Politically Disconnected Blackfolk (Disconnected not only with the Political Consensus of Black people but with the Political Reality) like to play when they can't form an intelligent argument or agenda. Instead, they think they can shame their way to inviting company over to their self-imposed ideological misery.

    quote:
    Understand that I don't mind being without the majority of African Americans.
    Obviously, that is complicated by your noted "recruitment drives". If you were so secure then you either wouldn't recruit or have to sell the Republican Party at all or you would be too busy building things like Booker T. as substantive and tangible reasons to support your Black Conservative Movement/Brotherhood or the larger CONservative Movement.

    Instead, you show nothing and get nothing... Glad that works for you. That and all those lame angles you think resonate beyond people with the same ILLNESS you have.
  • You are perfectly free to use quotes about what I actually said. When you do so, I'll respond.

    The majority of African Americans are not college educated, or Episcopalians. I am both. I don't mind being without the majority of African Americans.

    Is there another way I should say it so that you understand it properly?

    --
    Now I said that the ghetto basically is a trap. You said that the alternative is STRUCTURALLY RACIST.

    Define that.
    If a better life for an African-American individual from the ghetto requires them to leave the ghetto then it is the structure of American upperward mobility, in and of itself, that undermines the ghetto.

    You say leave without a thought as to who and what is left behind... And Black people, Republican, Episcopalian, Baptist, etc. lament the "loss of community". Cosby talking about "In the old days."

    So instead of forcing the issue we're suppose to be resigned to the [false] hope of
    Black Flight. Somehow that is suppose to be the engine that makes Republican business policies relevant. Relevant to someone in the ghetto?

    The disinvestment in "Chocolate Cities" definitely doesn't work towards our collective advantage. Now you tell me how that doesn't function as an arm of racism when it was the strength of our community, living in close quarters one class to another, that made the Civil Rights Movement possible - effective?

    There is a term plenty of CONservatives like to use when describing Liberal policies that you might be acquainted with: The Law Unintended Consequences. I say that presuming what you, perhaps, don't intend not what was considered when concessions were made on Civil Rights.

    If you truly ever had a grasp of Institutional Racism, this would not be something for you to question.

    Get out... BUT then what?
    Get out and then castigate?
    "Wash your a$$?" Is that it?
    I see it like this. The ghetto in the Jim Crow south was structurally designed to deprive its inhabitants of all of the benefits of the mainstream of society. That black families were able to make it habitable is to their credit. There is a sizeable fraction of black culture which is centered around survival amidst this deprivation. I say this is lowbrow in light of opportunities available to advance, but I also recognize that 'advancement' it is not absolutely necessary.

    But it is certainly true that the destruction of Jim Crow laws, ie the success of the civil rights movement availed blacks to the benefits of the mainstream of society. That unleashed the talented tenth from their burden of being solely responsible for the welfare of African Americans, and it meant that once blackfolks had a choice, they could choose mainstream institutions or stay with the black ones. Most everyone chose mainstream. Thus the decline in the influence of the Talented Tenth and their businesses.

    One can bemoan this, and there's plenty to complain about, but the evidence points clearly to the fact that on the whole, African Americans benefit from choice. When African Americans have a wider variety of employment and consumer choices availed to them, the prosper. The very point of Jim Crow was to deny that, and so the very existence of the Talented Tenth was a reaction, it was an edifice built upon a condition of restricted freedom.

    There is a useful and complex discussion about modes of economic improvement: http://www.visioncircle.org/archive/004440.html
    But I would argue that on the whole blackfolks are better off with the lid off.

    Does the Talented Tenth deserve responsibility as 'black leaders'? I think (obviously) DuBois would say yes and Washington would say no.
    --

    My grasp of institutional racism stems from MAssey & Denton + Oliver & Shapiro.

    http://www.mdcbowen.org/p2/rm/theory/index.htm

    Summarily, segregation in housing is the greatest contribution to black deprivation. + Blacks inability to generate, maintain and pass along wealth through inheritance is the greatest gap between blacks and whites who today with equal educations and salaries still have different standards of living.

    Since I hew to class roles and am not above some combat, I recognize how this split works, and it is my intent to make that choice more clear. Part of the thing that takes me out of the role of a Progressive is that I acknowledge that everybody in the race has their own roles and responsibilities. What I am not all about is the role-monkey circus. I am not saying, beyond 'fraternity rivalry' that we are right and you are wrong and we must dominate. That is what I consider the Progressive mistake. Black Unity doesn't work and it cannot be forced. That it has failed is evidence enough.

    So African America is and will remain a diaspora. But I believe that the first through Massey & Denton + Oliver & Shapiro's barriers will be the leaders of the next generation. Those who escape the deprivations of the ghetto and who actually build wealth.
    quote:
    One can bemoan this, and there's plenty to complain about, but the evidence points clearly to the fact that on the whole, African Americans benefit from choice. When African Americans have a wider variety of employment and consumer choices availed to them, they prosper.
    But that is not the question. The question is about "leaving" the ghetto today with the choices African-Americans have and what that does to the ghetto when there is Black Flight. The question is NOT a choice between having the Segregation "Lid On" or having it off.

    I mentioned nothing about a Talented Tenth but exactly how you promote the business initiatives of the Republican party and somehow have that idea disconnected with that of a Black Talented Class, narrow or broad, is all the more striking.

    quote:
    Segregation in housing is the greatest contribution to black deprivation. + Blacks inability to generate, maintain and pass along wealth through inheritance is the greatest gap between blacks and whites who today with equal educations and salaries still have different standards of living.
    And that too adds to the list of things you didn't include in your 15% racism gauge.

    quote:
  • I acknowledge that everybody in the race has their own roles and responsibilities.'
    .................. VS ...................
  • Black Unity doesn't work and it cannot be forced.
  • INCOHERENT.

    How are Roles & Responsibilities at odds with Black Unity? How is Roles & Responsibilities anything different than the crux of the notion of a Talented Tenth? How come when I asked you about Roles & Responsibilities (when I hoped that maybe you could speak to Everybody's Part Of The Bargain is/was - from Cosby's crack about the "lower economic people")... how come you had no comment then?

    So even the Institutional Racism you've been schooled on (read about, etc.) is not something you incorporate into your Party/ideological evaluation. At least some Progressive/Liberals acknowledge the existence. So it's no wonder why you want company with your misery even though you try to say you're okay without it. lol

    Anyway... Please make that BS make some sense. Obviously the STRUCTURAL RACISM stuff must have been over your head or too challenging to your orthodoxy. So please just explain this curious and conflicted view of Black Unity and why you are missing the point.
    quote:
    Originally posted by Cobb:

    First of all, I am disappointed with your lack of imagination in the suggestion that I am somehow invested in divorcing myself from blackfolks. I expected better.


    Cobb, respectfully, your writing is replete with statements and inferences to this effect. Please help me understand these quotes:

    quote:
    Originally posted by Cobb:

    The masses of blackfolks are not going to integrate the Republican Party because the Republican Party is something that is percieved to be wrong, and they don't see themselves as willing or able to change that wrong. You have to be an extraordinary kind of individual to go there. That's all I'm saying. Most blackfolks don't care that much.


    You've juxtaposed your affinity for the R. Party with those of "most blackfolks".

    quote:
    Originally posted by Cobb:

    I don't expect that the majority of African Americans should or will join the Republican Party, but until a sizeable percentage do, the GOP can afford to be more racist (among other things) than it ought to be. Maybe it just ends up being the ones like me who were born outside of the South, who are second and third generation college educated, and who work as professionals.


    quote:
    Originally posted by Cobb:

    If African Americans accept the challenge of freedom, it must accept that there cannot be one monolith, one love, one god, one politics, or one neck for one rope. We need to acknowledge our class and regional differences with respect.


    What does that last sentence mean?

    quote:
    Originally posted by Cobb:

    I would suggest that 'the black community' is a provincial and ultimately petty view of African America, and that the politics we have succeeded with in the 20th century do not fit with either African American nor global reality today. My work is addressed to those who are bored of and not served by that old time religion.


    So you're NOT interested in "divorcing" yourself from black America?


    quote:
    Originally posted by Cobb:

    Understand that I don't mind being without the majority of African Americans.


    Even this infers that there is some problem with "the majority of African Americans".

    How on Earth could someone read your words and NOT come away with the clear belief that African America is not something that you are comfortable with. Further, as an African American, how could you be surprised that other African Americans would see this as self-hating, self-destructive attitudes?


    quote:
    It's a difficult matter for me at this minute because that reaction is so stereotypical I don't know whether I should bother to continue. In some ways it's very much like being called a nigger. Basically "we know what you're all about and we are in the process of dismissing you."


    To be clear, there is no animus or venom in my words. I'm just calling it as I see it. Please help me understand where I am wrong.

    quote:
    The entire point of this is to say exactly it doesn't matter what the Republican party IS it matters what I MAKE IT.


    If one's spouse is abusing them should they stay in the relationship in hopes that they can change the abuser or do they get out and look for someone more appropriate for them? Why would you choose to align yourself with a group and party who couldn't care less about black people? They may heap some blacks with affection, but that is only because those blacks strip themselves of anything that could in the remotest way define themselves as black. Most white folks are extremely insecure about their racism. As a result, they LOVE black folks who say and do things to make them feel OK about their biases. Black conservatives, IMO, just take the pressure off of them for their biases.

    quote:
    And when it comes to African Americans, there are two kinds. The kind who are bold enough to change the Republican party, and those who are chickenshit and throw bottles from across the street.


    This makes no sense and reveals an attitude about politics and America that is . . . off. Parties EARN support. If a party doesn't do anything to support a group, why should that group support them? Should black folks think similarly about the KKK?

    And when it comes to African Americans, there are two kinds. The kind who are bold enough to change the KKK, and those who are chickenshit and throw bottles from across the street.


    Respectfully, do you see how ridiculous that sounds?
    quote:
    One can bemoan this, and there's plenty to complain about, but the evidence points clearly to the fact that on the whole, African Americans benefit from choice. When African Americans have a wider variety of employment and consumer choices availed to them, they prosper.

    But that is not the question. The question is about "leaving" the ghetto today with the choices African-Americans have and what that does to the ghetto when there is Black Flight. The question is NOT a choice between having the Segregation "Lid On" or having it off.

    I mentioned nothing about a Talented Tenth but exactly how you promote the business initiatives of the Republican party and somehow have that idea disconnected with that of a Black Talented Class, narrow or broad, is all the more striking.


    I think about it in the exact same context as that of the Great Migration from the South in the 20s and the formation of the Urban League. Today's urban ghetto is exactly the same as yesterday's sharecropping arrangement. Neither points the way towards self-sufficiency.
    quote:
    quote:
    # I acknowledge that everybody in the race has their own roles and responsibilities.'
    .................. VS ...................
    # Black Unity doesn't work and it cannot be forced.

    INCOHERENT.

    How are Roles & Responsibilities at odds with Black Unity? How is Roles & Responsibilities anything different than the crux of the notion of a Talented Tenth? How come when I asked you about Roles & Responsibilities (when I hoped that maybe you could speak to Everybody's Part Of The Bargain is/was - from Cosby's crack about the "lower economic people")... how come you had no comment then?

    So even the Institutional Racism you've been schooled on (read about, etc.) is not something you incorporate into your Party/ideological evaluation. At least some Progressive/Liberals acknowledge the existence. So it's no wonder why you want company with your misery even though you try to say you're okay without it. lol

    Anyway... Please make that BS make some sense. Obviously the STRUCTURAL RACISM stuff must have been over your head or too challenging to your orthodoxy. So please just explain this curious and conflicted view of Black Unity and why you are missing the point.


    I'm not sure I understand the dichotomy you percieve. Black unity doesn't work because it patently doesn't. Blacks have chosen to disperse instead of aggregate. I hold onto romantic notions of aggregation but it hasn't happened. I think that the Black Mecca theory is discredited, not only because of the recent talk about it, but from my own personal experience living in Atlanta which I see as more class conscious than any other black city I've lived in. As a case in point, local black support of Freaknic was nil which was a complete surprise to me out in the country when the Freaknic wars were going on. But again this is an old rehash of bourgie vs radical. Nothing particularly new.

    I would also take the failure of the Black Radical Congress as well as intelligent progessive black candidates within the Democratic party as evidence that African Americans standing on the sidelines with regard to building an independent and coordinated voting block and agenda.

    I welcome any counterexamples you might have. And I think the best place to start would be with Rev. Rivers in Boston.
    quote:
    quote:
    Originally posted by Cobb:

    The masses of blackfolks are not going to integrate the Republican Party because the Republican Party is something that is percieved to be wrong, and they don't see themselves as willing or able to change that wrong. You have to be an extraordinary kind of individual to go there. That's all I'm saying. Most blackfolks don't care that much.



    You've juxtaposed your affinity for the R. Party with those of "most blackfolks".


    I've been talking black politics on the web since 1993, and before that on email distributions and BBSs and at Xerox before that way back to 1986. Prior to that I was a national officer of NSBE in charge of getting money into the organization. I started reading Sowell in 1982, but before and since worked for the Rainbow Coalition, Operation Push and the Brotherhood Crusade in Los Angeles. My family has been involved in local politics and organizing black State and County Employees in California including the Black Woman's Forum, the BEA, the King Drew School and MLK Hospital. I was a participant in the very first Kwanzaa celebrations in Los Angeles at the outset. I have relatives in education who have run colleges and taught economics in at the University of Ghana.

    Most blackfolks don't have that kind of political background and motivation.

    I can't change that history and don't intend to make much hay about it. But I think I have something to do with the real discussion about black politics, and I'm going to continue to do so. Bottom line, is I'm not afraid to go where my reasoning takes me. And it takes me here. It's not about me, it's about the lessons I have learned.

    Now let me say it again. The masses of blackfolks are not going to integrate the Republican party. I'm talking about the motivated 12% who do more than just vote once a year - those who are motivated above and beyond simple citizenship to make a change in the agenda of political organizations.

    I wish that all the blackfolks I knew cared enough about politics to sit up on a Sunday evening (after a nice rib dinner) and engage in Socratic debate. But most blackfolks don't care that much.

    I don't know if you've bothered to read my websites, but I've been doing this for a long time. I think it's an extraordinary thing, not an ordinary thing that all brothers do.
    quote:
    quote:
    And when it comes to African Americans, there are two kinds. The kind who are bold enough to change the Republican party, and those who are chickenshit and throw bottles from across the street.

    This makes no sense and reveals an attitude about politics and America that is . . . off. Parties EARN support. If a party doesn't do anything to support a group, why should that group support them? Should black folks think similarly about the KKK?


    Parties cajole votes from the rank & file. I'm not sure how much they earn it, but some basic things have to be aligned. I think there are plenty of alignments between blackfolks and Republicans. If I haven't made it clear, I expect that millions of black Americans can and will walk straight into the Republican Party without altering their values one iota, however their attitudes need adjusting. Not all black Americans will, and to expect that kind of unity is foolish.

    Anyway, I don't need to apologize for rhetorical excess. I'm not a policy wonk writing position papers.

    I'm they guy who agrees with Dyson when he pointed out that for all Malcolm X's firey rhetoric, he didn't move his narrow ass out of Chicago and head into the heart of Dixie when blacks where being shot in the night. King took his fight to where the fight was.

    In my original approach the the GOP, presuming that it was home to the racists, King's attitude was my guidepost. What I have discovered is that with republicans and conservatives online, that kind of bigotry is nowhere near the rule.

    Again, there are certain cultural traditions in the South that I find completely unacceptable. But I understand and respect that there are some folks who felt the need to integrate the southern municipal governments. Why would any black man want Sheriff Clark's job? To make it right.

    Foolish?
    quote:
    quote:
    The entire point of this is to say exactly it doesn't matter what the Republican party IS it matters what I MAKE IT.

    If one's spouse is abusing them should they stay in the relationship in hopes that they can change the abuser or do they get out and look for someone more appropriate for them? Why would you choose to align yourself with a group and party who couldn't care less about black people? They may heap some blacks with affection, but that is only because those blacks strip themselves of anything that could in the remotest way define themselves as black. Most white folks are extremely insecure about their racism. As a result, they LOVE black folks who say and do things to make them feel OK about their biases. Black conservatives, IMO, just take the pressure off of them for their biases.


    I'm completely aware of that dynamic. But I don't see how you avoid that anywhere in America. Either you deal with it and keep stepping or you back off and let white people fail. The Republican Party is no exception. Keep in mind Baldwin's "My Dungeon Shook". That's my attitude.

    http://www.mdcbowen.org/cobb/archives/000990.html


    What is clear about the Republican Party is that it is dynamic and full of change. What worked 20 years ago means little today. Many folks aren't aware of Dirksen's work, and many misrepresent what Goldwater was all about.

    http://www.mdcbowen.org/cobb/archives/002158.html

    I don't think it makes any sense to give up any African American influence on the Republican party.

    Add Reply

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