Asking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

What has the Democrat Party actually done for black Americans?

They voted against abolishing slavery and supported Jim Crow laws. For the past several decades, they have created horrible neighborhoods (e.g subsidized housing) and moved black people into those horrible neighborhoods. They encourage welfare, which makes black people less inclined to pursue an education and build a better life as they become dependent on the state. Now, they have reached the point where their leader says that black people "ain't black" if they choose not to vote Democrat. This shows how much of a threat black Americans are to Democrats when they know that *they* are the party keeping them poor and making their lives more miserable. Before you think that "black people can't get jobs 'cos racism", consider that black people CAN get jobs and that there aren't any obstacles in their way that white people also don't have. We know that if you are poor, it's harder to get an education and go to college, but it is possible and you can do it if you have the belief and determination to. Even without a college education, there are decent paying jobs that only require you to have graduated high-school.

It seems to me that the Democrat Party just want to keep black people in a cycle of misfortune and poverty so they keep voting for them, thinking there is no real way out of that cycle. If they are kept poor, they will vote for the party that professes a greater interest in giving them welfare, etc. The Democrats don't want black people to get out of this cycle because then they would realize that they have no use for the Democrat Party and they would move away from voting for them. Ideology aside, there is a reason why even moderately successful people tend to vote conservative.

Even with a basic lower middle-class income, or indeed any kind of income, black people in America are more likely to not vote Democrat.
Turtlepower · 36-40, M
So you can't look at American political history through the lense of Democrat and Republican. When democrats voted against abolishing slavery they mostly consisted of conservative southerners. The political agendas of both parties swapped. Let it be known that neither party has helped black people considering both parties are dominated by wealthy and mostly people with an agenda that only wants to help themselves.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
SW-User
@carpediem I think I just spoke to your alt 😂
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@wildbill83
haven't you watched TV lately? we're not the ones condemning everyone who associates with "Make America Great Again". We're not the ones that think pride in one's own country is racist and divisive...

That's your party, the party of fools...

Can you list ten (10) things that is an American quality or behavior that makes you proud?
Theyitis · 36-40, M
So much to say.

First of all neither party has done much for blacks lately because the Republican Party is very much anti-black. Black folks know this intuitively, and that’s why Democratic candidates consistently win about 90% of the black vote nowadays. That allows the Democratic Party to take the black vote for granted simply by not being anti-black, they don’t have to actually take up any issues that blacks would like to prioritize; furthermore, Democrats are afraid to campaign on black issues because it might cost them the swing votes of white moderates.

Welfare does not discourage blacks from pursuing an education, better career opportunities, and life improvements, to the contrary welfare empowers them to do those things because it takes care of their most basic needs. It takes money to make money, and one is better able to spend money on making money when he doesn’t have to worry about being able to afford his basic needs.

It is harder for blacks to get jobs, and systemic racism is one of the major factors to that. It’s harder for poor people (who are disproportionately black) to get even a basic high school education. Poor people often have to work multiple jobs with long hours, which often means they can’t be home to even make sure their kids stay out of trouble, let alone make sure they study or help them with their homework. Being poor might also mean they can’t afford to eat regular meals. If a poor kid goes to school hungry he’s more likely to have difficulty focusing on class work and more likely to act up and have disciplinary problems. See, being poor isn’t just a problem in itself, it also creates other problems that are likely to keep one poor.
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@Slade
^Gee, why would anyone think leftists are racists?
Maybe because you say they are.
Slade · 56-60, M
@Diotrephes Yes I do. And they are
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@Slade
Yes I do. And they are

We all have unique perspectives so, if that's what you see, that's what you see.
TexChik · F
@wildbill83 yep ! He was such a prick . Retired Secret service reported constantly the the N word was the Clinton’s favorite word .
Tres13 · 51-55, M
Hung like a black horse@wildbill83
nedkelly · 61-69, M
They created BLM to commit crimes without the fear of prosecution
losthorizons · 51-55, M
Exactly. They have done nothing but keep them in poverty. But the blacks keep voting democrat. Wake up people. The dems also started the KKK
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Good post. I have not read the other comments, but expecting to see some fireworks.
carpediem · 61-69, M
@BizSuitStacy there are some really STUPID comments here. Enjoy
badminton · 61-69, MVIP
They encourage welfare

The real welfare is for corporations. They call it bail-outs, subsides, tax cuts, etc. Impoverished African Americans, and other poor Americans, get a pittance.

In the U.S. we now have a system of Corporate Oligarchy; socialism for billionaires and corporations, unregulated capitalism for everyone else. It's a bad system. Let's change that.
SW-User
@badminton
The real welfare is for corporations. They call it bail-outs, subsides, tax cuts, etc. Impoverished African Americans, and other poor Americans, get a pittance.

Yeah, and? That black Americans and other people on welfare get less is irrelevant lol. It doesn't address anything I've said, and is really fucking stupid.
badminton · 61-69, MVIP
President Johnson passed the most important legislation for African-Americans since the Emancipation proclamation; the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Theyitis · 36-40, M
@SW-User Sure, they were “real” Democrats, but “Democrat” meant something different back then. Do you think they were woke liberals? 90 something percent of the bill’s opposition came from the old Confederacy. Is that from where American Progressivism traces its roots?
Why do you suppose that today it’s almost exclusively conservatives that like to wave the Confederate flag, can you explain that?

Here’s another example: back when he was much younger, Jesse Jackson once ran for mayor of Chicago as a Republican. Did that make him a conservative? Would you have supported his candidacy? He was a Republican after all. Oh wait, lemme guess, he wasn’t a “real” Republican?

Or maybe, just maybe, American politics hasn’t always been as simple as liberal Democrats vs. conservative Republicans?
Theyitis · 36-40, M
@Diotrephes Yeah, never mind things like poll taxes and de facto segregation, the 14th amendment was enough. The rest is just bullshit.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
graphite · 61-69, M
Dem Party has told them they are victims and can't stand on their own two feet and that they need the Dem Party to ward off those racist enemies. (My local newspaper continues to push, push the narrative of oppressor-whites-are-doing-better-than-oppressed blacks, while completely leaving out any mention of Asians, who are doing better than whites. That would completely throw off the oppressor-oppressed narrative.)
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@graphite One thing is for sure and that is the national Democrats of 1920 were extremely racist toward Asians =

"Asiatic Immigrants
The policy of the United States with reference to the non-admission of Asiatic immigrants is a true expression of the judgment of our people, and to the several states, whose geographical situation or internal conditions make this policy, and the enforcement of the laws enacted pursuant thereto, of particular concern, we pledge our support."
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/1920-democratic-party-platform

The Republicans were equally racist =
"Immigration
The standard of living and the standard of citizenship of a nation are its most precious possessions, and the preservation and the elevation of those standards is the first duty of our government. The immigration policy of the U. S. should be such as to insure that the number of foreigners in the country at any one time shall not exceed that which can be assimilated with reasonable rapidity, and to favor immigrants whose standards are similar to ours.

The selective tests that are at present applied should be improved by requiring a higher physical standard, a more complete exclusion of mental defectives and of criminals, and a more effective inspection applied as near the source of immigration as possible, as well as at the port of entry. Justice to the foreigner and to ourselves demands provision for the guidance, protection and better economic distribution of our alien population. To facilitate government supervision, all aliens should be required to register annually until they become naturalized.

The existing policy of the United States for the practical exclusion of Asiatic immigrants is sound, and should be maintained."

Were there any real differences between the parties on this issue?
Tres13 · 51-55, M
Gave them a coloured President & a coloured female vp
SW-User
@Diotrephes
So, be sure to let me know when you are ready to renounce the ethnocentric racist BS in the Jewish Babylonian Talmud as well as all of the racist crap in the Bible and we might be able to have civil discussions. After several more years you might have gotten smart enough to present your views like an intelligent person. Are you game or will you pout?

You clearly hate us, so why would I want to discuss this with you?

You're wrong on all of these matters but you simply aren't worth arguing with.
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@SW-User Discussing issues with you is more hilarious than going to comedy clubs. Thank you so much for the laughs.
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@SW-User
You clearly hate us, so why would I want to discuss this with you?

You're wrong on all of these matters but you simply aren't worth arguing with.

It's unfortunate that you won't renounce the Jewish Babylonian Talmud. IMO, it is completely disgusting but if you were raped as a three-year old the trauma might be too hard for you to acknowledge. After all, that is one thing that it says is acceptable for old buzzards to do to toddlers.
MarineBob · 56-60, M
They made george floyds family millionaires
Slade · 56-60, M
@MarineBob I'm sure they've blown it all by now
MarineBob · 56-60, M
@Slade tell nancy she'll arrange a grant
SW-User
Black people cant look to any party to do things for them they have to stop being lazy, whiny, blaming everyone for everything and acting as though everybody owes them something. That would be a great start to getting where they want to be.
MarineBob · 56-60, M
@SW-User sorry to burst your bubble but no one can regardless of color
SW-User
@MarineBob 🤡
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
There are so many contradictions in this post.

Effectively the parties swapped sides in the early to mid-twentieth century. The Democrats supported the New Deal and later the civil rights act. Abe Lincoln would have been a democrat during that period for sure.

This is basically just a rightwing strawman argument that Trumpsters post.
Spotpot · 41-45, M
@SW-User You know the southern democrats were extremely conservative and conservatism is an ideology that tradtionally goes in hand with anti black sentiment.
SW-User
@Spotpot Irrelevant. They belonged to the Democrat Party, which is the only pertinent factor here.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@SW-User The Dixiecrats were centre left on economics and right on cultural issues.

Like you.
You are asking this question after the incredible number of bills that have been passed that benefited someone besides the super rich?
SW-User
Black people can succeed... by trying instead of crying.

Did Obama quit because no black man can ever be a Democratic president?
@SW-User
Do you understand how your response sounds incredibly racist?
And then you block me because this requires a mind on your part and you lack one. 😜
SW-User
@SomeLikeItHot Only a person of low intellect would think that.
Spotpot · 41-45, M
Social security medicare medicaid civil rights act were all pased by democrats what has the GÓP done cut taxes for the rich and profitable corporations they been serving the rich sincxe Reagan.
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@Slade
Bullshit. It's always been income based.

Turd
You are such a sweetheart!

They were willing to exclude people who made the necessary income and who were in the tax system because some of those people were Black. It was a racist program from the start. The effect was that 27% of the White workforce was excluded in order to exclude 65% of the Black workforce. Racists then as well as now, simply crap bricks at the idea of Black citizens benefitting from social welfare programs. So, they are willing to cut it for everyone if needed in order to stick it to Black people.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/vieilles_annonces/4917045573/in/album-72157624428147638/ January 1933

https://www.flickr.com/photos/vieilles_annonces/5045382790/in/album-72157624428147638/ June 1934

https://www.flickr.com/photos/vieilles_annonces/5420089085/in/album-72157624428147638/ October 1938
Slade · 56-60, M
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@Slade
homo

Be sure to get your orthopox (monkey pox) vaccine if you are going to continue in that behavior.
TexChik · F
They have enriched themselves at our expense, as usual.
Japrost · 41-45, M
Any intellectual talk about political parties is a waste of time. There is no political party that I have ever identified with.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@SW-User
*they* routinely fail black Americans.

Your original point was to ask what *they* have done *for* black Americans. I and others have addressed this. To compare their record to the only other major party in US politics is not unreasonable, especially given where your talking points come from and who is hearting this post.

Ironically, your response to arguments about FBJ passing the civil rights act involved mentioning the Republicans!
SW-User
@Burnley123 Would the Democrats have passed the Civil Rights Act without Republican support?

The answer is no!

Did more Republicans than Democrats vote in favor of Civil Rights?

The answer is yes!

Is support for Civil Rights unique to the Democrat Party?

The answer is *clearly* no!

You would only have a point IF Civil Rights were strongly supported by Democrats without there being a need for Republican assistance and support, and if Democrats were the only party that supported Civil Rights.

They needed a Republican to bring that act to a vote because of a lack of support from *their* party. Similarly, they needed a majority of Republicans to vote for it because of a lack of support from *their* party. If it was left to Republicans, black people would have still gained Civil Rights.

Is this really that difficult to comprehend?
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@SW-User I thought we weren't mentioning the republicans? I allow different limitations on your own arguments than you place on others.

My original point was that the us parties swapped places in the mid to late twentieth century. Firstly on economics with the New Deal and later on racial issues.

Yes, more Republicans than Democrats voted for the CRA. This was unsuprising given that they dominated southern USA at the time and that the vast majority of voters in those states were in favour of Jim Crow.

My point isn't to say that the Democratic Party of the time was liberal but that this was a defining point that made it so. LBJ was well aware of the political cost and the risk of losing the 'solid south,' under his presidency and this eventually came to pass.

Republican Barry Goldwater later ran a campaign based on 'states's rights'. He wanted white southern support and framed this by saying that southern states should have autonomy to make their own laws. Everyone knew at the time (inc. Goldwater) that these laws would discriminate against black people but they didn't say the quiet part out loud.

Goldwater lost but he set a template for Republican political strategy which endured. By Reagan's first election, the southern white vote was firmly republican. All this was possible because southern white opposition to the civil rights act had found a new home.

I'm not sure what I fail to comprehend here.
They voted against abolishing slavery and supported Jim Crow laws.

Yes...a LONG time ago.

More dissention from a Trump promoter or agent of our enemies.

You're so sad. I'm out. lol
wildbill83 · 41-45, M
convince them that they can't do anything themselves without coddling and vain sympathy from big brother...🤔
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
The Civil Rights Act.
SW-User
@Burnley123 By telling you that it was facilitated by a Republican? Oh, and there's the fact that more Democrats than Republicans voted *against* it.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@SW-User The point I made (that you ignored) is that the parties effectively swapped sides in the early to mid 20th century

To add to it, the democrats paid a political cost that exists til this day. They lost the south because southern whites switched to the Republicans.

I mentioned the Goldwater Southern strategy too and that also went over your head!
SW-User
@Burnley123 lolol

I addressed it indirectly by telling you that I wasn't asking about the Republican Party, but rather the Democrats and how *they* routinely fail black Americans.
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@SW-User
rofl

It was in the news =
‘Jews Want A Race War’ sign hung on overpass of busy LA highway 23 August 2020
https://www.timesofisrael.com/jews-want-a-race-war-sign-hung-on-overpass-of-busy-la-highway/

The Coming Race War in America
A Wake-up Call
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/books/chap1/comingracewar.htm

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/what-is-great-replacement-theory-and-how-does-it-fuel-racist-violence
SW-User
@Diotrephes 🤦🏻‍♀️

Apart from some soldiers who were mixed, there were no Jewish people in the German army.

To use one example, the army general Erhard Milch was said to be Jewish but his maternal heritage was German, and the Nazis said that his dad (who was Jewish) wasn't even his dad. They were probably doing that to justify him remaining in the army at the request of Göring, but that they *had* to do this shows how much they despised us and how it was not acceptable to have us in their army.

If people with Jewish heritage wanted to stay in the German army, they didn't/couldn't identify as Jewish and had no connection with any aspects of their Jewish background. In practically every case, it was only partial Jewish heritage anyway.

The closest the Nazis got to receiving any Jewish assistance was in the ghettos when they used *some* Jews (as in a select few) to help control the Jewish communities in these ghettos.
Slade · 56-60, M
@SW-User Capos like George Soros
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@SW-User
Apart from some soldiers who were mixed, there were no Jewish people in the German army.

To use one example, the army general Erhard Milch was said to be Jewish but his maternal heritage was German, and the Nazis said that his dad (who was Jewish) wasn't even his dad. They were probably doing that to justify him remaining in the army at the request of Göring, but that they *had* to do this shows how much they despised us and how it was not acceptable to have us in their army.

If people with Jewish heritage wanted to stay in the German army, they didn't/couldn't identify as Jewish and had no connection with any aspects of their Jewish background. In practically every case, it was only partial Jewish heritage anyway.

The closest the Nazis got to receiving any Jewish assistance was in the ghettos when they used *some* Jews (as in a select few) to help control the Jewish communities in these ghettos.

Are these articles lies?

https://www.haaretz.com/2003-10-30/ty-article/historian-nazi-army-included-150-000-of-jewish-descent/0000017f-db28-df62-a9ff-dfff0b4c0000

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1996-12-24-mn-12209-story.html

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/ellen-feldman-nazi-germany

https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1f2qr44

America was multitudes more racist than Nazi Germany was. America wouldn't let Blacks, except for a very few tokens, attend the military academies or become officers and its branches were very segregated. Compare that to the Nazi army, which was the most integrated military force in WWII. That is a historical fact.
i love black ppl
SW-User
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@faithfulhusband
i love black ppl

@SW-User
me too

You could have been 1924 Republicans =
"The Negro
We urge the congress to enact at the earliest possible date a federal anti-lynching law so that the full influence of the federal government may be wielded to exterminate this hideous crime. We believe that much of the misunderstanding which now exists can be eliminated by humane and sympathetic study of its causes. The president has recommended the creation of a commission for the investigation of social and economic conditions and the promotion of mutual understanding and confidence."
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/republican-party-platform-1924

Those 1924 Dems were still racist toward Asians =
"Asiatic Immigration
We pledge ourselves to maintain our established position in favor of the exclusion of Asiatic immigration."
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/1924-democratic-party-platform

Coolidge gave a soothing message in his second address on December 3, 1924 =
"THE NEGRO
These developments have brought about a very remarkable improvement in the condition of the negro race. Gradually, but surely, with the almost universal sympathy of those among whom they live, the colored people are working out their own destiny. I firmly believe that it is better for all concerned that they should be cheerfully accorded their full constitutional rights, that they should be protected from all of those impositions to which, from their position, they naturally fall a prey, especially from the crime of lynching and that they should receive every encouragement to become full partakers in all the blessings of our common American citizenship."
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/second-annual-message-18

The 1928 Republicans were still against lynchings =
"The Negro
We renew our recommendation that the Congress enact at the earliest possible date a Federal Anti-Lynching Law so that the full influence of the Federal Government may be wielded to exterminate this hideous crime."
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/republican-party-platform-1928

The 1932 Republicans expressed love (or at least friendship)=
"The Negro
For seventy years the Republican Party has been the friend of the American Negro. Vindication of the rights of the Negro citizen to enjoy the full benefits of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is traditional in the Republican Party, and our party stands pledged to maintain equal opportunity and rights for Negro citizens. We do not propose to depart from that tradition nor to alter the spirit or letter of that pledge."
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/republican-party-platform-1932
SW-User
@Diotrephes 🤦🏻‍♀️
They make a real people's party impossible.
2cool4school · 46-50, F
Oh yay politics (again) 🙄🥱😴
What a bunch of odd assertions. Silly as all get out.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
strongbow · 46-50, M
You be spittin facts! .... well done👍

 
Post Comment