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.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
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.