WHO THE REAL RACISTS ARE

Legion said:
iw6fjvqi1mi21.jpg


THIS IS REPUBLICAN SENATOR EDWARD BROOKE. DEMOCRATS HATED HIM​


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Brooke
Click to expand...

Your opioid addiction mental illness and low IQ is making you delusional
 
Dachshund said:
Which political party in America is typically associated with RACIAL EQUALITY and CIVIL RIGHTS ?



Most Americans would say the DEMOCRATIC PARTY. Right ?



But that's not correct.




Check out the history...





The 1828 Presidential election was won by Andrew Jackson. Jackson had a very pig-headed, stubborn temperament so some of his critics branded him "JACK - ASS" or DONKEY. So when he founded the Democratic Party in 1829, the DONKEY become its symbol. Ever since 1829, the US Democratic Party have fought against every major Civil Rights initiative and it has a long history of racial discrimination.




Here are some examples of the DEMOCRATIC PARTY'S racist world-view...




* THEY EMPHATICALLY DEFENDED SLAVERY.

* THEY STARTED A BLOODY CIVIL WAR WHICH WOULD CLAIM 620,000 LIVES.

*THEY STRIDENTLY OPPOSED RECONSTRUCTION.

*THEY FOUNDED THE KU KLUX KLAN.

*THEY IMPOSED LEGALIZED SEGREGATION.

*THEY PERPETRATED LYNCHINGS.

* THEY STRENUOUSLY FOUGHT THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACTS OF THE 1950's AND 1960's.





In contrast, the REPUBLICAN PARTY was founded (in 1854) as an explicitly anti - slavery Party. Its mission was to stop the spread of slavery into the new Western territories, with the aim of ultimately abolishing it entirely.




This goal was, however, dealt a major blow in 1857. That was the year that the Supreme Court heard the case of "Dredd Scott vs Sandford" and ruled that slaves were not citizens, rather, they were mere property ("chattel"). The rulining was carried by a 7 to 2 majority - 7 DEMOCRAT justices over 2 dissenting REPUBLICAN justices.




The slavery question was ultimately decided on the battlefields of the Civil War between 1861 and 1865. In this bloody conflict 620,000 men lost their lives. The Commander in Chief was the first Republican President Abraham Lincoln. In 1863 Lincoln issued a "Proclaimation of Emancipation" officially freeing all Black slaves.




Lincoln's Union Army won the war, when the Commander of the Confederate States Army, General Robert E. Lee, finally surrendered on the 9th April, 1865. Just six days later, John Wilkes Booth, a DEMOCRAT, assassinated President Lincoln. Linoln's Vice President, Andrew Johnson, ANOTHER DEMOCRAT, then assumed the Presidency.




Johnson adamantly opposed the plan to integrate the newly freed slaves into the South's social and economic order. In addition, Johnson and his DEMOCRATIC PARTY were unified in their opposition to...




* The 13th Amendment (1865) which abolished slavery.

* The 14th Amendment (1866) which gave Blacks citizenship.

* The 15th Amendment (1869) which gave Blacks the vote.




All three passed only because of UNIVERSAL Republican support.



During the Reconstruction (1865 - 1877) Federal troops stationed in the South helped secure Rights for the newly freed slaved. Hundreds of Black men were elected to Southern States' legislatures as REPUBLICANS, and by 1900, there were 22 Black Republicans serving in Congress. The Democrat did not elect a Black man to Congress until 1935.



The Reconstruction ended when the Federal troops returned home. DEMOCRATS roared back into power in the South and quickly re-established White Supremacy across the region. They used measures like BLACK CODES, laws that restricted the ability of Blacks to own property and run businesses and they imposed Poll Taxes and Literary tests used to subvert Black citizens' Right to vote.



So, how was this enforced ?



By terror.



Mostly terror instigated by the Ku Klux Klan, first founded by the DEMOCRAT, Nathan Bedford Forrest (the organization's first "Grand Wizard"). The original Klan was a military force serving the interests of the DEMOCRATIC PARTY, in fact, the affliation between the two groups was even more intimate than that. the boundary between the Klan and the Democratic party was very blurry indeed. Horse-mounted Klansman embarked on violent night raids during which they based whipped and murdered many Blacks. By the early 1880's, though, the Klan had mostly disappeared; this was because during the 1870's its campaign of terror had effectively achieved its goal, namely, the restoration of White Supremacy throughout the South.




The Klan re-emerged in the 20th century; it was re-instituted by a DEMOCRAT, William Joseph Simmons in Atlanta, Georgia in 1915. The founding of the second Ku Klux Klan was largely inspired by a film that was released that year called, "The Birth of a Nation". This film was produced and directed by D. W. Griffiths and largely based on a play called "Clansman" written by a Southern lawyer and DEMOCRAT, Thomas Dixon. Dixon was an old friend of Woodrow Wilson who was POTUS in 1915. Dixon managed to arrange for a private showing of "The Birth of a Nation" for President Wilson (it was to be very first time a motion piction had been screened inside the White House) before its release later that year. "The Birth of a Nation", was, of course, a silent film and used "title cards" as a substitute for spoken dialogue. Woodrow Wilson would have been flattered that a number of the film's "title card" were direct quotations from his five-volume work, "A History of the American People" (1902). Here is one example...




"The white men were roused by the instinct of mere self - preservation... until at last there had sprung into existence a great Ku Klux Klan, a veritable empire of the South, to protect the Southern country"




Woodrow Wilson praised "The Birth of a Nation" as being ," like history written with lightening." It's intensely racist content aside, "The Birth of a Nation" was, it must be said, a groundbreaking work of art in terms of its masterful and innovative cinematography, and when it was released for the public it became Hollywood's first ever blockbuster. It is still rated by authorities in the world of motion pictures among the greatest of the 20th century's feature films. No doubt Woodrow Wilson was dazzled as well by this aspect of "The Birth of a Nation." Woodrow Wilson was a big fan of Jim Crow laws and had even segregated fis own Federal agencies, but "The Birth of a Nation" became a part of the edifice of the Jim Crow regime that would legalise segregation for the next 40 years.




In the 1920's the membership of the Ku Klux Klan reached around 6,000,000.




A few decades after the time racist Democrat President Woodrow Wilson, in the 1960's the Democratic Party were still a racist organization. For instance, the only serious Congressional opposition to the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from the Party of the Jack-ass. Eighty percent of Republicans supported the Bill, while less than 70% of the Democrats did. Democrat Senators filibustered the Bill for 75 days until the Republicans mustered the few extra votes needed to break the log - jam.



So, when all their efforts to enslave Blacks and keep them from voting failed, the Democratic Party came up with a new strategy: if Black people are going to vote, they might as well vote Democrat. As Democrar President Lyndon Johnson put it...



"I'll have them niggers voting Democrat for 200 years."



Now the Democratic Party prospers on the votes of the people it spent most of its history persecuting and oppressing. Democrat politicians falsely claim it is the Republicans who are the villains: the racists, the fascists, the NAZIs. But in reality, it is the failed policies of the Democratic Party that have kept America's Blacks down, for example...




* Massive government Welfare has decimated the Black family. The "heroin" of welfare dependency, has, among other harms, created as astronomically high rate of single mother Black families; and Black children (in particular boys) who grow up in a family without fathers are, in the majority of cases, doomed to a future of poor life outcomes: mental health problems, poverty, crime, drug abuse/addiction, incarceration, etc.

* Opposition to school choice has kept black youth trapped in failing schools.

* Politically Correct policing has left Black neighbourhoods defenceless against violent crime.

* The Woke ideology and leftist sociologists and the modern Democratic Party, have promulgated poisonous notion like: Systemic/institutional racism; While Privelige; "Microaggresions", Whiteness is a form of property, unconscious racism,Reparations, the Police have it out for Blacks, The United States was created to protect and promote slavery. This all simply encourages Blacks to adopt the mantle of victimhood, and victimhood is ALWAYS a dead end . Given a smorgasboard of reasons that can be seized and used as excuses to explain why they are not succeeding, Blacks will never realise that they must take responsibility for their own lives and actions. They will remain blinded to the fact that they are living in a land of infinite possibilities and opportunities. Addicted to government welfare programes and benefits, they will lack the impetus to work hard and make something worthwhile or even amazing of their lives. BUT THE DEMOCRATS DON'T EVER WANT BLACKS TO UNDERSTAND THIS.




In 2021, the Democratic Party is no different to the Ku Klux Klan of the 1920s, they simply use different instruments to keep Blacks down. Instead of the whip and the noose, the use Federal welfare programs and government benefits and endless narratives of cultural Marxist/Woke victimhood.



Dachshund
Click to expand...

Is that why the republican party is all uneducated pasty faces ? and the majority of minorities and Jews are democrats?
 
Ike won three southern states in 1952 and five in 1956, when he won the popular vote in the region. And he did it while supporting civil rights.

In 1960, Richard Nixon more or less held the gains in the region, after the Republican Party had supported civil rights legislation.

How was this possible?

1964 wasn’t a point of radical departure. Republicans steadily gained strength as the old DEMOCRAT-dominated south — poorly educated, heavily rural, fearful of outside industry — figuratively and literally died off.

Jimmy Carter still nearly swept the South in 1976.

Bill Clinton was very competitive in the region, and won four Southern states in 1992.

Republicans didn’t take a majority of Southern congressional seats until 1994, and for the most part, didn’t make major inroads in southern state legislatures until the 1980s and 1990s.

Not until 2010 did they even gain unified control of the Alabama state Legislature.


https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/the-southern-lie-119406/
 
Taichiliberal said:
Oh Lord, our little David Duke wanna be is at it again folks.

Here stupid, learn something: https://glennrocess.medium.com/lbj-and-the-wisdom-of-the-long-term-political-game-2e9ab19a7457
Click to expand...


Oh Lord, another mindless ad hominem response from our brain-washed friend, Taichiliberal.


Poor Taichiliberal, he hasn't managed to work out who the Democrats really are, and what they are trying to achieve. He doesn't understand that THEY are fascists . That THEY are the people who hate America (the liberal democratic Republic) and what it represents. That it is THEY they are obsessed with destroying it ,and that they are succeeding.


David Duke , as I have explained in my post is, is essentially a Democrat, like Taichiliberal, folks. He just doesn't know it.


I mean, between 1829 and 2021, what have the Party of the Jack-ass ever done for Blacks in America except persecute, oppress and immiserate them? The Democrats' tactics and strategies may have changed, (i.e. from unleashing the KKK to unleashing Woke ideology in the K-12 curriculum, etc) but not their ultimate objective. In fact, in terms of all the main categories of life outcomes, Blacks as a group are failing more in 2021 than they ever were in, say, 1940 or 1965.


Why's that ?



Dachshund
 
Dachshund said:
Oh Lord, another mindless ad hominem response from our brain-washed friend, Taichiliberal.


Poor Taichiliberal, he hasn't managed to work out who the Democrats really are, and what they are trying to achieve. He doesn't understand that THEY are fascists . That THEY are the people who hate America (the liberal democratic Republic) and what it represents. That it is THEY they are obsessed with destroying it ,and that they are succeeding.


David Duke , as I have explained in my post is, is essentially a Democrat, like Taichiliberal, folks. He just doesn't know it.


I mean, between 1829 and 2021, what have the Party of the Jack-ass ever done for Blacks in America except persecute, oppress and immiserate them? The Democrats' tactics and strategies may have changed, (i.e. from unleashing the KKK to unleashing Woke ideology in the K-12 curriculum, etc) but not their ultimate objective. In fact, in terms of all the main categories of life outcomes, Blacks as a group are failing more in 2021 than they ever were in, say, 1940 or 1965.


Why's that ?



Dachshund
Click to expand...

AD HOMS ARE THE LIMIT OF THEIR COLLECTIVE INTELLECT, WHEN FACED WITH THE FACTS OF ANY ISSUE....
 
Dachshund said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Oh Lord, our little David Duke wanna be is at it again folks.

Here stupid, learn something: https://glennrocess.medium.com/lbj-a...e-2e9ab19a7457
Click to expand...



Oh Lord, another mindless ad hominem response from our brain-washed friend, Taichiliberal.


Poor Taichiliberal, he hasn't managed to work out who the Democrats really are, and what they are trying to achieve. He doesn't understand that THEY are fascists . That THEY are the people who hate America (the liberal democratic Republic) and what it represents. That it is THEY they are obsessed with destroying it ,and that they are succeeding.


David Duke , as I have explained in my post is, is essentially a Democrat, like Taichiliberal, folks. He just doesn't know it.


I mean, between 1829 and 2021, what have the Party of the Jack-ass ever done for Blacks in America except persecute, oppress and immiserate them? The Democrats' tactics and strategies may have changed, (i.e. from unleashing the KKK to unleashing Woke ideology in the K-12 curriculum, etc) but not their ultimate objective. In fact, in terms of all the main categories of life outcomes, Blacks as a group are failing more in 2021 than they ever were in, say, 1940 or 1965.


Why's that ?



Dachshund
Click to expand...

Your first sentence demonstrates a lack of original thought. But mimicry is a form of flattery, I guess.

As for the rest of your drivel....just more absurd revisionist clap trap from a 3rd rate David Duke wanna be (FYI: The Louisiana Democrats kicked him to the curb 30 years ago. He's been a card carrying GOPer ever since).

And for the objective reader, here's what this pathetic goose steeping propagandist ignored for his:
Ever the opportunist, Richard Nixon saw this leftward shift of the Democratic party as a golden chance to break up the Democratic Solid South by appealing to racist whites. His campaign strategist, self-taught “ethnologist” Kevin Philips described this chance in his now-infamous “Southern Strategy” quote in an interview with the New York Times:
“All the talk about Republicans making inroads into the Negro vote is persiflage. Even ‘Jake the Snake’ [Senator Jacob K. Javits] only gets 20 per cent. From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that . . . but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”


Now watch Dach's try to move the goalpost of the discussion, ignore/deny valid, documented facts in favor of his racist revisionism. This lame, tired ploy by attention seeking goose steppers (accuse others of what they accuse you of) only works for like minded cretins like Dach. Small wonder they're just losing their minds as the majority of America is growing to ignore and ostracize them. Now, lets watch Dach just blow more smoke, make more absurd accusations and spin tales of a different reality.
 
Legion said:
George-Wallace-Segregation.jpg



DEMOCRAT​
Click to expand...



Thank you for highlighting the racist roots of the US Democratic Party, Legion, with your excellent series of photographs and quotations above. I think Democrat, Woodrow Wilson, was definitinely the most vehemently racist President the United States has ever elected. Liberal-left leaning Americans condemn Trump as a racist; maybe they should check out some of the stuff Wilson wrote about Blacks in his "History of the American"- it's right up there with "Mein Kampf."


Then there's current POTUS, "Sleepy Joe" Biden. What, exactly, was Biden doing reading out a 45 minute eulogy at the funeral service of Robert Byrd, the former Ku Klux Klan, "Grand Cyclops", and Democrat Senate Segregationist in 2021 ??? Biden refered to Byrd as his: "mentor"; "guide" and "friend." This is not surprising, and it explains the number of racist remarks Biden has let fly against Black Americans over recent years.


If President Trump were to have muttered any one of the many anti-black racist slurs Biden has, can you imagine the reaction from the mainstream media. It would pure hyperactive, hyperventilated hysteria; Trump would be depicted as the Devil incarnate - the "Grand Wizard" of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.


I've never though that Trump was a racist. I honestly don't think he cares about what colour an American's citizen is. The way he's see things is that America was founded on the principle of individual liberty (under the common, consensually-established law of the land, so everyone is pretty much free to have shot at making something worthwhile of their lives - at experiencing some success, satifaction and happiness, or hopefully a LOT of success, satisfaction and happiness. Its always they way that doing this requires hard work - that's just the "way of the world" in America (the West). When you put a lot of effort into achieving a worthwhile goal over a long time, when you achieve it, it feels great. Then straight away , you set your next , bigger, higher goal and start to go for it. You don't need to be brilliant , like Albert Einstein, or naturally talented athlete like Usain Bolt. You just need to be a regular, average person. I mean, some people are born with (or acquire) serious mental illness with means they need a lot of help to get by, and maybe quite a few life opportunities are not open for them; like wise with people who have very serious physical illnesses or diorders. But even thought such people have very limited individual autonomy, and there are many types of activities and endeavours they simply cannot engage in; there are still many that they can.


What pisses Trump off, is when his beaurocrats tell, ""Mr President, we're finding that a dramatically disproportionate number of African - Americans have been receiving federal government welfare/benefits on a long-term basis. Trump has a good understanding of human nature, because he has spent a life-time working all kinds of different people. This is why he was (and will be again) such an excellent communicator. Whether its: drawing crowds of 30,000+ to MAGA rallies across America and using his talent as a showman to entertain his supporters and have some pantomine-type fun with them too, giving a thumbs down to the wicked witch, "Crooked Hillary", and the wicked robber baron "Mini Mike" (Bloomfield) while delivers his political messages ; to giving a very dignified and solemn speech in France for the 75th anniversary of the D-Day landings at Normandy or his speech to the people of Warsaw in Poland in 2017 (which came from the heart and was tremendously moving); the common factor is that everyone at these different speeches LISTENS and everyone PERFECTLYUNDERSTANDSwhat Trump is saying.


( My own theory about Trump is that a lot of people forget he was a DEVELOPER for many years, I mean he actually BUILT skyscrapers in Manhattan and other districts in NYC. When you are the man who is building a multi-million dollar high-rise building in New York from SCRATCH, it means you have to be regularly on site keeping an eye on the project and making sure that things are being done the way you want. This, in turn, means you have to talk with, and get to know, all sorts of different tyes of people: excavators; carpenters concrete -layers; electicians; metal workers; plumbers; tilers, painters; plasterers; surveyors; structural engineers; draftsmen; architects; Union officials; Disctrict Council Officials. These people will have a wide range of different backgrounds and levels of education. I read in a book (a biography) about Trump, that the workers on his building sites liked him AND Trump got to like them. When it YOUR money that's paying for putting up a giant tower, you want to make sure that everything is being done right, that requirers constantly "laying down the law", but doing it in a way that's respectful and reasonably civil . I think Trump's workers respected him, not just because he was the big boss - but also because he would often take some time out have a chat and a laugh with them. I don't think a person's class or race or social status mattered at all to Trump. Provided you were trying hard to do your best with the skills/talents that you had, and you were working towards some worthwhile goal that you'd set for yourself - then that's cool. Trump see America as a place where there are a zillion opportunities for everyone; and he thinks the founding of the country on the principle of individual liberty (within the law) makes America an exceptional place. In America ANYONE is free to "go for it". if you (a adult) decide that there's a goal/s you have, and it's a (morally) good goal, like saving up to buy your own property, then you can "go for it", and no one is going to "take a shot at you", or put you down for trying (if anyone does try to materially restrain or obstruct you, that's illegal .and they'll go to prison if they don't back off). The other condition of this American Dream is hard work, the more focussed effort you put into achieving your desired life outcomes, the more chance you will have of making it. The understanding that achieving anything of genuine value in this life, surely came from the Founders (Puritan/Calvinist) Protestant Work Ethic).



Trump hates it that so many Black Americans are on Welfare/benefits, because in many cases individuals have become hooked on receiving free services and money. It is a terrible trap. Blacks who receive long-term government Welfare/benefits, think by receiving government Welfare/benefits and not having to work, they have "beaten the system". They can idle about all day, smoke drugs, fool around with local girls, and so on. But it utimately back-fires, because unless you are striving (i.e. WORKING) to secure your livlihood and a set of bigger, long-term future goals, your life will become rapidly devalued and stripped of any meaning and purpose. The perception of one's life having lost meaning is "painful" and it can result in drug-use, destructive/violent antisocial behaviour, serious mental health issues and suicide. Perhaps the most desructive aspect of the welfare culture in Black American communities is the astonishing percentage of Black single-mother families relative to other racial groups like Hispanics or White (European) American. From memory,over 70% of Black families have no father. This is a direct consequence of the Welfare state.Many young Black women choose to make a "career" of being dependent for life on government Welfare/benefits, by intentionally impregnating themselves with no intention of remaining with their chosen, male "sperm donor" in a stable, enduring relationship. Or, if a black couple do stay together to bring up children, the relationship is weakened and destabilized, by the fact that the woman knows she can always rely on government welfare if her male partner is no longer around. So, a pledge made to stay together ("for better or for worse") and weather the vicissitudes of married family life is tacitly subverted. When there are the inevitable quarrels and disputes between the mother and father, for the woman, the option of single-mother welfare/benefits is always lurking somewhere in the back of her mind. It is a very convenient "escape hatch" and it seems to lower the amount of resolve she might otherwise have been prepared to invest in enduring the: periodic bickerings and shouting matches; the bouts of inter-personal friction , the strife caused by spousal misbehaviours that are part and parcel of life for all married couples.



BUT HERE'S THE RUB, there are a thousand reputable, mainstream research studiies in sociology, psychology, racial/ethnic demographics that have been conducted over the past decades, and all come to the same conclusion. This is that if you are a black person in America who was raised in a single-mother household then you are basically FUCKED (doomed). The chances of you achieving success in any of the main categories of life outcomes: educational, occupational, financial, health, etc; are very, very low. Both Black boys and black girls are set at a severe disadvantage when they are brought up in a family without a father, though boys seem to suffer more in the long-term. Thus, a cycle of Welfare/benefits dependency is set up, with the children bought up in a Black single mother family being very likely to become addicted to long-term Welfare/benefits themselves due to poor educational attainment, unemployment, an elevated risk for disabling and highly impairing mental illnesses, and such like.



Trump is not angry at Black Americans for being Welfare dependents, Trump does not hate Black Americans as human beings. Donald Trump is NOT a racist. He is angry at those who were (and still are) resposible for intentionally addicting Black Americans to federal Welfare/government benefits, namely: - THE U.S. DEMOCRATIC PARTY - the greatest pack of ass-hole on planet Earth.



Kindest Regards



Dachshund
 
Last edited:
Dachshund said:
What, exactly, was Biden doing reading out a 45 minute eulogy at the funeral service of Robert Byrd, the former Ku Klux Klan, "Grand Cyclops", and Democrat Senate Segregationist in 2021 ??? Biden refered to Byrd as his: "mentor"; "guide" and "friend." This is not surprising, and it explains the number of racist remarks Biden has let fly against Black Americans over recent years.
Click to expand...


Indeed. The patronizing attitude toward black Americans that DEMOCRATS display on a daily basis is evidence that they consider them incapable of participating in society as equals.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Your first sentence demonstrates a lack of original thought. But mimicry is a form of flattery, I guess.

As for the rest of your drivel....just more absurd revisionist clap trap from a 3rd rate David Duke wanna be (FYI: The Louisiana Democrats kicked him to the curb 30 years ago. He's been a card carrying GOPer ever since).

And for the objective reader, here's what this pathetic goose steeping propagandist ignored for his:
Ever the opportunist, Richard Nixon saw this leftward shift of the Democratic party as a golden chance to break up the Democratic Solid South by appealing to racist whites. His campaign strategist, self-taught “ethnologist” Kevin Philips described this chance in his now-infamous “Southern Strategy” quote in an interview with the New York Times:
“All the talk about Republicans making inroads into the Negro vote is persiflage. Even ‘Jake the Snake’ [Senator Jacob K. Javits] only gets 20 per cent. From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that . . . but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”


Now watch Dach's try to move the goalpost of the discussion, ignore/deny valid, documented facts in favor of his racist revisionism. This lame, tired ploy by attention seeking goose steppers (accuse others of what they accuse you of) only works for like minded cretins like Dach. Small wonder they're just losing their minds as the majority of America is growing to ignore and ostracize them. Now, lets watch Dach just blow more smoke, make more absurd accusations and spin tales of a different reality.
Click to expand...





Oh dear me ! I think I've put a bee - in the bonnet of Taichi ! Ha, Ha ! Ha !




He appears to have become over-excited about former Republican President Richard Nixon's so-called "Southern Strategy". I think that Taichiliberal wants me to make a response to his claim that the wicked Richard Nixon formulated this nefarious, racist, scheme. Well, I'm happy to do that. Here's what I think...




The idea that Richard Nixon used a rascist "Southern Strategy" is a phoney old myth. It is still pulled out, on the odd occasion, by Leftist nit-wits ( "spotty Herberts" like Taichiliberal whose Woke, Marxist college Professor told him it was true) in the context of debates about the politics of race in America in the 20th century.




So folks, I guess I'll have to re-educate the poor, little, socialist blighter, and we'll need to start at the very beginning (a very good place to start). So here we go (try to pay close attention Taichi !). Here's the story. ONCE UPON A TIME...




Once upon a time, the Democratic Party was the Party of Jim Crow, and the Republican Party was the Party of emancipation and racial integration. Democrats were the Confederacy and Republicans were the Union. Jim Crow Democrats were dominant in the South and socially tolerant Republicans were dominant in the North. Right Taichi ?




But then in the 1960's and 1970's everything supposedly "flipped". Suddenly, the Republicans became racists and the Democrats became the champions of Civil Rights

.



Why did this happen ?




The story - which was fabricated by left-leaning academic elites and journalists - went like this...Republicans could not win in a national election by appealing to the better nature of the country, they could only win by appealing to the worst. The leftist media pinned this plot on their all - purpose "bad guy" the villainous, Republican President Richard Nixon, and it came to be known as "The Southern Strategy".





The "Southern Strategy" was very simple. Here was its rationale...






(1) WIN ELECTIONS BY WINNING THE SOUTH.


(2) TO WIN THE SOUTH APPEAL TO RACISTS.


(3) SO THE REPUBLICANS, THE PARTY OF FREEDOM, WERE NOW TO BE LABELLED THE PARTY OF "RED-NECKS."




BUT THE STORY OF THE TWO - PARTIES SWITCHING IDENTITIES IS A MYTH[./SIZE]





Actually, it's THREE MYTHS rolled into ONE BIG FALSE NARRATIVE.





MYTH (1).... In order to be competitive in the South Republicans started to pander to White racists in the 1960's.




THE FACTs...Republicans actually became competitive in the South as early as 1928 when Republican Herbert Hoover won over 47% of the South's popular vote against Democrat , Al Smith. Then in 1952 Republican President Dwight Eisenhower won the Southern States of: Texas; Florida and Virginia. In 1956, he picked up: Louisana; Kentucky and West Virginia too. And this was after he supported the Supreme Court decision in "BROWN vs BOARD of EDUCATION" that desegregated public schools. It was also after he sent the 101 st Airbourne to Little Rock Central High School to enforce racial segregation.





MYTH (2)....Southern Democrats angry with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 swithched Parties.





THE FACTS....Of the 21 Democrats who opposed the Civil Rights Act, just ONE became a Republican. The other 20 continued to be elected as Democrats or were replaced by other Democrats. On average, these 20 seats didn't go Republican for another 25 years.





MYTH (3)... Since the implementation of the "Southern Strategy", the Republicans have dominated the South.




FACTS Richard Nixon, the man who is typically credited with creating "The Southern Strategy" lost the deep South in 1968. In contrast, Democrat Jimmy Carter nearly swept the region in 1976, nearly 12 years after the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Then in 1992, over 28 years later, Democrat, Bill Clinton, won: Georgia; Louisana; Arkansas; Tennessee, Kentucky and West Virginia.




The truth is Republicans didn't hold a majority of Southern Congressional seats until 1994, 30 years after the Civil Rights Act.




In short, if the Southern "Red-Necks ditch the Democrats because of the Civil Rights Law passed in 1964, then its kinda strage that they waited intil the late 1980's and early 1990's to do so? ISN'T IT TAICHILIBERAL ? I hear that things move slower in the South, but not that slow !





SO WHAT HAPPENED ? WHY DOES THE SOUTH NOW VOTE OVERWHELMINGLY RUPUBLICA ? The reason is because the South itself has changed. Its VALUES have changed. The racism that once defined it does not define it any more. Today its values are CONCERVATIVE: pro-life; pro-guns and pro-small government. Southern Whites are more likely to vote for a Black Conservative like Senator Tim Scott of Soutth Carolina , than a White Liberal.





In sum, history has moved on Taichiliberal. Like other regions of America, the South increasingly votes VALUE and not skin colour. The myth of a "Southern Strategy" cooked up by that Devil incarnate, Richard Milhous Nixon, is just an excuse the Democrats have made up for losing the South and a means to smear the Republican Party with baseless allegations of racism. My advice to a young "Spotty Herbert" like you, Taichi, is not to believe the lies that your Marxist Professors tell you at college, or the lies that you read about American politics in the modern leftist literature. Go with the FACTS not THE BULLSHIT. The FACTS are being increasingly difficult to find , however, because your Fascist comrades in the media and "Big Tech" are erasing them, just like the Nazi's burned books. As well as this, the lunatic, Woke left are publishing revisionist, politicized historiographies, like "The 1619 Project" by Nikole Hannah - Jones, in an attempt delegitimize works that are true evidence - based, objective histories of the United States. Then there are that cluster of influential, authors including : IBram X Kendi; Robin D'Angelo; Ta - Nehisi Coates; Kimberle Crenshaw and Brene Brown who have written "Number One" American best-sellers (Ta-Nehisi Coates for example), or works that have had a strong influence in the academy (Kimberle Crenshaw Intersectionality and CRT, etc) If you read these books critically, you will see that that they spew utter hatred for America and ALL traditional American values; at the same time they incite dangerous, racial animosity and division. Furthermore they based on irrational premises and pure falsehoods (like the meme "2 +2 =5", which is intended to be "a spit in the face" of Western Enlightenment reason). The problem is that individuals like Ta -Nahehisi Coates are, in fact, extremely gifted writers there's no denying it. Coates is a very talented wordsmith, so good that his writing can dazzle the reader. This is why his latest book will is, or will be,a US "Number One" bestseller. But when what you are reading evokes a sense of wonder, it simultaneously blunts your critical rational faculties, and in Coates case, many readers are therefore unable apply a critical lens to the subject matter and identify the vile moral values and degenerate political philosophy that he is pedalling. My point is that you need to be careful when you are reading popular, political works today. My advice would be if a best-selling book that deals with a political/s issue is on the market and the author is a leftist, don't read it.





The good news is that if you're are interested in a certain general, political issue ,"X",you can still find the (objective) facts of the matter for yourself , but it's not easy and you'll need to be prepared to put in a fair bit of time and effort. BTW, If you want to find out the facts regarding what made America the greatest civilization in the 1000-year history of the West, just read John Locke. He was the brains behind it all and his books are free online. They explain the ideas that made America the most prosperous and powerful nation in the world. It's all there, dude, the "whole box and dice".But John Locke was writing in the later part of the 17th century and he was English, so that makes him a DEAD, WHITE, MALE, and you guys are not allowed to read DWMs. Right Taichiliberal ?



Dachshund
 
Last edited:
Dachshund said:
The idea that Richard Nixon used a rascist "Southern Strategy" is a phoney old myth. It is still pulled out, on the odd occasion, by Leftist nit-wits in the context of debates about the politics of race in America in the 20th century.


Once upon a time, the Democratic Party was the Party of Jim Crow, and the Republican Party was the Party of emancipation and racial integration. Democrats were the Confederacy and Republicans were the Union. Jim Crow Democrats were dominant in the South and socially tolerant Republicans were dominant in the North.

But then in the 1960's and 1970's everything supposedly "flipped". Suddenly, the Republicans became racists and the Democrats became the champions of Civil Rights

Why did this happen ?

The story - which was fabricated by left-leaning academic elites and journalists - went like this...Republicans could not win in a national election by appealing to the better nature of the country, they could only win by appealing to the worst. The leftist media pinned this plot on their all - purpose "bad guy" the villainous, Republican President Richard Nixon, and it came to be known as "The Southern Strategy".

The "Southern Strategy" was very simple. Here was its rationale...


(1) WIN ELECTIONS BY WINNING THE SOUTH.
(2) TO WIN THE SOUTH APPEAL TO RACISTS.
(3) SO THE REPUBLICANS, THE PARTY OF FREEDOM, WERE NOW TO BE LABELLED THE PARTY OF "RED-NECKS."

BUT THE STORY OF THE TWO - PARTIES SWITCHING IDENTITIES IS A MYTH. Actually, it's THREE MYTHS rolled into ONE BIG FALSE NARRATIVE.

MYTH (1).... In order to be competitive in the South Republicans started to pander to White racists in the 1960's.

THE FACTs...Republicans actually became competitive in the South as early as 1928 when Republican Herbert Hoover won over 47% of the South's popular vote against Democrat, Al Smith. Then in 1952 Republican President Dwight Eisenhower won the Southern States of: Texas; Florida and Virginia. In 1956, he picked up: Louisana; Kentucky and West Virginia too. And this was after he supported the Supreme Court decision in "BROWN vs BOARD of EDUCATION" that desegregated public schools. It was also after he sent the 101 st Airbourne to Little Rock Central High School to enforce racial segregation.

MYTH (2)....Southern Democrats angry with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 swithched Parties.

THE FACTS....Of the 21 Democrats who opposed the Civil Rights Act, just ONE became a Republican. The other 20 continued to be elected as Democrats or were replaced by other Democrats. On average, these 20 seats didn't go Republican for another 25 years.

MYTH (3)... Since the implementation of the "Southern Strategy", the Republicans have dominated the South.

FACTS Richard Nixon, the man who is typically credited with creating "The Southern Strategy" lost the deep South in 1968. In contrast, Democrat Jimmy Carter nearly swept the region in 1976, nearly 12 years after the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Then in 1992, over 28 years later, Democrat, Bill Clinton, won: Georgia; Louisana; Arkansas; Tennessee, Kentucky and West Virginia.

The truth is Republicans didn't hold a majority of Southern Congressional seats until 1994, 30 years after the Civil Rights Act.


In short, if the Southern "Red-Necks ditch the Democrats because of the Civil Rights Law passed in 1964, then its kinda strage that they waited intil the late 1980's and early 1990's to do so?

SO WHAT HAPPENED ? WHY DOES THE SOUTH NOW VOTE OVERWHELMINGLY RUPUBLICA? The reason is because the South itself has changed. Its VALUES have changed. The racism that once defined it does not define it any more. Today its values are CONCERVATIVE: pro-life; pro-guns and pro-small government. Southern Whites are more likely to vote for a Black Conservative like Senator Tim Scott of Soutth Carolina , than a White Liberal.

Like other regions of America, the South increasingly votes VALUE and not skin colour. The myth of a "Southern Strategy" cooked up by that Devil incarnate, Richard Milhous Nixon, is just an excuse the Democrats have made up for losing the South and a means to smear the Republican Party with baseless allegations of racism.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top