The black bloc: Et tu, Kanye?
Oh-oh. Kanye West, one of the most visible of music superstars, married to media personality Kim Kardashian, has praised political changer Candace Owens (aka “Red Pill Black”; I have written about Owens previously here).
The Twitter hordes have descended on him for this act of independent thought, and he has fought back:
I love the way Candace Owens thinks
— ye (@kanyewest) April 21, 2018
Tom Arnold has deleted a tweet of his, but it originally told Owens to “suck racist dick”. Now he just calls her an “alt-right race pimp.”
I’m freaking out. @kanyewest ….please take a meeting with me. I tell every single person that everything that I have been inspired to do, was written in your music.
I am my own biggest fan, because you made it okay. I need you to help wake up the black community. https://t.co/Uz1nB9K0Oz— Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) April 21, 2018
there was a time when slavery was the trend and apparently that time is still upon us. But now it's a mentality.
— ye (@kanyewest) April 22, 2018
self victimization is a disease
— ye (@kanyewest) April 22, 2018
This sort of thing and the possibilities it suggests must be staggeringly frightening to the left. If they ever lost the black bloc of voters, or even a significant portion of that monolithic group, the left would have a great deal of trouble winning elections. That is their fear, and it is a valid one.
The percentage of voters who are black has hovered around 12 to 13 percent (the higher figure during the Obama years) recently. Those voters vote overwhelmingly Democrat, to the tune of over 90%.
But if you look at this chart you’ll see that it wasn’t always that way:
And there’s an interesting disconnect in the self-report of black voters:
Although 88% of African Americans voted for Democrat John Kerry in 2004, 44% consider themselves to have a moderate political viewpoint. Only 28% consider themselves liberal in their political views.
Those are old statistics, but I don’t think they’ve changed enormously. It does appear that, at least on paper, there’s room for quite a bit of movement from left to right among black voters.
That explains why the Democrats MUST hammer home the idea that Republicans are racist to the core, and why they MUST demonize people like Candace Owens in order to diminish and/or eliminate her obvious appeal. If the left doesn’t do that, they will probably never win another election except in the big blue cities.
[NOTE: This must be “Julius Caesar” day. I just noticed I used a reference to the play in the title of this piece, and a quote from the same play in my previous post today.]
Based on my experience here in the Deeep South, with a black population of 30%, I regret to observe the blacks of my acquaintance, all personally conservative, aver they simply cannot vote for any Republican, period. That strikes them as akin to treason. The Dem brainwashing over the last 60 years is deeply embedded.
So I do not look for any wondrous change.
I am continually amazed that blacks vote for the party of Jefferson Davis, the Ku Klux Klan and Jim Crow laws. Those people beating the blacks in Selma, AL were democrats. I think it is the worst case of battered spouse syndrome I have ever seen. The democrats beat the blacks so they really love the blacks.
The blacks are kept under control by the Historical Black Churches. That’s not a racist term, but something generally used to refer to Protestant denominations that believe in a Black Jesus, Black Panther Christians, and so on.
These HB Churches are usually historically black (cause white people and Jim Crow Democrats…) and they are about 77% Democrat in voting, as well as also being liberal.
So the religion is the mental and spiritual chain put on blacks to help enforce the controls of the Demoncrat plantation system.
R Wright is a perfect example. So are Jesse jackson and Sharpton.
The democrats beat the blacks so they really love the blacks.
It is little different from how Democrats in 1830 kept control of the Irish and Scottish vote. The white plantation masters were beating down on the Scots and Irish (as dogs), but they still got their vote because they could always point to the dangerous black slaves that would go on a rape campaign if it wasn’t for the Demoncrat respected gentlemen holding the leash on the dogs.
I like this guy too.
https://youtu.be/_uom5-aTvCY
@ Frog: Don’t mean to hijack the discussion but can you tell us about the racial climate in the South? Are the warnings of shameful Southerners and open-minded Yanks to minorities (of color, sexual orientation) called for? I spend some time in Mobile, Alabama and, being a person of color (can I still use that term?), didn’t really experience anything bad. I actually enjoyed my time. But that’s anecdotal.
I don’t think telling black voters that they’re not thinking for themselves, that they need to be awakened, or that they’re still suffering under a slave mentality is the way to win their hearts and minds.
All you are watching are what you see under a popular fronts (social) strategy…
What if their popular fronts social movement falls into disarray as now they all have gotten whatever could be similar for each, and whats left, is mutually exclusive and not all that available…
The idea came from the united fronts concepts…
☠United Front of Progressive Parties – Wikipedia
☠Understanding the united front | SocialistWorker.org
☠The united front in theory and practice | Socialist Review
☠The US Women’s Movement, the Left, and United Fronts | Portside
Ymar Sakar Says: It is little different from how Democrats in 1830 kept control of the Irish and Scottish vote
Long gone and no longer relevant after the later movements, as was the KKK of the same period which was their strong arm… the democrats history was always to change sides ahead of the new demographic wave they would ingratiate themselves to early… this was why they were on the wrong side of many issues including racism, slavery, against civil rights laws, etc. They honestly thought that the people were like them, and so, those fads would never take traction, why would anyone share when they could keep it (like them)?
(from the Jacobin)
The Communist Party’s 1930s popular front strategy weakened the labor movement and empowered the Democratic Party
everyone knows the NEW popular (social) Fronts.. we just didn’t and still don’t think of them as that… Feminism is the primary one (at least the one that exists now) it connects most of the largest others, and has been key in changing schools and early inclusion of required (to pass) curriculum, now even entering medical entrance tests (so there is no more question).
before i get long, let me point out that the whole reason for this vanguard of the third period in their own words:
‘we cannot all be of one mind; the gestor will therefore simply take the leadership into his hands and march in the van.’ – Theodor Herzl
Looking at the graphs, it looks like 1964 was the year that blacks made the nearly complete shift to the Democratic Party. That was the year that Lyndon Johnson pushed through the first big Civil Rights Act, despite major opposition by the Democrats. It’s now 54 years later and the living memory of that is disappearing, which might give the Republicans an opening if they are energetic enough to take it. Trump already made a push during the campaign with his economic message that his policies would benefit blacks as well as everyone else. The SJWs also seem to be turning them off just like everyone else.
if you need a cherry on top
The rise of the Nazi Party to power in Germany in 1933 and the annihilation of the organized communist movement there shocked the Comintern into reassessing the tactics of the Third Period. From 1934, new alliances began to be formed under the aegis of the so-called “Popular Front.” The Popular Front policy was formalized as the official policy of the world communist movement by the Seventh World Congress of the Comintern in 1935
and now?
Popular front
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_front
A popular front is a broad coalition of different political groupings, usually made up of leftists and centrists. Being very broad, they can sometimes include centrist and liberal (or “bourgeois”) forces as well as social-democratic and communist groups. Popular fronts are larger in scope than united fronts.
oh and its not a secret.. its in the open…
Popular-Front Pan-American Feminism and the Development of International Women’s Rights
Conference: Conference: 128th Annual Meeting American Historical Association
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267901012_Popular-Front_Pan-American_Feminism_and_the_Development_of_International_Women%27s_Rights
The diversitists make color judgments. Racism thrives. Sexism progresses. Love loses.
Everyone else judges people by the content (e.g. principles) of their character.
I think. as was mentioned, their churches is what holds them in thrall. Unfortunately there is not enough awareness of history, the KKK, slavery supporters being Dems, as well as their further suppression through Jim Crow.enactments
.Too bad they do not recognize their Republican roots via Stephen Douglas & Lincoln. But we can hope for inroads thru
West, Owens. Diamond & Silk & Herman Cain.
I looked up the dread “southern strategy”. Turns out the republicans used coded words or something. Anyway, got the whites voting republican instead of dem. Which is funny, since it was the repubs who voted more for civil rights legislation. And dems opposed it but the blacks vote dem.
GRA Says:
April 24th, 2018 at 8:12 pm
@ Frog: Don’t mean to hijack the discussion but can you tell us about the racial climate in the South? Are the warnings of shameful Southerners and open-minded Yanks to minorities (of color, sexual orientation) called for? I spend some time in Mobile, Alabama and, being a person of color (can I still use that term?), didn’t really experience anything bad. I actually enjoyed my time. But that’s anecdotal.
* * *
I was born and raised in the Texas Panhandle, which is not Deep South, and don’t know much that went on outside my personal family and friends, but my parents and their friends would have never tolerated us kids speaking or acting disrespectfully of the black or Hispanic people we knew.
My kids grew up in well-integrated communities and schools and never had any problems making friends of all ethnicities, and I wouldn’t have tolerated THEM acting discourteously either.
Richard Aubrey
I looked up the dread “southern strategy”. Turns out the republicans used coded words or something. Anyway, got the whites voting republican instead of dem. Which is funny, since it was the repubs who voted more for civil rights legislation.
The problem with claiming that Nixon’s Southern Strategy turned the South Yellow Dog Pub from Yellow Dog Demo is that at the Presidential level, the South was competitive for Republicans since Eisenhower ran in 1952. Thomas Dewey got 27% of the Southern vote in 1948.(Wilkie got 21% in 1940.) Eisenhower got 48% of the Southern vote and won four Southern states- Texas, Virginia, Tennessee and Florida. For those who claim that Goldwater’s voting against the 1964 Civil Rights bill is what turned the South Pub, consider that Eisenhower got a higher percentage of the Southern vote in 1956 than Goldwater did in 1964.
The Myth of the Racist Republicans.
These things usually happen very quickly, as a result of what is known as a “preference cascade”. As discussed above, many blacks may think differently, but are cowed by social and church pressure not to rock the boat. But as brave souls such as Candace Owens, Diamond and Silk, and the guys in “Barber Shop” come out of the political closet, others will say “You know, that’s what I think too!” and it won’t be all that unacceptable to say so in public.
I also think the process will be expedited by the GOP getting some truly in-your-face black leadership in ghetto areas. As Donald Trump said, “what do you have to lose?”
Also regarding the southern strategy, in 1992, 24 years after the 1968 election and after 8 years of Ronald Reagan and 4 of Bush 41, the GOP controlled no southern legislative chambers. The South turned truly Republican after the Hillarycare fiasco.
The GOP has a chance to do much better with black Americans, but the party needs to campaign to get their votes. I hope Trump will follow up his 2016 campaign comments by touting employment and economic gains. The black community was hit hard by the financial crisis because they did not have the resources to maintain the home ownership gains of prior years. Increases in black employment are historic and important.
Having grown up in a “mixed” area, aka urban ghetto, my experience is people there were extremely conservative. “Progressive liberals” not so much. More about fear of slavery and the holocaust and feeling f*cked up by the same.
Wouldn’t it be marvelous if someone like Kanye West, who annoys me to no end, were to be the person to get the black population to wake up, pay attention, and throw off their Democrat overlords. It would show that once the truth is presented in a way that is easiy understood by all, like Ms Owen’s does, can make an enormous difference in getting a significant part of this country’s population back on the tracks to where they should be. YAY, Candace Owens, and even, no matter how much he annoys me, YAY Kanye West! There is still hope! We may get out of this alive, yet!
Candace Owens’s appearance on the Rubin Report last September is worth watching. She is impressively independent, thoughtful, and eloquent. Interestingly, she says Kanye sometimes is not as articulate and fluent as he needs to be to get his point across–an insight that had not occurred to me. She gives him a lot of credit for freeing up her own thinking.
Turning Point is lucky to have her, but make no mistake, the lefty, SJW twitter lynch mob is coming for her. She will be demonized, trivialized, belittled, warned against, dismissed, threatened, misconstrued, disappeared, boycotted, lied about, denounced, investigated and, if possible, prosecuted. Stay well-informed and be ready to defend her.
Just out of curiosity…any of y’all black?
I always think it’s funny when white folks like me try to figure out what’s going on on the other side of the colour line.
BUT…as noted, LBJ succeeded in getting that bloc of votes…what did he prophesy? “200 years” – It’s going to take more than Kanye & Ms Owens to derail that train.
Black churches in the US are more political front than Kingdom of God outpost…and have been since the 60’s/70’s. Most should be forced to give up their charitable tax exempt status since they achieve little more than providing a forum for D politicians to stump for $$ & votes.
They used to be powerful family unifiers & community spiritual support mechanisms…no mas. All D grievance politics all the time & those pastors or notable figures who leave that plantation are treated accordingly…as we see with Kanye & Ms Owens.
At best…conservatives should hope that blacks stay home on election day. Never stop campaigning for those votes & never stop pointing out the failures of D grievance politics & never stop encouraging personal responsibility as the real path toward prosperity…but pray that black voters stay home so you can stay ahead of the margin of vote fraud.
I know politics makes strange bedfellows but does no one here have a problem with a man, West, who infamously said, during a telethon for Hurricane Katrina, that Pres. Bush didn’t care about black people? Pres. Bush told his wife that was the worst moment of his presidency. “My record was strong, I felt, when it came to race relations and giving people a chance. And it was a disgusting moment.”
It’s just Kanye West guys.
He’s an entertainer. His wife’s a reality tv star with a sex-tape or two.
Since when does the Republican Party take reality tv stars with sordid sex-lives serio…errr.
Nervermind.
It seems to me that Democrats not only need to persuade black people and other minorities that they are victims of oppression in order to get their votes – but they also need to KEEP those people victimized in order to keep getting their votes. Victimization is pretty much the only platform that the Democrats have lately, and if people actually gain independence, become successful and stop feeling like victims, why would they keep voting for Democrats?
Democrats have to tell minorities — not just black people — that they will help them fight back against those oppressor Republicans in order to get their votes – but then, they must not actually DO it. They have to make sure to keep their “victim” voters down, while carefully making it look as if the Republicans are doing it.
This casts so many things in a whole new light. Take, for instance, the Obama-era disparate impact school discipline policies, by which schools were ordered to stop disciplining black kids at a higher rate than white kids without regard to whether the kids actually needed more discipline. Though cast as fighting back against institutional racism, the obvious consequences of such a policy couldn’t be more racist. If the script is actually followed as written, a whole generation of black kids will grow up without being taught to conform to the behavior expectations of the mainstream culture, while white kids, who may be disciplined when they need it, ARE learning how to behave. When the black kids don’t know how to succeed as they get older, it’ll be easy to persuade them that they failed because of racism, and, voila! The newest block of “victim” voters for the Democrats is ready.
BUT…as noted, LBJ succeeded in getting that bloc of votes…what did he prophesy?
LBJ is not a prophet, even though many white people wanted him to be.
Protestant Evangelical mostly white churches (and by that I don’t mean the Body of Believers but just a human building with a human organization that is called a church) like the Westboro Baptists are pretty much the same: a political rally in the guise of a sheep congregation.
Compared to other religions, Protestant Evangelicals are not as conservative as I had expected. It’s not 80 or 70%. They are higher than the average for the US which is around 33% conservative. In comparison to the more hardcore religions, Evangelicals are surprisingly moderate, even though the doctrine and dogma doesn’t sound like it.
Jews, secular plus orthodox plus reformed, is about 75% Democrat straight party vote in the USA. That’s not even a single religion any more, but you can see how strong the culture slants towards Dems. That’s in super majority territory. Anything in super majority territory or approaching it causes extreme social and cultural duress and motivation to circle dance and maintain the status quo. It’s just human nature. Not even Leftist riches can change that.
As for people’s questions about the South: the South’s “racism” was primarily a control method inherited from the Democratic party.
Racism, meaning the idea that whites are superior and blacks need to be kept as dogs in a cage, was first created by eugenics based Southern philosophers to promote the control of the minority of white plantation slave aristos. It is easy to see this is true because even the Irish, white people, were treated as dogs and in fact were of lesser value and social status than black slaves (who if worked in the House, were considered upper echelon servants of the nobility). If black people were the family dog that people loved but could kill when they felt like it without consequence, then the Irish were stray dogs that anyone could kill if they didn’t like them. The identity of “whites” was not a European concept, but a US eugenics concept. Immigrants naturally steered towards their own ethnicity. The Irish with the Irish. The Scots with the Scots. The Anglo Saxons with the Saxons. There were no “white people” per say. Whether you were black or white, the Picts would still put an axe in between your eyes. No prejudice with that. The prejudice came from Southern aristo control methods.
By collecting all the white European tribes together, the Democrats could create a block vote system, similar to how they can get Jews or blacks to vote their “interest” in the Democrat party by majority plus numbers.
So Southern racism naturally declined and became rejected when the religious indoctrination system and the Democrat political system began losing majority totalitarian control. Civil War 1 did a huge chunk of damage but it didn’t kill the slavery mentality. People still wanted slaves, they just started talking about Sanger eugenics, whites can’t marry blacks (cause KKK people will lynch the white person first then the black boy), Jim Crow (if you are a white boy, you had better not serve blacks or else the KKK will burn your arse down first), and so on.
White Southerners didn’t necessarily agree with owning slaves, or Jim Crow, or anything else the Democrat aristos told them to do. But they felt powerless and just couldn’t bring themselves to vote Reagan, because it was like betraying their religion. Betraying your religion is a big taboo amongst humans. Families would rather disown you first, before you convert away from Catholicism and Vatican dogma. We’re in serious cultural supremacy territory.
There’s not as many “Kingdom of God” fortresses in the USA as people think. This country after all is not ruled by the 10 commandments, Moses, or YHVH. Just look at what is sitting on top of the US capitol to get an idea of what patron god or goddess is over the USA. It’s definitely not the God of Abraham or Isaac.
Having grown up in a southern city with a significant black population I would like to address a misconception. As opposed to areas of the country where there is very little interaction between the races, we constantly dealt with each other in a variety of settings. Before I left home for college it would have been unusual for me to have my haircut by a white barber. There were several black owned barber shops and shoe repair businesses that catered to a white clientele almost exclusively.
I hope people can now see that democrats like Tom Arnold are just as racist and sexist as everyone else, they are just pretending not to be racist or sexist because black people are voting for democrats. If everyone is racist then the decision for whom to vote for should not be based who is or isn’t racist but whose policies will benefit you the most.
Oh another thing I just remembered.
Black people were Republican voters, but the KKK fixed that in the South after the Northern abolitionists “won” against slavery 2.0
Due to Reconstruction (What Southerners call Re-Destruction by carpet baggers from the North), significant numbers of freed black slaves were “put back under the plantation” system, via Jim Crow and black voting codes. The Southern Dems couldn’t return all of their totalitarian power, but they got most of it back.
A black representative in the house of representatives of a Southern state was considered by most white people to be nothing but the “dog” of a Northern abolitionist. That’s because white supremacy beliefs ran deep into the Southern Baptist and Episcopalian religious sects. These organizations did not go against slavery, but rather for slavery. The Northern Baptists split off from the Southern Baptists precisely because they could not agree on which god liked or disliked slavery.
The years around 1830 were fateful ones for a developing sense of a southern sectional identity. While social and cultural distinctiveness had already developed below the Mason-Dixon Line, the Missouri Controversy (1819-21) nurtured a new political significance to differences between a “North” and a “South.” The vote on extension of slavery into the West seen in the debate on admitting Missouri to the Union went along strictly sectional lines, North and South, with profound political significance for the division of power within the Union. Two events around 1830 added to the growing sectional consciousness, and both had religious meaning. William Lloyd Garrison’s publication of The Liberator called for the immediate end of slavery, making the issue a predominantly moral one. Shortly afterwards, Nat Turner’s Rebellion brought a large-scale slave uprising, with Turner acting out of prophetic belief, rooted in the Bible’s Old Testament, that he would bring his people out of bondage. After these two compelling events, southern whites used religion to carve out new relationships with northern abolitionists by attacking their morality and with southern blacks, who represented to them internal subversion based in misreading the same scriptures they read.
Title page, Charles Colcock Jones’s The Religious Instruction of the Negroes in the United States, 1842. Screenshot by Southern Spaces.
One white response to these forces was a new mission to the slaves. South Carolina Methodists were most successful in establishing specific missions, while an evangelical alliance led by minister-planter Charles Colcock Jones in Liberty County, Georgia, promoted an idealistic vision of an evangelical biracial community that would lead to the end of slavery. These initiatives were of limited impact, but they symbolized a new willingness among slaveowners to allow white preachers and, sometimes, black exhorters to preach the gospel to their slaves. The gospel that appeared here was one that stressed moral discipline and obedience of slaves to masters, with ultimate hopes for redemption in heaven. White religious leaders assumed new responsibilities for the fate of slave souls, which was a response to their overriding concern to convert everyone, their concern to achieve greater social control of slaves, and their belief that slavery was not an inherently immoral institution.-1830 Southern United States https://southernspaces.org/2004/overview-religion-and-us-south
This is the power of religion as a control scheme. Human organizations, created by humans, to enslave other humans, in a human dominated socio political economic and military system.
Blacks are victims, yes. So is everybody else, the whites most of all.
Any human organization that loses its original leader and founder, usually decays and grows corrupt over time. This is as true for empires as it is for feminism and religions. I have never seen this reverse it, except in the hands of another leader/guru/messiah figure. The cycle then starts all over again.
The blacks are brainwashed, yes. But so are the rest of us on this world. The reason why Republican overtures to black people have not worked is because of 2 primary reasons.
1. Blacks were betrayed by the Republican abolitionists when Grant removed federal protection from black polls and freed slave areas.
2. Blacks understand that there is institutional racism in the US, so they won’t believe REpublicans that deny that existence.
When Republicans say that institutional racism and plantations do exist, but that the Demoncrats are the ones running it, then Republicans may become “believable” to blacks in the USA (not African blacks, home born and bred American blacks)
Yes, I think that you are right.
As near as I can tell, the real dividing line in humankind is between the ‘communitarian/species-being/primacy-of-the-group’, kind of human organism, and the more, if imperfectly, individualist type.
And, I think that that psychological split, or rather spectrum is evident across racial and cultural boundaries, though proportions no doubt differ within various populations.
There are after all, plenty of crotch sniffing, society worshiping, place seeking Republicans like David Brooks, who orgasmically writhe in the “we” like a dog rolling in feces.
And among Southerners, there were no doubt – I regret to say – probably some number whose interest in “white supremacy” was essentially positive, fascistic, and even homoerotic (as we see with some Republican liberals), rather than the simple and negative residue of personal and psychological distaste and a resultant wishing to maintain social distance from certain inhabitants of the countryside who seemed to them unpleasant. A twisted and cynical paternalism involving trying to have it both ways socially – having cheap exploitable labor that disappears from view when desired – may also have been involved.
Thus: Positive versus “negative” liberty: assumed social responsibility for the unpleasant other versus the rejection of the notion that your need somehow entails my duty; the rejection of the very notion of “the other” versus the idea that antithetical aims and values and tastes logically imply radical moral otherness; are, I think the elements that are actually at play.
Manju:
Are you really that dense, or are you just trolling?
Or both?
This post isn’t about West’s depths as political analyst and philosopher.
But you know what? He’s not stupid. And he has shown some courage here. And what’s more—and this could be important—quite a few people follow him. If he draws their attention to Candace Owens and piques their curiosity, that could lead to political change eventually for some or even quite a few of those people. The unthinkable—taking a serious look at conservative points of view—becomes thinkable for them.
Ann:
Please see the last paragraph of my comment above, to Manju.
Noting what West has said in this instance, and the effect it could have, and the courage it took him to say it, of course does not indicate some sort of blanket approval for everything West has ever said or done. So I don’t understand your question or your point. No one here is holding him out as some sort of paragon or guru. But he does influence people, and (as I said to Manju) he’s not stupid, either.
@ neo, trolls. They think the community here are as brain dead as their usual clique
Kan and Trum are good examples of how any publicity is good publicity, even if it is negative.
This is even more true due to social media. If everyone attacks you now, everyone also knows your name now. Then you can use social media to put your story out and people will actually read it now, because you are no longer a nobody.
That is true whether your allies are popular or your enemies are popular.
Even though Twitter and Facebook are gatekeeped by Leftist Journolists, they still can’t stop everybody from reading everyone else’s stuff every day.
The Resistance intel network thus will slip through. Somebody, somewhere, will figure it out.
@GRA – I’m a white dude living in a majority Black Deep South city, and have spent most of my life in the region. IMHO, while this particular city is the worst I’ve lived in concerning racial issues, and not just from one side (whatever happens, it seems there is someone trying to turn it into a racial thing for personal or political gain), I don’t notice any significant issues on a day-to-day basis. Personally, it seems to me that white southerners may be more critical of “Black culture,” because they have more interaction with it, but are also more able to see and appreciate one-on-one Black folks for who they are as individuals. Yankees are, i believe, just as racist, if not more, but like to hide it more. I am reminded of the Malcolm X quote, likening southerners to wolves and northerners to foxes, with the conclusion that he’d rather be surrounded by wolves because at least you know where you stand.
From my kids in school, though, it seems a lot of the kids aren’t necessarily buying into that old garbage, including the victimology. While @Frog may be right about Kanye’s chances to turn old Dems into Pubs, his real potential I think lies in countering the SJW indoctrination of the schools and reaching the Millennials, who are by nature smart and skeptical.
Ymar Sakar Says:
April 25th, 2018 at 12:17 pm
Oh another thing I just remembered.
Black people were Republican voters, but the KKK fixed that in the South after the Northern abolitionists “won” against slavery 2.0
no, not the KKK, the knights of the white camelia, your going to see some articles coming from the UK, i arranged them..
they are resurecting eliza pinston and her testimony during hayes tilden, how they sliced her breasts. and cut her achillies tendon, and more…
all to stop blacks from voting republican…
Tuskegee University found in its study Tuskegee University found in its study, “Lynching, Whites and Negroes, 1882 to 1968,” that among the 4,745 lynchings examined, 1,299 of the victims were white, while 3,466 were black.
i have mentioned her before, and the tortures of the democrats, but again… no one listens till years later or AFTER it comes up again not before, not in anticipation, etc.
but there is something happening on the kanye front!!!
i said above, the left will be stupid IF they decide to force a choice between loving the kardashians or the socialism communism..
why?
cause kim and others will fight back!!!
KIM KARDASHIAN: IS FREE THINKING NOT ALLOWED?
Just as i said it would play out, they are following a script of behavior, i have said it for decades… once you get hte script, its easy to guess whats next?
whats next?
easy. double down on stupid and wake their constituency up by accident in forcing a choice they never had to
as in the past, their methods are geared to win in a specific time, or what happens is things fall apart…
you know, you can only fool some of the people some of the time, etc..
well, they do that, and hope to get the brass ring when the confusion is most, and then it dont matter… once they have it, then there is little that can be done (and they always fear their opposition will do what they are doing. just as the chinese jumped the russian process in indonesia… etc)
its spectacular when it works, when it doesnt as it didnt in the 20s and 30s, and again when road to serfdom came out and was a hit, and then now…
their games are not able to hold things long, so they have to make them converge on a moment a movement, a emotional sweep…
they want to exploit Momentary Lapses of Public Reason
once chavez had power, gliechsaltung meant he never gave it back, and his daughter got to be a billionaire without ever making a product or doing anything…
its repeating, but how would anyone know since they want to ignore history to guess whats going on as if there is a chidlrens prize for being right… (there isnt… being right late is a hellish prize]
The people Kanye West might influence politically probably don’t usually vote in any case. West himself didn’t vote in the 2016 election. Neither did Candace Owens.
Americans no longer have the freedom to not vote now. Everyone has to join the Red vs Blue fight now, whether they like it or not.
Just as they have to put their identity on the line for Facebook. This is not de-escalating things by forcing people into fighting each other. It actually escalates tension, because humans no longer have a safe spot or fortress to hide in.
who are by nature smart and skeptical.
The ones that survive Tide Pod and condom snorting challenges at least.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_of_the_White_Camelia
Both the KKK and the Masonic Knights of WC, participated. I wouldn’t go so far as to say which one lynched more whites, I’ll leave that to the genius statistics people.
Yankees are, i believe, just as racist, if not more, but like to hide it more.
In 1830, both Northern Democrats and Southern Democrats were profiting from slavery.
“[manju] Are you really that dense, or are you just trolling?
Or both?”
Rhetorical question, right? By the way Ann is another.
Why care about Kanye, amirite? Maybe because he and his wife reach tens of millions of people via twitter and, as Andrew Breitbart said, politics is downstream from culture.
Another reason to support (not dismiss) his recent tweets? The other side is telling everyone to ignore him. They’re calling him crazy. They’re not responding to what he’s said. He’s hit a nerve. He’s gotten his friend Chance to tell blacks that they don’t have to be Democrats.
Previous blacks have tried to get off the plantation. They usually destroyed their credibility with the old Democrat trick of “black slaves are going to revolt and rape/steal your white girls” shtick.
Lizzy Says:
April 26th, 2018 at 10:30 am
He’s gotten his friend Chance to tell blacks that they don’t have to be Democrats.
* * *
Saw that yesterday.
Maybe we really are on the verge of a tipping point aka preference cascade.
As Mr. Obama showed us (relentlessly), you have to play to the entertainment industry to make political hay.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/04/chance-the-rapper-weighs-in.php
Regarding the “Southern Strategy”:
The following is anecdotal, but take it for what it’s worth.
I remember watching TV in the ’60s, and more than one show there were racist characters; particularly small town sheriffs, who were almost invariably depicted as violently bigoted. Equally almost invariably, they had southern accents – even if the show was set in California.
In the media of the time, it was routinely implied (if not explicitly stated) that all Southerners were racists. More than that, it was implied that all racists were Southern.
Of course, for people who happened to be a Southern whites (racist or otherwise), that message didn’t go over very well. So Nixon was able to pick up a lot of votes, not because people necessarily liked him, but because the Democrats didn’t seem to like THEM.
Apparently it didn’t occur to liberal leaders at the time that insulting a core constituency might not be a productive strategy.
…And some of them still haven’t figured that out.
richf Says:
April 26th, 2018 at 12:43 pm
Regarding the “Southern Strategy”:
In the media of the time, it was routinely implied (if not explicitly stated) that all Southerners were racists. More than that, it was implied that all racists were Southern.
* *
The greatest lies are the logical fallacies that are snuck into the cultural discourse.
The assassination-by-implication you describe still occurs for the disfavored groups, usually rich white businessmen these days, but it might be an interesting film analysis to see how the group-think enemy changes over time.
* * *
PS to the Grammar Mavens: WP does not recognize that “snuck” is a legitimate past tense of “sneak” — must be a dialectist.
http://www.patrickkphillips.com/grammar/sneaked-or-snuck-ones-more-correct-than-the-other/
http://www.dictionary.com/e/snuck-or-sneaked/
A fitting adjunct to the Words of West and the Candor of Candace: they are newly restating the Sagacity of Sowell. The quotes here are from Green, because she is synopsizing Sowell’s work, but the post has many insightful quotes from his book, “Black Rednecks and White Liberals.”
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/04/26/social-poison-a-reading-of-thomas-sowells-brawl-by-amanda-s-green/
“As promised, I’ve returned to Thomas Sowell and the final parts of his excellent essay, Black Rednecks and White Liberals. Whether you believe in a “Redneck culture” or that it is something that came to parts of the South from sections of England, the underlying basis of what Sowell has to say still stands. There is a culture that white liberals have identified in African-American society, held up as being “authentic” and have championed. This action by white liberals is, according to Sowell, a social poison that must be counteracted sooner, rather than later.
Slavery.
A simple word that brings up so many negative connotations and rightly so. No one today wants to think about being owned by another person, being property to be bought and sold at the whim of a master. It is also a dark part of our history. But it is just that, history. At the time, despite our horror at the idea today, slavery was legal. Yet, the aftershocks of it can still be felt. Must of that is because of the so-called good intentions of white liberals. Yet, as Sowell points out, using it as THE causation for today’s problems does more than a simple disservice to our country and, most especially, to the African-American that are part of it.
…
Victims. That is the key here. In fact, if you think about it, victimhood is the current preferred state when you listen to so many liberals, be they “intellectuals” or not. We have them promoting the idea of African-Americans as victims because of slavery. It doesn’t matter if the African-American in question came from a Southern slave heritage or not. [many did not, and as Ms. Owens said, they are all gone now anyway]
…
It harms the individual because it truly does make a victim of them. They expect to be mistreated, either physically, mentally or emotionally. They don’t learn how to stand on their own but have to have their safe spaces where they can go so they don’t have to be exposed to words or ideas or even just the sight of people who offend them.
…
Whether these intellectuals meant to cause problems for the more successful members of the African-American community or not, we’ll never know. I’m sure there were at least some of them who started this with the best of intentions. They simply didn’t think through the cause and effect of their actions. Instead of rewarding effort and hard work, they wound up punishing it. They caused a rift in the community they were supposedly helping. Instead of expanding the world view, as Sowell says, they narrowed it.
History shows us the problems with a narrow world view. It might feel safe and familiar, but it will ultimately lead to trouble. Not only does it often lead to isolationism, it leads to a lack of understanding what goes on around you. Both can and will eventually blow up in your face. The ability to adapt is stifled and that society or culture will stifle. How, then, does that help the African-American — or any other — culture? It doesn’t, not that the white liberal intellectual will ever admit it.
…
It is an alibi, an excuse. It goes hand-in-hand with the attitude of entitlement we see in too many of this nation, no matter what the color of their skin. Too many have forgotten what made America great, that spirit of facing trials and tribulations, of overcoming dangers and challenges, to forge a new homeland and to excel at what they did. Too many of us want it all handed over on a silver platter, preferably paid for by the government. What they don’t realize is that the government has to pay for it somehow and that somehow is us. It is money out of our pockets.
…
It is past time to call bullshit on much of what these white liberal intellectuals are doing. They are not helping those they claim to champion. They sure as hell are not helping our country. Why do we keep listening to them? Stand up, speak out and tell them to sit down and listen to the adults for awhile.”
To Neo: you will recognize a lot of what Sowell advocates as tracking with our favorite Recovering Psychotherapist, Stuart Schneiderman at HadEnoughTherapy? (blogroll)
“No matter what the origin of counterproductive behavior, such behavior must be changed if progress is the goal.” (BRAWL, p. 56)
And this post of Schneiderman’s seems very germane to the FBI scandal, if only obliquely to the topic of your post (that is, the Democrats lying to their black constituents for decades).
http://stuartschneiderman.blogspot.com/2018/04/happy-tenth-anniversary.html
“Here is my first post, reprinted verbatim, called: Why Lie? [published in 2008]
I cannot guarantee that this story really happened. Call it apocryphal, if you like.
A student walks into a philosophy final exam and looks up at the blackboard to read the question he is going to answer. That question is: Why?
While he is considering his answer another student walks up to the professor, turns in his bluebook, and walks out of the room.
The professor opens it and instantly judges that the student should receive an A. The bluebook contains two words: Why not?
So, ask yourself this: Why not lie? This might help us to understand the recent incident where a much-admired politician got caught in a whopper of a lie.
Some people lie to gain an advantage. Some tell small lies to avoid offending friends and family. Others lie because they are afraid of the truth. Still others lie because they can get away with it.
Finally, there are people who lie because they are rewarded for it.
In that case, why not lie?
Imagine that you get caught in a lie. Some people are appalled, but others come forth to defend you. They say that it was only a minor distortion, that it was not relevant or germane, that you were in touch with a higher truth, and that those who denounce you have a darker purpose.
And besides, who is to say that lying is not therapeutic. Isn’t a liar merely rewriting his or her life story. Isn’t that what therapy is all about?
Of course, you might have to own up to your lies. If your supporters have been properly acculturated they will see this as a challenge to their capacity to offer unconditional love.
As you bask in the glow of this impassioned defense, you might say to yourself that lying is not so bad after all. Perhaps fiction is closer to the truth than mere facts. Besides, if lying has brought you fame, fortune, and power… why not lie?
Why not, indeed?”
Black ideologues don’t follow white liberals. It’s somewhat the other way around. Plantations always needed enforcers to tell blacks what to do. That’s why Jesse jackson and Sharpton and Hussein’s reverend exists for. These blacks were taught to revere religious authorities that were black. Partially because historical black religion was the only thing they could count on to spiritually and legally resist Jim Crow and slavery.
The REpublicans had failed them. The white plantations that considered them family were ruined by the war. The dream of an independent and free black community in the South was destroyed by the funding of the previous slave masters that had lost their property but not their power. Any whites that wanted to do different, such as General Lee or Nathan B Forrest, were ostracized and bypassed by the supremacists. If it hadn’t been for the respect and honor accrued in the war, the KKK would have lynched Forrest and Lee soon after Reconstruction began. Plenty of whites got lynched for trying to make a free society works.
Even if there weren’t white liberals taking advantage of the US black reliance on historically black churches as authorities, Sharpton and Jackson would still exist because it’s a good way to make a buck off a scam. Jackson’s rainbow coalition camps out in front of the houses of rich white people, until they get paid off. Jackson then uses the money to enrich himself as an overseer. He tells blacks what to do and gets paid by white liberals to do it.
Stand up, speak out and tell them to sit down and listen to the adults for awhile.
Whenever people tried to do that, want to know what the Left responded with?
They told the black pastors to gin up some black riots in inner cities. That in fact got YOU guys to sit down and listen to the Leftist alliance for another few decades. Weaklings. Talk is just talk. America needs actual street force to back it up.
The First Amendment only exists because of the power backing it up from the 2nd Amendment. Without the power of a bullet from a gun, people can’t do as much as they think.
Half of the next phase of the plan involves nationwide disarmament. They already control the cities. Their bully boys cannot extend their influence until the suburbs and the rest of the states are disarmed. There is no need for a military occupation or a military backed coup de tat. People still thinking in 19th century terms in the 21st century of the USA.