Why black people are progressive...Doesn't make sense.

[Big Blue]

A lot of roaches showing their asses in the wake of this election.

Pure comedy. OP is a dumbass.

 

[dh86]

Why are the majority of the black community are progressive liberal
Progressive liberal :
- Destruction of the nuclear family and fatherhood
- feminism and the emasculation of black men
- Dependency to the governement (this benefits them)
- Pro-choice (killing black babies to decrease our numbers)
- They're anti buisness, which means they're against black empowerment and black entrepreneurship, they prefer social programs and poverty for black people
- They advocate for gay and trans rights
- They advocate adoptions for gay people
- Anti-Religion
Conservatism :
- Economic liberalism (which is good for black empowerment)
- Anti feminism and pro-manhood
- They're for small government, more power to the local community
- They're pro buisness
- They're against gays and trans rights
- They believe traditions must be preserve in order to keep a community strong
- They believe in solidarity among people in the same community
- They're for segregation except for buisness deals (We should only deal with white people for buisness purposes)
- Pro-religion

Now when you talk to black people about conservatism, they automatically attach this ideology to republicans and racist white people. Conservatism is a ideology, so white people don't own this ideology, conservatism is everywhere, In nigeria, South Africa, Japan, China, Saudi Arabia etc...Every community and ethnicity can advocated conservatism for their own people, this had nothing to do with white people or the republican party. But when a black man said he's conservative, stupid negroes automatically associated this with being republican. Being a conservative means you want to keep the black community strong by promoting strong nuclear family and black solidarity.

The hallmark of pure conservatism is personal responsibility. This cuts across cultures. If you're a man, and "society" feminized you, that's on you. If you watch two men kissing on tv, and is "brainwashed" to want to kiss another man, guess what? If your family is split up and your ex has custody of the child and now you're paying child support, guess what? That's the fault of you and your partner. Personally. The government has no party in that dispute aside from ensuring the child is taken care of. If you're conservative and wants to promote a strong nuclear traditional family, you have one with a housewife and stay the fukk out of everyone else business.

When you speak of "living off the government" and welfare. Understand that ADC has its origins placed in aid to post civil war widows & their children. White only. This continued for the next nearly 100 years, now in the 1960s it's available for black moms and it leads to destruction? Are you implying that blacks are intrinsically morally lacking?

The majority of your platform doesn't speak to limited government conservatism, rather to seeking to legislate morality. Which to say by your morality. That leads to most blacks problems with the modern Republican Party, it's inherently hypocritical and we see it for what it is. You want to try to differentiate black conservatism but you aren't able to.

 

[dh86]

You sound like a troll, because clearly you should have known the historical context of these political parties if you are claiming that i am incorrect. So in the first instance I defined Liberal the same way it is defined now, except that the liberals then would have then been in the Republican Party and were in support of the abolition of slavery. They are the party of Lincoln. Democrats during that period were supporters of the institution of slavery and they were by and large Southerners. They were your conservatives. The fact that you don't know those historical points is your issue.


In the second instance the welfare policy that I addressed was called the "man in the house rule." It is well documented who created the rule (Conservative Republican Family Values a$$holes) and what the rule has historically done. Here is article from 1992 after the LA Riots discussing that particular policy after Conservatives Republicans lamented that the lack of family values is the reason for the issues among poor African Americans.

Welfare's unintended consequences
Glenn McNatt

May 18, 1992|By Glenn McNatt

ONE OF the crueler ironies in the aftermath of the Los Angeles riots has been the suggestion, particularly on the part of conservatives, that the real cause of the violence was not racism or poverty but crumbling inner-city families.

The inner-city family has fallen apart, the argument goes, and thus an entire generation of young people has come of age without proper "values." It's all the fault of the liberal social welfare policies of the 1960s, President Bush said recently.

That's a neat formula for evading the responsibility three successive GOP administrations bear for the neglect of America's cities.

The irony, of course, is that conservatives were the ones who insisted on making family breakups a condition for welfare. Remember the "man in the house" rule? That was the one that said families couldn't get assistance if there was an able-bodied man in the house. It was enacted because opponents of welfare, particularly Southern conservatives, simply couldn't abide the idea of government "handouts" to male heads-of-household... ."

So if a man lost his job, he literally had to leave home if he wanted his children to be eligible for government surplus cheese, beans and peanut butter. Somehow conservatives persuaded themselves that this encouraged "family values."

With the advantage of 20-20 hindsight it's easy to see how the policy had exactly the opposite effect. It accelerated the fragmentation of poor families at just the time low-skilled factory jobs were disappearing. The expansion of the welfare state in the 1960s coincided with the decline of the factory economy in the worst possible way because the no-man-in-the-house rule actually encouraged the breakup of stable, two-parent families.

Conservatives like to talk about the "law of unintended consequences" -- by which they mean the difficulty of predicting the long-term effects of government social policies. Welfare hasn't worked, they argue, because it only produces more dependency.

Yet dependency clearly is a function of the great increase in single-parent, female-headed households over the last 20 years. And that, in turn, was at least in part an unintended consequence of punitive welfare rules that forced poor men to chose between abandoning their children or watching them starve. We are still paying for that mean-spirited policy in Los Angeles and other cities across America.

Doubtless other factors played a role in the break-up of two-parent families over the last generation -- higher divorce rates, teen pregnancy, the corrosive commercial values purveyed by popular music, movies and television. But the no "man in the house" rule was a classic example of how a government social policy aimed at assisting poor families actually undermined them.

If you doubt that, consider this: What would the result have been if the rule had required just the opposite of what it in fact demanded of poor families -- that is, in order to receive assistance, both parents had to live at home with their children?

Glenn McNatt is an editorial writer for The Sun and Evening Sun.
Welfare's unintended consequences
Welfare expands in the 1960s | Soc 315 – Social Welfare



What do want to know about Dr. King's poor people campaign and for that President Lydon Johnson's war on poverty?
War on Poverty - Wikipedia
Poor People's Campaign - Wikipedia
Poor People's Campaign


If you care to read more on the subject of the Black family you can read more a scholarly paper like the one from University of Wisconsin, which shows the growth of the single mothers heading African American families. It was actually rare up until the 1960's:

"... Between 1960 and 1985, female-headed families grew from 20.6 to 43.7 percent of all black families, compared to growth from 8.4 to 12 percent for white families.' Recent estimates suggest that more than half of all black families are headed by women... ."
http://www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/focus/pdfs/foc121e.pdf


African Americans also had the highest marriage rates in America up until the 1960's and 1970's.
BlackDemographics.com | MARRIAGE

If I'm following correctly, husbands had kids they were no longer able to feed, and welfare saved the kids from dying. And welfare is the problem. Right?

 

[NoChillJones]

Why are the majority of the black community are progressive liberal
Progressive liberal :
- Destruction of the nuclear family and fatherhood
- feminism and the emasculation of black men
- Dependency to the governement (this benefits them)
- Pro-choice (killing black babies to decrease our numbers)
- They're anti buisness, which means they're against black empowerment and black entrepreneurship, they prefer social programs and poverty for black people
- They advocate for gay and trans rights
- They advocate adoptions for gay people
- Anti-Religion

Uhhhhhhhhhhhh they are for diversity........where as conservatives have traditionally been anti diversity and pro white racism. So there is that......Not to mention Reagan DESTROYED the black community with this shytty tax cuts for the rich and his war on drugs that him and Bush both shipped in by the boat loads to our community. Your biggest gripe is gay people.........my biggest gripe if upward mobility. And the Conservative party has shown they are not for the upward mobility of any one but rich white males.

 

[Koba St]

So you expect black people to align with Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Donald Rumsfeld, dikk Cheney, Ann Coulter, Newt Gingrich, Rudolph Giuliani, etc?

You really expect that to happen?

I'm not saying there aren't bad liberals out there, but I'd rather just stop voting than to support most of these conservative clowns.

So according to you, either you some super liberal who wants to sing kumbaya or some raging conservative who wants to enslave all non whites.

We can actually be conservative without adopting the racist white version of conservatism you know.

 

[Samori Toure]

If I'm following correctly, husbands had kids they were no longer able to feed, and welfare saved the kids from dying. And welfare is the problem. Right?

Wrong. And you are not following correctly. Nice try Cac.

The rules to get welfare imposed on families during that generation forced family to split up (fathers could not be in the home). Welfare had been around before the 1960's, but only White people were basically getting it; and there were not rules saying that the father could not be in the home. During Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty in the 1960's the benefits were extended to Black families and all of a sudden the Conservative Republicans made a rule that in order to get the benefits the father could not be in the home. So the policy was tied to race, because it was not there before then; and in addition Black people were leaving the South and heading North for industrial jobs. That policy is why you see so many single mother homes right now in Black community, because single mother homes is a recipe for continued poverty. That is why I linked the University of Wisconsin paper for your review.

 

[Robbie3000]

I gotta start checking which sub forum threads belong to before I click on them.

Some of you TLR dudes are just...

 

[Wild self]

Black folk really like Libertarians on some Ron Paul shyt, without any discipline.

No social responsibility, but no judgment of people. The least disciplined way through life us the most disastrous.

 

[TooLazyToMakeUp1]

I don't even discuss politics with most people because a lot straight-up party zealots that refuse to think for themselves
The two party system is convenient for lazy people. For too many people only care when they're told to

 

[feelosofer]

The minute I hears that it is worse in 2016 than it was 60-70 years ago, I mentally checked out.

 

[OG Talk]

Every single voting elegible Black person in America should register as an independent.

Stay on the fence and make both "sides" fight and claw to get you off of it every election. Use your unpredictability as an assett.

There is no progressive agenda that suits us, or progressive coalition that stands with us. Stop being sitting ducks that make it easy for one side to suppress our vote. Voter suppression only happens to people that are predictable in their patterns and behavior.

Stop using buzz words like "allies" "minorities" and "people of color". You're Black. Before you're gay, or Muslim, or Christian or feminist, or liberal or progressive. You are BLACK.

 

[Nemesis]

Being a black conservative have nothing to do with being a republican. So you don't have to support the republicans, but if some of their policies can benefit us, we should keep a open mind, same thing for the democrats. We should only supported a black conservatism agenda and ally with whoever can supported our agenda. But being a liberal is a dead end for black men.

same Republicans that supported apartheid?

 

[superunknown23]

 

[dh86]

Wrong. And you are not following correctly. Nice try Cac.

The rules to get welfare imposed on families during that generation forced family to split up (fathers could not be in the home). Welfare had been around before the 1960's, but only White people were basically getting it; and there were not rules saying that the father could not be in the home. During Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty in the 1960's the benefits were extended to Black families and all of a sudden the Conservative Republicans made a rule that in order to get the benefits the father could not be in the home. So the policy was tied to race, because it was not there before then; and in addition Black people were leaving the South and heading North for industrial jobs. That policy is why you see so many single mother homes right now in Black community, because single mother homes is a recipe for continued poverty. That is why I linked the University of Wisconsin paper for your review.

So the children would have starved with daddy in the house correct?

 

[Ardamus]

I'm black.

I'm progressive.

The highlighted green things are good to me.

The highlighted red things, are bad to me.

Anything in blue means you don't know WTF you're talking about.

Agreed. Seems like when this convo comes up, our own people forget that we are diverse within ourselves. How can you motivate and mobilize people when you don't even get that one train of thought will not work across the board or everyone? I'm not for a cult but I am down for my community.