Blacks are Fleeing

Can you say gob-smacking news??

Back in the 1960s, the Dems sold their souls to snag the black voting bloc. They also significantly increased the size of our government with entitlement benefits for poor families. The family units were “entitled” as long as the father wasn’t in the home, a rule which served to break up black families. It was, and remains, a disaster of karmic proportions, one they were warned about repeatedly.

America’s urban poor, mostly black, are enslaved to local Dem governments; those enclaves are drugged-out concentrations of wretchedness. Will Teflon Donald Trump be able to make some changes in that ugly picture?

As Trump rolls back the evils of the 1960s, race relations in the U.S. are undergoing a paradigm shift. As Turley says, the leftist definition of racism, i.e., power+prejudice=racism, is rotting out. In its place is a nascent realization that this definition is a lie; blacks want immigration to end so that citizens’ jobs are safe.

In other words, the Democrat Party will have to choose: will they be the voice of unlimited immigration – i.e, job-stealing immigrants flowing in through Mexico, or will they choose their faithful black voting bloc? They can’t have both.

We’ll have to watch the votes in November to see how this plays out in various Congressional Districts.

15 thoughts on “Blacks are Fleeing

  1. I have a different take on the poll results. Dr. Turley believes blacks, inspired by Trump, are breaking away from the old racial politics. Instead of the 1960’s politics of government legislation on behalf of racial minorities we’re now moving into a new paradigm where all ethnic groups become united as one nation under economic nationalism.

    This sounds unrealistic to me. It looks like just another version of civic nationalism. Sadly, I don’t believe ethnic differences can be resolved this way. When differences are stark enough you can’t unite disparate people as one nation. From the War Between the States to MLK to Black Lives Matter in 2018, Rodney King’s question apparently still has the same answer. And I doubt some Trumpian version of economic nationalism is going to fix this.

    I don’t believe blacks are being inspired by any new political or economic theories. They haven’t suddenly seen the light on the virtues of a color-blind Constitutional republic but this time with an economy that benefits everyone. Instead, they see the real threat that Hispanic immigration poses to them and, quite rightly, want to protect themselves.

    Contrary to Dr. Turley’s thinking they still embrace identity politics. It’s just that they realize that Mexicans, and everyone else now flooding into the US, weren’t born with White Guilt. The political leverage they’ve been used to isn’t going to work in the New America. By opposing non-white immigration they’re looking out for their own self interest, as well they should.

    • I don’t believe blacks are being inspired by any new political or economic theories. They haven’t suddenly seen the light on the virtues of a color-blind Constitutional republic but this time with an economy that benefits everyone. Instead, they see the real threat that Hispanic immigration poses to them and, quite rightly, want to protect themselves.

      That’s what Turley says, i.e., blacks are leaving the Dems because they see the real threat Latino immigration poses for them as a group AND the Dems are pushing unlimited immigration, legal or not.

      IOW, the time has come for Dems to choose which victim group they will back, though the reality hasn’t yet caught up with, say, Maxine Waters and her ilk. Somehow I don’t think the choice will be the ever-loyal (“ever” encompasses the years between LBJ and 2016) black community.

      I don’t see the disagreement.

      • You’re right, Dr. Turley does acknowledge that blacks are aware and threatened by immigration. So I do agree with him on some points. But I strongly disagree with him on his overall argument concerning a paradigm shift in race relations in the US.

        In the early part of the video, first 2 or 3 minutes, Dr. Turley talks about the Emancipatory Myth. In multi-ethnic societies the state liberates minorities from the oppressive group or culture that’s been holding them down. He also calls this identity politics, and cultural marxism. This is the old paradigm. He says it hasn’t worked and it’s a dying philosophy, it’s rotted out.

        Around 6:30 he begins talking about what Trump is ushering in and why blacks are responding to it. And this is where my disagreements begin. He calls Trump’s economic nationalism part of the new paradigm. Dr. Turley even calls it “a new racial logic.”

        6:58 – “this is key, where the nation is itself a race”

        7:12 – “to be american is to belong to a multi-national or multi-ethnic citizenry”

        8:05 – “we are seeing the redefinition of the whole notion of race”

        8:30 – “the solution to racial disparities is not the promise of power to minorities but rather the promise of new and exciting economic opportunities for every single citizen in the nation.”

        The above quotes are essentially the building blocks of civic nationalism. Dr. Turley is describing a post-racial society where citizens bond together as a new race of Americans. The old ethnic identity politics slips into the past and we all work together as Americans.

        I know I’m on the jaded and cynical side to begin with, but even on my cheeriest of days I don’t see anything even resembling that on the horizon.

        My belief is that not only is that not going to happen but we’re rapidly going in the opposite direction. The old ethnic identities are intensifying and hardening. I believe Dr. Turley is far too optimistic about what is coming.

        • My belief is that not only is that not going to happen but we’re rapidly going in the opposite direction. The old ethnic identities are intensifying and hardening.

          Again, my experience is different. My average white middle-class family is becoming mixed race. That’s happening with the B’s family, too.

          And I see efforts in our local community to bridge the gaps…slooowly in this small, formerly slave-holding county. But the signs are there. Give it another fifty years. This isn’t an instant process.

          • So it really is over then. The European diaspora is soon to become mixed-race and as abolished as the Native Americans are. Of course I have been seeing this all around me too, with the runaway migration to Australia.

            Increasingly it’s hard to care about Muslim atrocities. We can be abolished by any number of means and we are actively being abolished by several kinds. The future is a vast, meaningless consumerist culture, I can’t see any way to stop it.

        • I see some paradoxes.

          If the US is a “proposition” nation, destined to be a completely homogenized society, then it is attaining an identity we cannot now recognize.

          But, the US has recognized the rights of individuals to be different.

          My idea is that the complete freedom of association be immediately implemented. People can admit or exclude other people from their home, property, or privately-owned company for any reason whatsoever. If you wish to not hire blacks, or whites, you have the right to do so. If you have a community, say, of Ashkenazi Jews, they can own a housing complex and rent to, or sell to, only Ashkenazi.

          The only qualification is that the courts are not able to enforce exclusionary provisions of a contract. In other words, you cannot have a restricted covenant built into a contract, whereby only Jews are eligible for buying a house. The government is not qualified to make such determinations, and has no business doing so anyway. The enforcement of such provisions will have to be done through customs or ownership management.

          Chicago had a very viable system of informal real estate redlining, maintaining the value of neighborhoods, which worked until broken up by the courts and regulators.

          This is a sort of have-your-cake-and-eat-it situation. Parents wanting their children to marry in their race would simply live in exclusionary areas and send their children to exclusionary schools. People wanting to mix would be able to do so in some, but not all, locales. The common denominator would be that all people of whatever inclination would be able to adapt the situation to get what they want, and would be able to attribute it to the individual liberty and property rights associated with the US system of government.

          There is always the problem of the free rider, or the benefits of identity politics. Any government strong enough to protect the individual is strong enough to enslave him. You’ll always have the problem of minimally-competent, highly-verbal individuals trying to leverage their eloquence into power and money through the power of the state. This is perhaps the central dilemma of representative government. As Patrick Moynahan said (quote from memory) “Once people find out they have the power to vote themselves money from the public purse, they will do so.”

          Switzerland is a very good example of a multi-lingual, multi-cultural (kind of) society that is united through a federal government with ample local autonomy. Switzerland has different cantons with different languages, and not every Swiss is able to understand every other Swiss.

          • “If the US is a “proposition” nation, destined to be a completely homogenized society, then it is attaining an identity we cannot now recognize.”

            I may not be catching the meaning of your sentence properly, so apologies ahead of time if I’ve misinterpreted it.

            Dr. Turley is not envisioning the US becoming homogenized in an ethnic sense. He still thinks blacks, whites, latino’s will be be biologically separate groups. But they will become united as one people under Economic Nationalism. This united people will have a shared culture and shared civic traditions and this is what he means when he refers to the nation as a race.

            The difficulty is that Dr. Turley is adopting slightly new definitions for both the terms “race” and “nation”. During his talk he vacillates back and forth, sometimes using the old definitions and other times the new, so it gets murky at times.

            In a lot of ways I think Dr. Turley’s vision is just the traditional 20th century civic nationalist view of the US. I don’t think that view is workable at this point. Even if it were I would be opposed to it. I’m not a fan of proposition nations. I prefer real, organic nations.

  2. Talking about Rodney King, I know that the race riot that his arrest inspired was supposed to be black vs white, and to some extent it was, but watching the looting on TV from the safety of my home, at that time in Maryland, it was obvious that the majority of the looters, whom Tom Brokaw described as “poor and desperate” were in fact well nourished looking mestizos. They even showed and interviewed ordinary blacks who opposed the looting, and one black adolescent who didn’t go out to join the festivities, “Because her mother wouldn’t let her”. Now one hears about how blacks are being driven out of Hispanic neighborhoods by violence (think MS13). Of course the riots were also enabled by the well publicized withdrawal of the police force by the liberal police chief. As one radio commentator put it at the time, “The police have withdrawn, but there is no looting, yet.”
    It is not a coincidence that Kurt Schleicter (sp?), one of the columnists on Townhall, who talks about our collapse into anarchy as a nation because of these tensions and the current political philosophy, was a young lieutenant in the National Guard that was sent in to restore order. The stakes could be higher than many of us think.

    • Compton CA is a case in point. Once evenly (more or less) divided between blacks and whites, it is now 75% Latino, 25% black.

  3. I remember the ethnic cleansing of the solidly Democratic ethnic cities of the north to make room for welfare black shock troops guaranteed to vote Democratic. The so called ‘fair housing act’ was flagrantly unconstitutional in that it told me I could not rent or sell my property to whom I chose. The block busters followed and whole ethnic neighborhoods were ruined. Here in St. Louis the remaining whites of North St. Louis fled to tract house suburbs like Ferguson…. then they fled from there to St. Charles and points further West.

    • Someday the history of the migration of blacks to the north (where the jobs were) will be told. It often began with the purchase of bus tickets by the town fathers in the South…or sometimes by blacks themselves, anxious to get away from the endless toil of sharecropping.

      Now, their descendants are returning, back to the South.

      BTW, many of those down-and-out in Las Vegas are given one-way bus tickets to California. Look at San Francisco.

    • Chicago had a functional system of “redlining” where real estate agents, by informal yet very strong agreements, did not show certain areas to blacks. Of course, the individual black who holds values comparable to those held by the white working and middle-class would experience restrictions not justified by their personal ethics and actions. Yet, such blacks had their own neighborhoods, which with police assistance, were prosperous and relatively crime-free.

      One of the most malevolent actions of the Obama, and likely the Bush administration before him, was to mandate the forced diffusion of welfare families into areas previously all-white and more importantly, all working families. This immediately crashed the property values and minced the desires of the families to raise their children in a safe and enriching environment.

      I agree with you that freedom of association and the right to use your own property as you wish is the critical factor in whether the US can maintain its identity as a single country, or whether it dissolves into a mass of warring coalitions, each looking to grab the most resources from the common pot.

  4. Here is the deal, ladies and gents. If 18% of Black US voters do not vote for the Democrats, it is not possible for Democrats to win a national election. This week’s Rasmussen poll has Trump at 36% approval with Black voters. Combining this with the parallel #walkaway phenomena and the realization the Democrats under Obama were reduced to a coastal regional party, it is easy to see why they are being so unhinged and hysterical over the most trivial matters. They are a dying party.

    While they hope to replace Blacks with Hispanics, they, too, are seeing improvement under Trump and he is peeling their support away from the Dems in enough numbers to hurt the Democrats even further.

    • Your assessment is spot-on. The only qualification I would make is that these groups turn out in small numbers for the midterm elections – e.g., the ones coming up in October. So we may have to wait until 2020 to see this new alignment. My guess is that the top spots on the Dem side will be either Latino or black, in order to stave off the reality.

Comments are closed.