Wednesday, 1 February 2012

Why do American blacks vote for the party which is destroying them?

Before the late 1960s, when Democratics reinvented themselves as the champions of   victimhood, it had largely been the anti-black party: pro-slavery, pro-secessionist, pro-segregation. Between the end of the Civil War and the early 20th Century those blacks who were allowed to vote went with the Republicans. Until 1924, blacks weren’t even allowed to attend Democratic conventions.

Despite the fact that all the most vicious major-party racists senators and congressmen belonged to the Democrats throughout most of the 20th Century, after Roosevelt got 71% of the black vote in 1936, no Republican presidential candidate has ever got a majority of Afro-American votes. Harry Truman got 77% of black votes in 1948, and that was the first time a majority of blacks had thought of themselves as natural Democrats – despite all the evidence to the contrary, the perception of the Democrats as the party of prejudice had evaporated.

In 1964, Barry Goldwater’s stance against LBJ’s Civil Rights Bill sealed the deal – despite the fact that Republicans had always spearheaded civil rights initiatives until that point. Johnson got a whopping 94% of the black vote in ’64 – eight years earlier, Eisenhower, had managed 39% for the Republicans, and even Richard Nixon had managed 32% in 1960.

For obvious reasons, Barack Obama garnered 95% of the black vote in 2008.

The irony – the truly horrible irony - is that if Johnson and Obama and their ilk had been secretly funded by the KKK, they could hardly have been more successful at destroying black lives. Johnson did it by introducing a whole raft of legislation and initiatives aimed at creating The Great Society, which was based on the premise that the vast strides blacks had made since World War II would become a sprint for equality if the state stepped in and helped. And we all know what happens when the state decides to help you.

We now know that The Great Society undoubtedly did more harm to black prospects than the re-introduction of the old Democrat “Jim Crow” laws would have achieved. Black crime, black teenage pregnancies, and rioting in black areas shot up: black educational standards, black family stability and black jobs plummeted. The only people who benefitted from these  "reforms" were the vast army of race relations activist and experts who arose to represent the black race and to administer the stacks of taxpayers’ money that were being spent to permanently enervate it.

While Johnson completed the work begun by Roosevelt to make blacks dependent on the state, Obama simply got them to vote for him – and then promptly set about destroying the very jobs they needed.

And yet, while Republicans – who generally want to treat Afro-Americans like everyone else – are viewed as racists, Democrats – who have taken a wrecking ball to black lives in the name of those twin horsemen of the Apocalypse, “equality” and “fairness” – are viewed as benefactors (for a while there, Obama was seen as a saviour – I wonder how that’s working out for them).

The destruction of the black race – its metamorphosis into a welfare-junkie sub-class – is plain to see in a whole series of depressing statistics. The gap between blacks and whites is wider than it was 25 years ago in every significant area. Whites are 20 times richer than blacks on average; 45% of blacks from middle income families end up at the bottom of the income heap, compared to 16% of white middle-class children; only 31% of middle income blacks end up earning more than their parents compared to 68% of whites; 54% of blacks born into low income families stay poor, while 69% of whites move up the economic scale; 10 out of every 25 students who drop out are either black or latino; 3 out of 10 black men end up serving time in prison; black unemployment is a whacking 15.2%; 18.2% of blacks have no health insurance compared to 10.8% of whites.

And, before you ask, all these figures represent a distinct disimprovement on the early 1960s, when blacks were making great strides on practically every front: health, earnings, social mobility, education etc. Then a Fifth Cavalry of victimhood-mongering do-gooders arrived, who seemed convinced that blacks were too useless to make it on their own  - and blacks were done for!

Liberals, of course, fiercely deny entertaining patronising attitudes. The inability of Afro-Americans to “progress” is, of course, the fault of right-wing bigotry and discrimination and inequality and bla-de-blah. What’s needed is more “affirmative action”, more welfare payments, more urban “initiatives”, more social affairs experts sorting out black communities… But when all the evidence points to the fact that it’s exactly that sort of social engineering approach which caused all the harm in the first place, why do liberals keep on pretending it’ll help?

Four main reasons, I suspect – (1) the old narrative provides them with a stick with which to beat Republicans and the rich in general, (2) it maintains the Democratic Party’s image as the natural home of minorities and victim-groups, withoutn whom they'd never win an election (3) it allows liberals to maintain a (bizarre) belief in their own moral superiority, and (4) it provides thousands of people with employment in the race relations industry, government agencies, politics, the media and academia, not to mention “community spokespersons”.

Whether they realise it or not, these types – the natural successors to the ranting, puerile, Trotskyist nihilists who infiltrated the Democratic Party in the late 1960s - are doing more to keep blacks at the bottom of the heap than any other group. The fact is, they need blacks to remain dependent.

If I were an Afro-American who didn’t owe my living to “representing” (or exploiting) my own people, I like to think I’d have enough courage to vote Republican (or, at least, not to vote Democrat), if only as a protest against a party which has remained viable on the back of my people’s suffering. But, then, I’d probably subscribe to the myths peddled by the Democrats for the past half century, because it must be almost impossible to face up to the fact  that those nice liberals who constantly harp on about the historical injustices done to my people are largely to blame for our plight.

As Alex de Tocqueville wrote some 165 years ago, “if despotism were to be established amongst the democratic nations of our days it might assume a different character; it would be more extensive and more mild, it would degrade men without tormenting them.”

The Americans are suffering a form of liberal despotism, and so are we. And, as so often, it’s blacks who are being degraded – in the name of selfish pseudo-compassion. 


  1. Interesting stuff, Scott. Certainly black drug related gang culture has proliferated over the last few decades. Where did you get the statistics from as a point of interest? What about Hispanics, how are they faring?

  2. The Economic Mobility project provided a lot of the statistics (produced on behalf of a charitable foundation)

    But the same basic statistics are available in lots of places. (You can blow your mind with facts and statistics here, with the Population Reference Bureau’s bulletin covering US economic and social trends between 2000 and 2010:

    As for the progress blacks made after World War II, the great (black) economic historian Thomas Sowell is excellent on this in such books as “Conflict of Visions” and “Vision of the Anointed” – he grew up in Harlem during the post-war era of progress, and became a Marxist, and was an academic economist when he realised that everything the Democrats were doing to improve black lives was in fact destroying them: his books are stuffed with scary statistics. Charles Murray’s 1984 book, “Losing Ground: American Social Policy 1950-1980” was a real eye-opener, as it showed that the more money you spent on welfare for the poor, the worse their lives became, economically and socially.

    Black voting habits are covered at

    The National Black Republican Association is interesting on black voting: there’s been a long argument over whether martin Luther King Jnr was a Republican!!! (his dad certainly was). Obviously, the linked article is heavily weighted against the Democrats, but it’s fascinating nevertheless:

    As for Hispanics, I haven’t paid much attention – but they’re generally nearer black economic and social levels than whites or orientals (who tend to come out on top whatever’s being measured!).

  3. There is also the issue that Michelle Obama pointed out-albeit unintentionally,how at Princeton she was viewed by her fellow students as a charity case.
    If university applicants were accepted on merit and not race-based quotas,then she could have held her head high.