The most successful and expensive ($22 Trillion and counting) southern strategy was Johnson's "great society".
Forgot to address that, since the article mentioned it. For one, there is question as to whether he actually said that.
Even if he did, he would be
one person with an ulterior motive (rather than all blacks just lapping it up for the "freebies", as commonly portrayed, a lot of them back then
were suspicious of "government dependency" as a tactic).
But still, you have millions of southern Democrats, both the elected officials themselves, as well as the voting base, who already felt their nation was being taken from them and given to the minorities (in addition to them being the
conservatives, who also talked the most about the Constitution, and were the most against "socialism").
Why would they all stay in a party changing like that, and suddenly figure "oh, let's keep giving them
more of our nation, just to make them dependent?" What would the voters get out of that? (And again, the article does admit a lot of them left the party).
The reason that race is being judged as it is is due to the fact that by and large they are blaming their issues on another race and another financial class of people. Let's not ignore that part of the equation.
"By and large". I think people are listening to media figures (again, Sharpton and Jackson being the biggest ones people point at), and assuming this is what the
entire race is saying. (And as far as the financial class, that is not just the blacks saying that, that is more a partisan thing).
I think one legitimate problem is when people start talking about "
white privilege", which is a very strong term that makes it sound that no progress has been made in race at all, and putting something on those who may not be guilty of it, just because they supposedly happen to benefit in some way.
There are legitimate concerns out there they are addressing which the majority of the community might attest to, but again, the media often hypes these things up, and I think you all know that. And it's still not the same things as "blaming all their issues on another...". A middle class or even well off family that complains of some sort of discrimination is not blaming gang violence on whites or the rich, for that is not really "their" issue. The "race" consists of many different people with many different experiences and viewpoints.
And because terms like "white privilege" might somewhat unfairly put the whole race in the same pot, if people are concerned about "the truth", and claiming the ideological high ground, then people should not just do back to the other side what [they felt] them do to them. That's just being just as much in "error" as you say the other side is.
That's one of the biggest problems in this [highly charged] issue.
Your fanatical use of party talking points and self deluding justifications makes me wonder if you can form any thought of your own anymore.
I don't know whether that is referring to the post you were quoting, or just all of his posts in general, but if that post, why is that "party talking points"? It's what happened in history (though it might happen to be cited by one party more). The opposite notion that blacks all are just "problem people" because they "don't want to work and just want handouts", and this one party is just using them to get votes is also a party talking point.
Also forgot to mention, great post by Baptist Believer!