It is better to keep your friends close to your hearts and
your foes/enemies even closer.
The history of the discordance between the support of the
democratic party and their (mis)deeds to the blacks in America
is not knew,but I think following my opening statement it is the
course they had to revert to to achieve whatever little they got.
In your previous discourse you stated that much as the Republicans
supported the black cause,they were practically impotent to deliver
on their flowery promises.
So the question that needs to be asked is why go with those who
make promises that turn into mirages instead of joining those bad guys
who are repeatedly being accussed of frustrating your ambitions.
On a superficial level,from your thesis,the Republican party out to
be the party of African Americans.Unfortunately you are so much dismayed that they have chosen enmass to support the Democratic party.
May be there reason will be gleaned from the way Nelson Mandela reacted following his release from 27 years of inhuman incarceration by
the White Apartheid supremacists.
Taking the ball into their courts so that they fall over themselves trying to
prove they are not the devil incarnate!
To me,both the Republican and Democratic party are only two sides of the same coin each trying to manipulate the blacks for cosmesis.
The reality of all then is must the African reinvent a wheel?
Definately not!.They have to choose a place where their voices and numbers will make them have an impact.
The old saying is : "Whoever promises to protect you against being
harmed and does nothing to stop your being harmed or put into harms' way is as guility as the prime commiter of the crime!".
That to me is what the face of the Republican party is, history not withstanding!.
Thank you.
Kipenji
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The confusion about the history of Africans in relations to the Democratic party is a serious problem; look at Sharpton's speech, the two elements that drew the most press attention were his comments on the blood Africans shed to get the right to vote and the reason why Africans are in the Democratic party, I quote form one paper:
"One of many standing ovations went on for a minute after he told delegates that after the nation failed to deliver on Civil War-era promises of "40 acres and mule" to freed slaves, "we didn't get the mule so we decided we'd ride this donkey as far as it would take us."..."Mr. President, the reason we are fighting so hard, the reason we took Florida so seriously, is our right to vote wasn't gained because of our age," Sharpton said. "Our vote was soaked in the blood of martyrs, soaked in the blood of good men, soaked in the blood of four little girls in Birmingham."
A knowledge of history substantiate one part of his position, the cost in blood for voting rights and other so-called civil rights, and if anything Sharpton did not really describe the immense amount of blood lost in this struggle.The other part that drew so much press coverage, namely "we didn't get the mule so we decided we'd ride this donkey as far as it would take us," conveniently overlooks the fact that it was the Democratic party who lead the opposition to the 40 acres and a mule, and all of the so-called Radical Reconstruction agenda put forth by the Republican party. In point of fact Africans in this country were voting Republican until the 20th century when there was some slippage in support of Wilson, who promised a fair deal for all, and then reneged, leading to the famous confrontation between Wilson and Monroe Trotter; indeed Africans did not really come out in favor of th e Democrats until the great depression when FDR promised to relieve some of the extreme economic pain, in contrast to the laissez faire policies of the Rep. administration.
Just to get some background on the evolution of the Democratic Party and its relationship to the Africans in the US, I have inserted what PBS, a government funded corporation, says about the history. Remember this is not a revolutionary or nationalist entity saying this but PBS:
=======================
The Democratic Party was formed in 1792, when supporters of Thomas Jefferson began using the name Republicans, or Jeffersonian Republicans, to emphasize its anti-aristocratic policies. It adopted its present name during the Presidency of Andrew Jackson in the 1830s. In the 1840s and '50s, the party was in conflict over extending slavery to the Western territories. Southern Democrats insisted on protecting slavery in all the territories while many Northern Democrats resisted. The party split over the slavery issue in 1860 at its Presidential convention in Charleston, South Carolina. Northern Democrats nominated Stephen Douglas as their candidate, and Southern Democrats adopted a pro-slavery platform and nominated John C. Breckinridge in an election campaign that would be won by Abraham Lincoln and the newly formed Republican Party. After the Civil War, most white Southerners opposed Radical Reconstruction and the Republican Party's support of black civil and political rights.
The Democratic Party identified itself as the "white man's party" and demonized the Republican Party as being "Negro dominated," even though whites were in control. Determined to re-capture the South, Southern Democrats "redeemed" state after state -- sometimes peacefully, other times by fraud and violence. By 1877, when Reconstruction was officially over, the Democratic Party controlled every Southern state.
The South remained a one-party region until the Civil Righ ts movement began in the 1960s. Northern Democrats, most of whom had prejudicial attitudes towards blacks, offered no challenge to the discriminatory policies of the Southern Democrats.
One of the consequences of the Democratic victories in the South was that many Southern Congressmen and Senators were almost automatically re-elected every election. Due to the importance of seniority in the U.S. Congress, Southerners were able to control most of the committees in both houses of Congress and kill any civil rights legislation. Even though Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a Democrat, and a relatively liberal president during the 1930s and '40s, he rarely challenged the powerfully entrenched Southern bloc. When the House passed a federal anti-lynching bill several times in the 1930s, Southern senators filibustered it to death.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/jimcrow/stories_org_democratic.html
ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!
