What went wrong? Why did it devolve into race riots, violent anti-war protests, suburban flight, urban blight, and the shift in allegiance of white middle- and working-class voters to the Republican Party? Is it all LBJ's fault or were there bigger influences at work?
>LBJ implemented those programs as much to make poor voters vote democrat than anything else. They are not much more than vote-buying programs.
Does anyone have sources that back this up? Pic related.
You seem to be confusing a lot of events. The Great Society had nothing to do with the war effort. If anything, the Vietnam War contributed to the rise of the New Left, which left antipoverty programs to slowly die.
"Suburban flight and urban blight" are more the results of demographic shifts that occurred in the 1950's. The trends continued, but only because they had to. Once the middle class leaves the city, the city has no money for schools (generally financed by the property tax), and children born in the inner city stay in poverty. The Great Society was supposed to help this, but not all of the measures got through Congress (where many Southern Dems were still mad about the Civil Rights Act, plus a general bitterness against Johnson).
The shift in voting demographics really didn't come until Reagan. Working-class voters of all races, but especially white, are attracted to the New Right because of God and Guns.
So no, not really his fault, other than his less-than-friendly attitude towards other politicians.
Can't have a major war and all these programs at the same time.
Though it is very sad that most of these programs are either dead or turned into some sort of monstrosity.
>What went wrong?
Big B didn't win...
Honestly, I think if he ran today he would have a shot at the nomination.
>Libertarian principals wrapped in a patriotic conservative package
>Vote on the Civil rights Act
>General pimp from Arizona
>Working-class voters of all races, but especially white, are attracted to the New Right because of God and Guns.
You’re putting the cart before the horse.
The Left (Dems) created and empowered the “God & Guns” conservative Rightwing in the U.S. by abandoning the unionized working class in the late 1960s - early 1970s and throwing all their weight behind every fringe kook element out there, (Blacks, feminists, homosexuals, atheists, illegal Mexicans, etc.) all of which were directly opposed to what average working class Americans were looking for.
I’m 48 years old and remember my parents and neighbors (who weren’t politicized at all) absolutely raging at the Democrat’s plans to bus me and my friends an hour away into the Detroit ghetto, while importing hordes of Black kids into the brand new elementary school right in the middle of our neighborhood.
The average working class White American had nowhere to go but into the arms of the Republicans, who played it for all it was worth.
Irwinn Schiff had a great deal to say about it.
Basically you can't force niggers and white trash to be functional human beings, no matter how many oncentives you give them.
And also the great society created regulations to extend credit to women and minorites, who would not have been otherwise approved because he guaranteed repayment to the banks. And women and minorities, rather than taking out loans for starting businesses and tackling other projects took out consumer loans, and essentially that capital assumes negative value for society as a whole because it is spent and accumulates interest, while adding zero economic growth to the economy.
The Reps problems don’t stem from the “Reagan Democrats” but from their own fringe kook fundie religionist element, who gained increased power and influence when the working class jumped ship to the Reps.
>why can't the god damn bl-cks just get it together
They were getting it together until LBJ’s “Great Society” absolutely fucked them.
Despite all the hurdles facing Blacks in America, their post-Civil War history up until the late 1960s was one of slow but steady improvement within a rich and unified sub-culture. After LBJ put them on the “government plantation”, Black-American society went straight down the toilet.
This, even most liberals agree that the black family and black wealth and status were generally stable and increasing through the 1930s at the least. For some reason they also agree that black society declined after desegregation but they are unable to come up with an answer that corresponds with historical reality and instead blame it on everything but destructive liberal policies and programs.
Son, I was there. The Dems wanted to shove me on a bus and ship me an hour away to some run-down ghetto school in Detroit, as this would somehow cure my parent’s of their “racism” for working hard and paying their taxes...
Nah, the Religious element came in WITH the working class whites. The thing to understand about the religious kooks is that they're actually playing to class.
Because as it turns out yes, a lot of poor people are religious. And a lot of these angry poor people don't really care that the religious stances piss of the 'right' sort of people. That is, in their mind, a bonus if anything.
The real split is between the parties populist base and economic elite. Now, the democrats have just as much of a contradiction about their base, and where their money comes from, but they have managed to pretty well convince the poor urban blacks that their economic interests align with whites in Portland.
The problem is the Republican party can't do the same anymore. They fucked up the economy, and haven't even thought about how they're going to get out of it, while their elite wants to pull it even further away from it's base then ever. At this point, they're openly contemptuous of poor, angry whites.
When significant numbers of young blacks were being sent to some place halfway across the world, which they probably couldn't locate on a globe either, to fight a war set up by the establishment of old white men, while young whites got university student exemptions, it's not hard to see why blacks were getting pissed off at that same establishment.
You're bundling a lot of things together. I'll write down a few broad thoughts on the matter as food for thought.
First, desegregation was a clusterfuck. The integration of blacks into white society is contingent on the destruction of the black identity which was solidifying at the time. And while genetics may not play a direct role in determining the intelligence of blacks, it does express itself in physical features that make them easily distinguishable from other races. Unless there's a religious awakening or some new labor movement, I doubt the racial divide will be breached anytime soon.
White flight was and is mostly due to the fact the cities failed to maintain a level of infrastructure necessary to make workers think that living in the city is worth the cost, while the postwar boom died off as Europe and Asia recovered their industrial capacity, leading to increased unemployment.
The people who were most able to escape the city were those who didn't have enough money to not care about the increased cost of the city, but did have enough money to make a daily commute; essentially, the middle class.
Yuri Bezmenov isn't the only person claiming it. Basically an assload of Soviet defectors and ex-KGB and GRU agents (Golitsyn, Kalugin, Lunev) agree on the fact there was a massive psyops operation in the US in order to ignite social unrest and there's a consensus among them that it worked.
I wasn't referring to him, I was referring to you.
You bring nothing to the discussion, all you care about is comforting your own idiotic beliefs by constantly repeating the word "SJW", as if it somehow allows you to circumvent completely valid points.
Well it is certainly true that a large amount of blacks were disenfranchised, which I am sure most people would be able to discern.
Is this your thing, though? Do you just randomly jump into various discussions and then point out a slight error, which in no way diminishes the overall point, with the same rigour of a professor grading papers?
Can I at least assume that you remember to this without any bias whatsoever, pointing out the same inconsequential details among both Stormfags and SJW's?
>claims black people couldn't vote
>later claims this is somehow only a slight error and that his knowledge of history is in fact quite good
Fuck off man. You're a retard. Blacks died in vietnam, whites died in vietnam, and asians died in vietnam. It wasn't good for anyone, except the global elites who have profitted off of every conflict of the 20th century.
When you use buzzwords like "pigeonhole" and "rich old white men" memes, expect to be called an SJW, and then especially expect to be called an idiot when you unabashedly post historical inaccuracies and then try to minimize the inaccuracies to conform to your oh-so-sensitive and nuanced world view.
Please stop posting here until you have educated yourself on the topics being discussed.
I never said rich, white men, I don't know why you are putting what he said on me.
I asked the legitimate question, of why a black man, who was being disenfranchised at home, should feel any obligation to go to war for democracy in another country.
I don't understand why you are raving on about historical inaccuracies, is black disenfranchisement a historical inaccuracy or what?
>is black disenfranchisement a historical inaccuracy or what?
It is when you are referring to it still being present after 1965.
Protip: most American soldiers who fought in Vietnam of all races were "disenfranchised" since the voting age wasn't lowered from 21 to 18 until 1971.
Well that makes sense I guess, though it doesn somewhat imply that all persecution and disenfranchisement stopped immediately after the Voting Rights Act, which I am sure many people would disagree with.
As soon as racism ended the black community experienced uncle tom flight, those who could make it out the ghetto never came back, those left behind lost pillars of the community and ended up trapped in a cycle of poverty in the inner cities. Hence all the "don't forget where you came from" and resentment towards "sell outs".
Some here might argue that this is ok, those who could make it out shouldn't be burdened with other people's problems, and you'd be absolutely right.. However most of these people need not be a burden in the first place.
The way I see it black people are like bombed out stocks, like oil right now. Speculators are panicking and pushing the price excessively low but obviously they are not like blockbuster, kodak or radioshack, when they hit rock bottom they can only go up.
Deindustrialization and the crack epidemic fucked up the urban black communities, not Civil Rights or economic assistance.
>hey stupid nigger, get off the welfare plantation! wait, w-why won't you vote for me???
Stay classy, conservakeks.
No. it just showed that if you're gonna end poverty, go all the way; otherwise, you're gonna have a bunch of poor people not doing anything but committing crimes, ruining normal stable neighborhoods, and collecting free money (welfare).
It's certainly possible that specific programs of the Great Society hindered, rather than helped, but I hardly take that to mean that neoliberalism is the solution to the racial woes of the U.S.
>black people are slowly improving their communities
>they start voting democrat because of LBJ
>their communities stagnate for 50 years, making no improvements at all
>end up protesting the same shit as they were 50 years ago
>they still vote democrat
But black voters stuck with the Democrats afterwards, with a brief exception made for Eisenhower (who would be considered a communist RINO by contemporary right-wingers)
The "welfare plantation" meme is quite literally racist bullshit that only serves to further alienate black voters from the right.
Of course a bunch of ex-soviet intelligence workers are going to brag and overblow their accomplishments, but are you seriously saying the social unrest of the 60s was entirely a product of espionage and not the results of racial tensions and a new generation of Americans rejecting the values of their parents?
At the end of the day, the Democrat Party stands to gain more as long as minorities stay poor, dependent, and afraid
so whose fault is it that the black community has made almost no progress, do you think
why do you think the DNC is fine with importing millions of new immigrants every year to compete for lower class and entry level jobs
LBJ launched the war on poverty and racial inequality and planned to win it by redistributing wealth and pushing numbers-based racial remedies. An almost bewildering array of Great Society programs was launched to accomplish. Author Riley's book reviews the track record of such efforts over the past half century. He contends they have slowed the self-development necessary to advance. Minimum-wage laws have priced blacks out of the labor force, affirmative action in higher education has brought fewer black college graduates (especially in math and science) than we'd have without racial preferences, and soft-on-crime laws make black neighborhoods more dangerous.
The Obama presidency demonstrates that blacks have progressed politically, but evidence from other groups indicates that black social and economic problems are less about politics than they are about culture. Persistently high black jobless rates are more due to unemployability than discrimination in hiring, the black-white learning gap stems from a shortage of education choices for ghetto children - not biased tests or a shortage of funding, and the real reason our prisons house so many blacks is black behavior - behavior too often celebrated in black culture.
Thomas Sowell's research has shown that political activity generally has not been a factor in the rise of groups from poverty to prosperity. Many Germans, for example, came to the U.S. as indentured servants during colonial times and shunned politics while working to pay off those debts. Asians have little political clout in the U.S., tending to avoid politics - yet, they have done quite well economically. Sowell found similar patterns elsewhere. On the other hand, Irish immigrants' rise from poverty in the U.S. was especially slow, despite the fact that Irish-run political organizations dominated local government in several big cities. Per Michael Barone, it was only after the decline of Irish political machines that average Irish incomes began to r
This is a bold book. The author has put a target on his back, writing as a black man who opposes policies misguidedly aimed at helping blacks in America. Riley is not a mere pundit or spectator. He writes as someone who knows firsthand the pain and difficulty of discrimination.
Riley does not argue that the problematic policies are paternalistic and offensive, but rather that they are misguided and do not work. Most obviously, the minimum wage hurts low-skilled young blacks, who employers cannot afford to hire at the minimum wage, never mind at an increased minimum wage. It is just basic economics that the minimum wage hurts those at the bottom of the economic scale. Riley presents the history of the minimum wage, which was consciously constructed to keep blacks and others out of the work force. And he presents the evidence that blacks continue to be hurt by the minimum wage despite the ignorant good intentions of those who call for increases in the minimum wage.
Also obviously, blacks are hurt by the lack of school choice thanks to the teachers’ unions.
More surprisingly, Riley argues that black politicians and black political power have not helped blacks socioeconomically.
Most surprisingly, Riley makes the argument that affirmative action has actually hurt blacks. The evidence from California and elsewhere is that blacks have greater success in college in the absence of affirmative action.
There should be a kind of profiles in courage award for authors who are willing to speak the truth when they know they will be vilified for it. If there were, Riley would be the leading candidate for 2014.
Speech by a black man (Jason Riley) destroying the liberal narrative on racism and explaining why liberal policies have destroyed blacks in America
> Nah, the Religious element came in WITH the working class whites.
While Americans were more religious back in the day then we are now, the "Christian Fundamentalist Movement" didn’t exist. Sure there were bat-shit crazy Christian fundies around like today but they weren’t formaly organized as a political movement like they are nowadays, which came about with Reagan’s victory in 1980.
The Christian fundie movement as a political force that the Reps have to now bow down to, was a _reaction_ to attacks against America, Christianity and Western civilization in general by the Democrats in the 1960s - 1970s.
I don't disagree with that. But the "Christian Fundamentalist Movement" as a political movement started as, and always was (it's fairly dead now),a unifying force on a a geographically dispersed, marginalized people.
You don't need to get into attacks on 'america and western civilization in general'. American and western civilization were the ones attacking these people.
> White flight was and is mostly due to the fact the cities failed to maintain a level of infrastructure necessary to make workers think that living in the city is worth the cost
I disagree. While there is no denying the general movement by Americans to the suburbs in the post-WWII period, American big cities were absolutely “livable” and predominantly populated by Whites right up until the late 1960s.
Detroit for example came in 2nd place in the running to host the 1968 Summer Olympics and only happens to world class cities. Detroit was still the high-tech capital of the planet, with best standard of living for the widest percentage of people on Earth. It was literally the best place to live and raise a family and grow old and retire.
Then in 1967, the Riot happened…
This of course resulted in a tidal wave of Whites fleeing to the ‘burbs and then in 1973, Detroit first Black mayor was elected and this forced out the remaining Whites (who by then only got pennies on the dollar for their homes).
But until the 1967 Riot, Detroit and other large American cities were full of White people and nice places to live.
>are you seriously saying the social unrest of the 60s was entirely a product of espionage and not the results of racial tensions and a new generation of Americans rejecting the values of their parents?
(different anon here) Soviet shenanigans didn't _cause_ the unrest in the 60s but they’re interference guaranteed it couldn't be dealt with in a peaceful and civilized manner and would cause the maximum amount of trouble.
It's not like the Soviets were newbies at this kinda thing...
>attacks against America, Christianity and Western civilization in general by the Democrats in the 1960s - 1970s
>No, but a claim that the blacks "couldn't vote" during the Vietnam war certainly makes you a SJW, and a fucking idiot on top of it.
While it wasn’t across-the-board-nation-wide, many Blacks in fact could not vote due to various Jim Crow laws specifically designed to prevent them from voting.
But the problems that resulted from LBJ’s “Great Society” didn’t arise because all Blacks could now freely vote, it happened because Blacks had become wholly dependent on Big Government, be it directly thru welfare benefits or indirectly thru preference for government jobs and quotas imposed in private business.
> In asking how exactly it ruined the African American communtity
LBJ’s “Great Society” eliminated the need to have a traditional family by providing cradle-to-grave welfare benefits for any Black woman who had a baby.
In fact, getting married made those benefits _unavailable_ and now today, 70% of Black kids are born to unwed mothers with the inevitable result their kids grow up to be uncivilized assholes and perpetuate and acerbate the problems within the Black community.
This is then blamed on “White racism”…
> expecting a doctoral thesis on a Tibetan fingerprinting board
Do your own leg-work, I don't really care if you agree with me or not.
Actually yes, that's precisely what I'm claiming. If anything the racial tensions were much higher decades before with the KKK roaming about but it didn't erupt into full blown self-destructive horseshit like in the 60s.
How exactly? KKK didn't cause race riots, the great depression didn't cause race riots, the WW2 didn't cause race riots, Korean war didn't cause race riots, but somehow the Vietnam war did, completely coincidental with former Soviet spies going on record about pouring loads of money into it and infiltrating everything.
>According to Oleg Kalugin, "the Soviet intelligence was really unparalleled. ... The KGB programs — which would run all sorts of congresses, peace congresses, youth congresses, festivals, women's movements, trade union movements, campaigns against U.S. missiles in Europe, campaigns against neutron weapons, allegations that AIDS... was invented by the CIA... all sorts of forgeries and faked material — [were] targeted at politicians, the academic community, at the public at large."
People like Angela Davis and Stokely Carmichael were on Russian payroll.
Interestingly enough though, MLK wasn't, despite the US government suspecting he was a communist. He was of no use to the Russians since he advocated non-violent resistance.
>KKK didn't cause race riots, the great depression didn't cause race riots, the WW2 didn't cause race riots
>But until the 1967 Riot, Detroit and other large American cities were full of White people and nice places to live.
"White flight" was already a thing by the 50's and was driven by desegregation.
>Am I being redpilled?
Pol will basically believe anything you say as long as it's in .jpg form.
Where to even begin with this post.
>democrats abandoning the unionized working class
Are you fucking kidding me? What, those democrats Nixon and Reagan are the ones responsible for dismantling unions
>unions are financially viable in the 21st century anyway
And on to you, Mr. 48 year old
>Child of white middle class in the 70s and 80s
>Oh I've been oppressed by the federal guvment
You came into adulthood during 90s, literally no better time to be a white male in the 20th century other than the 50s. I'm so fucking sick of your generation complaining about how unfairly you've been treated. Enjoy Hilary Clinton '16, its your fault she's going to be president because you can't get over the fact that not everyone confirms to your narrow interpretation of what it means to be a "real American"
> ”White flight" was already a thing by the 50's and was driven by desegregation.
Mrs.JL Wilkes notwithstanding, you’re conflating the post-WWII nation wide movement out to the suburbs that was a result of post-war prosperity and the desire for a 1/4 acre of lawn, with Whites fleeing out of control Blacks which didn’t happen until the late 1960s - early 1970s after mass riots in several major American cities, which was driven by the Civil Rights movement.
Only the Southern working class shifted to the Republicans.
The Northern working class still mostly votes Democratic, largely because of the higher union membership in non-right to work states.