Reparations: A Wrong Answer and Sure Road to Democrat Party Defeat

In addition to Bernie Sanders' - in my view, insane - talk about socialism, one other issue being pressed by far left Democrats could help re-elect Donald Trump and, of course, in the process achieve the exact opposite of what these ultra-liberals want.  That issue is reparations for slavery which will (i) push many working class whites firmly into Trump's waiting arms, and (ii) ignores the fact that far more whites than blacks are living in poverty.  In a perfect world, it would be nice to have a magic wand and be able to erase slavery and Jim Crow from America's history, yet the push for reparations will likely only exacerbate racial division, especially among poorer whites who would rightly or wrongly likely view reparations as "those people" getting special rights at their own expense.  Indeed, Trump's 2016 calls to stir up racial division would likely be greatly intensified in 2020.  A piece in The Atlantic by a black authors argues that reparations is not the way to remedy the situation and that the battle against poverty needs to be a collective fight.  Here are article highlights:

Juneteenth—the annual celebration of when enslaved people in Texas learned of their freedom—brought two hearings this year on Capitol Hill. The first was widely covered. The House Judiciary Committee looked at H.R. 40, a proposal to create a commission to study reparations for slavery and subsequent discrimination. Witnesses debated the utility and justice of pursuing financial reparations to right some of the wrongs that, past and present, have kept black people economically disadvantaged in the United States.

At the same time, the House Budget Committee held a hearing on poverty in America, which drew a fraction of the media coverage. In that hearing, the economic disadvantages facing African Americans were only part of the story—because less than one-quarter of Americans living in poverty are black.

Slavery, and the systemic racism that has disadvantaged blacks in its aftermath, cannot be forgiven or forgotten. But reparations are not the answer. We cannot fix these injustices by emulating the my-race-first policies that birthed it. While the suffering of blacks hits close to home for me, it also pains me to see someone of another race or ethnicity degraded by the way our country forces poor people to live.

When blacks demand that our poverty be alleviated, it’s simply a matter of one race prioritizing its path to living well, when we should be fighting for everyone to live well. Prioritizing the economic needs of those who share my ethnicity, while so many others are suffering along with us, is morally wrong. The struggle against poverty needs to be a collective fight.

“We are tired of the racialization of poverty, the partisanism of poverty,” William Barber II, a Protestant minister who is a co-leader of the Poor People’s Campaign, told the members of the Budget Committee. More whites live in poverty than people of any other ethnic or racial group; a higher percentage of Native Americans live in poverty than members of any other ethnicity. Poverty isn’t a black problem, but an American problem, Barber told the committee, just as he had told the nine Democratic presidential candidates who spoke to the Moral Action Congress convened by the Poor People’s Campaign in Washington, D.C., earlier that week.

[T]he prevailing system in the United States isn’t white supremacy, but rather, economic oligarchy. And too much of the discussion of racism adopts the language of oligarchy, offering economic ascension as an antidote.

While racial inequality is sometimes quantified in other ways—by the composition of the prison population, levels of education, or health—it is most often quantified by dollars, and how many one has. In 2018, the Equality of Opportunity Project released the results of a multiyear study of economic mobility. Most of its findings were about economic opportunity. People homed in on its statistics about black boys, who had much less of a chance of rising to a different economic tier than the one into which they were born, or of staying rich, than white boys. Less was said about Native Americans, who, the study’s statistics showed, were about as poor as blacks, or about Asian Americans, who had a better chance to rise economically than whites.

Reparations are often presented in terms that are meaningful within an oligarchic system: A long history of racist practices has created economic inequality between blacks and whites. Of this, there is no doubt. But this is not the racial wealth gap; it is merely a racial wealth gap. One goal of reparations is to close this gap. But that adopts the logic of oligarchy, instead of challenging it. More black people reaching higher wealth tiers, and then living in the cocoon those tiers provide? That’s not something I am willing to fight for.

Barber and Liz Theoharis, the other co-leader of the Poor People’s Campaign, presented a “moral budget” to the committee. It aimed to show that the alleviation of poverty and its degradations is not only a moral demand, but that these goals make good economic sense. . . . The principle behind the movement remains the same as it was in 1968. People of all races who oppose this system of inequality and suffering, and the demonization of the poor, must act as a single force.

[Martin Luther] King was focused on the oligarchic class—or “Bourbon class,” as he called it—and its promotion of a strategic form of divide and conquer, pitting poor blacks against poor whites. Howard University’s E. Franklin Frazier had written about this strategy in his popular book, Black Bourgeoisie, a decade earlier, in 1957. Other scholars before and since have pointed to the post-slavery origins of voter suppression in service of what the wealthy, white, land-owning class publicly called white supremacy. But they had a dual aim, ensuring that poor whites were not part of the supreme.

This is not to argue for an equivalence of historical suffering between whites and blacks, but to emphasize that white supremacy in the U.S. is a strategy, not a system. The system is an economic oligarchy, and racism is an extremely effective tactic for perpetuating it. And the debate over reparations confuses the system with just one of the tactics that sustains it.

Reparations would address the financial ramifications of the racism that stymies blacks from “winning,” and knocks those blacks who have won back down. But they would not right the wrong of a supremacist society that is designed to create a class of winners and a mass of losers, and to do so, in part, by isolating aspirants from those they leave behind.

I switched away from the H.R. 40 hearings to focus on the debate over the more encompassing wrong. The focus should be on transforming the oligarchy, not on lifting up any one segment of society.

Reparations are a sideshow. We are living in the now, in which millions of people of all races and ethnicities are forced into degradation, ill health, and despair in this rich nation. Overturning that system is a goal that is not out of reach for a people who had the intellectual, political, and social will to survive slavery and beat back Jim Crow.

The author is correct.  Reparations are a side show, but one that, if pushed, will only serve to defeat politicians seeking to right the wrongs of today's economic system.  Worse yet, it will maintain in office those who most promote hate and racial division.  Let's hope Democrats aren't foolish enough take the reparations bait.  

A Democrat Recipe for Political Suicide

Democrat circular firing squad.

From my days years ago as a Republican activist I know one thing for certain: the GOP understands something liberal Democrats are oblivious to, namely, that you have to win elections in order to accomplish goals.  And to win elections, you do not embrace an agenda that will hand you opponents something they can use to bludgeon your candidates with and that has the potential to drive voters into the arms of the competing political party. Lose the moderates and you lose the election. Forget that whites still make up a majority of the electorate, you lose the election. 

The far left in the Democrat Party is clueless about these realities.  Politics involves winning elections so you can implement change. At a time when the Democrats have a perfect opportunity to win back the White House and to take control of the General Assembly here in Virginia, some House Democrats are pushing the issue of "reparations" for African-Americans, a theme which I readily see the GOP using to outrage the very working class whites that Democrats need to win back to win in 2020.  Do things need to be done to assist blacks in achieving the so-called American Dream? Most certainly, but using the term "reparations" is absolute idiocy! Can't you hear Trump and his minions and Fox News talking heads bellowing how Democrats want to take money from some and write checks to others?  Add this to the Democrats' ridiculous "purity" police efforts and the whining of some about the "whiteness" of the current top three presidential nomination contenders in the polls and the Trump and the GOP must be smiling broadly  Democrats are their own worse enemy.  A piece in Politico looks at this issue which may prove radioactive to Democrat election efforts:

Democrats have sidestepped the debate over reparations for African-Americans for decades. But now the issue is bubbling up in the House, and the new majority is wrestling with how to tackle it ahead of the 2020 campaign.

Sparked in part by the support of several presidential contenders, the topic has been discussed multiple times by top House Democrats, including at their retreat in the exurbs of Virginia earlier this month.

But the issue is likely to divide the party — not just by race, but by generation. The Congressional Black Caucus is notably split, with some younger African-American lawmakers clamoring to force the conversation into the open while more senior members worry about alienating moderate voters.

A discussion over reparations isn’t without risk, however, according to Clyburn and some other senior lawmakers and aides. Forcing the issue would likely open Democrats up to attacks from Republicans during the 2020 race.

But avoiding it — especially with Democrats controlling the House with the most diverse caucus in history — could also turn off voters of color who think it’s an important conversation to have, especially with President Donald Trump in the White House and white nationalism on the rise.

“As this administration has seemed to be forcing certain issues, I think that everybody wants to have an honest discussion about everybody who is in this country,” Clyburn said.

That Democrats are seriously entertaining such a response to the bitter legacy of slavery and discrimination against African-Americans underscores how quickly the party has shifted in recent years. While Barack Obama opposed reparations as a presidential candidate, White House hopefuls like Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and former HUD Secretary Julián Castro have warmed to it.

While some Democrats worry even the word “reparations” is too controversial because it could conjure the notion of direct payments to descendants of slaves, supporters note that they’re talking about something potentially much broader.

Some Democrats, including Clyburn, said they support doing the study but note the process would take years to complete — if the bill was ever passed by the GOP-controlled Senate and signed by Trump — and that there are more immediate ways to help African-Americans and other underserved communities right now.

With that in mind, Democrats are expected to use the appropriations process in the coming months to steer more federal dollars toward programs that directly benefit minority communities. Some examples include programs that aim to increase the number of doctors and nurses in minority communities, address food deserts in underserved neighborhoods and pump more money into preserving historically black colleges and universities.

“I’m all for repairing the faults that exist in the country rather than waiting on somebody to do a study and then making recommendations,” Clyburn said.

The issue came up at least twice during Democrats’ retreat in Leesburg, Va., at which the party celebrated 100 days in power and discussed the next pieces of their agenda. But right now, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Cheri Bustos said she doesn’t see it becoming a prominent part of the campaign and the issue hasn’t been raised by voters in DCCC polling.

Other lawmakers said the public isn’t paying attention to the debate.

Rep. Joe Cunningham, a Democrat who flipped a heavily Republican Charleston-area district in South Carolina that is 19 percent African-American, said reparations didn’t come up during his campaign last year.

“It’s not something that came up in our election,” Cunningham said. “Certain things come up for presidential elections and come up every cycle — you know this stuff about the Electoral College — but from the day-to-day stuff I think the people are talking about other issues like the cost of their health care.”

Cunningham hit the nail on the head: talk about things that will win support of a majority of voters of all races, like health care and pocket book items.   No doubt some will call me a racist based on this post, but if your team doesn't win the election, NONE of your agenda gets accomplished.  Far left Democrats, especially from liberal states and cities forget this reality time and time again. 

Do Christians Owe Reparations to LGBT Americans?

As I have noted in various posts over time, homophobia ALWAYS traces back to Christianity and ignorant batshitery in the Old Testament written by Bronze Age herders who due to ignorance and a desire to be different from surrounding cultures that imposed a harsh condemnation of same sex sexual relations - the ignorant authors did not even have an understanding of homosexuality in its modern meaning.   This Old Testament poison was picked up and spread across the globe by Christian missionaries and by British imperialist as they conquered territories.  Even Islam became more homophobic and less tolerant of  sexual fluidity thanks to the prudish British.  Now, in the wake of the Orlando massacre, a few Christians are beginning to speak out about Christianity's responsibility for homophobia and the continued mistreatment of LGBT individuals.  A piece in Baptist News Global went so far as to make the case that Christians owe reparations, especially on the spiritual front, to the LGBT community.  Here are excerpts:

     One of the encouraging responses I have witnessed in the wake of the mass shooting at the gay nightclub Pulse in Orlando is the admission of guilt on behalf of some churches and religious leaders, recognizing that the perpetuation of our theological messages about LGBTQ people over the years has been death-dealing. Many have seen anew the connection between anti-LGBTQ theological narratives and the perpetuation of violence against LGBTQ people in society. Others now recognize that even our silent complicity in this spiritual violence has a high cost.

    [A]nti-LGBTQ violence is fueled by theological narratives. In sum, for generations, the denigration of LGBTQ people has appealed for validation to the most powerful language and symbols available to humanity, setting messages of scorn within an ultimate context by conscripting sacred text and even the mind of God in the justification of oppressive activity. The theological maligning of LGBTQ lives makes it easy to know who it is theologically appropriate to hate, whose bodies are fitting targets for violence, and whose souls even God couldn’t care less about. 

     For LGBTQ people, the mechanisms of oppression have nearly always been waged first against our souls. But it never ends there. This spiritual violence has led to innumerable suicides, hate crime violence beyond what we know through the collected statistics, and the marginalization of LGBTQ people in the very institutions they should feel most at home: their families, their churches, and their communities.

    Feeling remorseful for this history of theological violence against LGBTQ souls isn’t enough to cultivate spiritual and physical wellbeing for new generations of LGBTQ teens, or to make our churches more welcoming spaces for the fullness of LGBTQ lives, or to heal the deep wounds of our religious institutions wrought by severing parts of our collective body asunder through spiritual violence. Rooting our response in the gospel, our call is not simply to feel guilt over past harm or even to ameliorate of future harm, but to heal the wounded and bind up the broken and to become repairers of the breach we have created. In the case of battles waged against the souls of queer folk, our reparations for wrongdoing must address the ways we’ve spiritually and theologically structured our lives and institutions to marginalize, silence, and spiritually harm LGBTQ people for generations and to repair the damage wrought by this violence.

     These spiritual reparations might look something like:·        Supporting initiatives to help homeless LGBTQ youth in your city in response to the ways theological narratives about LGBTQ people have wreaked havoc on families that reject their queer children based on these narratives’ implicit and explicit messages.·        Supporting initiatives to address LGBTQ suicide in response to the ways theological narratives about LGBTQ people have wreaked havoc upon the psyches and souls of LGBTQ people, at times making life seem unlivable.
·        our church being the first to respond vocally and prophetically in public spaces to the attempt to pass laws that harm LGBTQ people in your community and building coalitions to eradicate those laws that already do, and risking something of your own institutional life to do so.
·        Standing up to sibling congregations and denominational bodies that perpetuate anti-LGBTQ theological messages, holding them accountable for the soul violence they are doing to LGBTQ people.