March 18, 2004
SHOW US THE VOTES:
Blacks Shift to the Center: Why the Democrats are losing their hammerlock on this constituency. (John H. McWhorter, 3/18/04, FrontPage)
There are no indications that voting Republican will become the norm among blacks any time soon — and a good thing, too, because being a slam-dunk voting bloc for a single party means that neither party has any reason to court your vote with meaningful proposals. But more and more, black politics are moving to a constructive center, wary of sad realities but open to the fact that change does happen.In a poll conducted by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies in 2000, for example, 74% of blacks were registered as Democrats. By 2002, that number had fallen to 63%, with about one in four blacks — many of them younger voters — registered as independents.
In a 1995 Gallup poll, almost all blacks favored affirmative action in the form of outreach to minorities, but 78% were opposed to hiring minority applicants when they were less qualified than white ones. [...]
Of course, most of us still know a black person or two who bring to mind Homey the Clown from the television variety classic "In Living Color," painting life as a black person in the U.S. as an endless battle against racist abuse. This ideology, increasingly difficult to square with reality, is a legacy of a stain that the past left on the African American self-image.
In his 1951 classic, "The True Believer," Eric Hoffer noted that fanatic movements attracted people who found a balm for their insecurity by folding themselves into movements that stressed unquestioning allegiance. Forging true progress means engaging with the complexities of the real world, but this requires individual initiative. Therefore, fanatic movements sidestep logical engagement in favor of mythologies and recreational fury. Post-civil rights blacks have been ripe for such ideologies: Left with a sense that one is inferior, nothing could be more soothing than a new identity based on resenting a morally inferior enemy.
For the true believer, a paradisiacal future is the focus, which requires that the present be remorselessly condemned regardless of actual conditions. Hence the black "victicrat's" insistence year after year that "most" black Americans remain mired in misery.
Homey the Clown and Eric Hoffer--now there's a parlay. Meanwhile, we'll withhold judgment on whether black America is moderating until we see if George W. Bush gets back up to at least Reaganesque levels of support in 2004. Posted by Orrin Judd at March 18, 2004 8:44 AM
I would expect Bush's % of the black American vote to rise. In 2000 the Dems were able to portray him as bad for black Americans using scare tactics like the Byrd dragging ad. In 2004 black Americans will have his actual record to judge him by. I don't know if he will reach Reaganesque levels but if black Americans start voting more on issues (i.e. vouchers, gay marriage) that ideology (i.e. always Democrat) he will do better.
Posted by: AWW at March 18, 2004 10:08 AMI am amazed - well, not really - at the lack of reflection in all the stories about Obama potentially making history as the third black senator. So for their unwavering support over the last forty years, blacks have gotten a couple of senators, a governor or two and a few congressmen in ghettoized districts? That's it? Not even a not-worth-a-bucket-of-warm-spit VP nomination? Talk about not getting a decent return on your investment.
Reminds me of the joke about the prostitute who told her roommate she made $1,000.10 for the night. Her roommate asks who paid her the $.10? Her reply was all of them.
Posted by: Rick T. at March 18, 2004 10:29 AMI certainly hope that the black community will begin to demand more in return for their vote - It's painful to see their sycophantic defense of the Democratic party, when the reality is that the GOP, (at least lately), has been far better to blacks, both as a class, and individuals.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at March 18, 2004 12:13 PMUnfortunately, the various Voting Rights Acts requirements taken in conjunction with redistricting have produced "minority districts" that have elected black extremists (in Texas, the recent Congressional primary that saw Chris Bell defeated by nutball Al Green is a good example; Corrine Brown in FL and Sheila Jackson Lee here again in TX might also be good examples). So even though blacks may be moderating in their views, I'm not so sure that blacks are necessarily choosing more moderate leaders. Those are just a few examples, of course, and that's hardly enough for solid conclusions, but it's something I thought I'd throw out.
Posted by: kevin whited at March 18, 2004 1:58 PMThose hemmed-in minority districts are always going to elect nutballs, just like the ones that keep sending Jim McDermott (the Washington state psycho) and Henry Waxman to Congress. A moderate or conservative black candidate (a la JC Watts) is going to win in a Republican district. Someone like Colin Powell or Watts probably wouldn't poll 20% of the vote in Oakland or Compton or South Chicago. And until that changes, the black community will have to be content with what they get now from the Democratic party.
Posted by: jim hamlen at March 18, 2004 4:06 PM"So for their unwavering support over the last forty years, blacks have gotten a couple of senators, a governor or two and a few congressmen in ghettoized districts?"
Don't forget one President (Clinton) and a chance for a second (Kerry)...
Posted by: Ken at March 18, 2004 4:21 PM