[RD] "Race"-based Gerrymandering

I was also told by several Americans now that America is in part so racially segregated due to "redlining"

Accurate. If someone my age who is black inherits the house they grew up in, that house will be in a former red-line district and will have a far lower market value than similar houses in surrounding "better" areas. The participants in the current market won't even know why; bad schools, bad reputations, regarding building codes, utilities, infrastructure, relations with law enforcement...all are results of redlining that persist today. So even the most American of all generational wealth builders, the family home, is currently just beginning to be accessed. That makes it harder to 'move on up' to that deluxe apartment in the sky.
 
Not only am I aware, I can remember when it began happening. And it didn't happen everywhere but spread slowly. First by activists and leftist intelligensia.
Lee Atwood is a member of the leftist intelligentsia?

Black pride campaigns began but typically by leftists. Black pastors did not encourage it in general.
Are you unfamiliar with people like Marcus Garvey or people like WEB Du Bois whose anti-racism activities lead them into sympathy for socialism? The involvement of religious figures was very much a late arrival to the civil rights movement.

EDIT: Also, could you please use the quote function when replying to people? Your post was the last one on the page and I almost missed it. I really don't want you to think I am just ignoring your responses.
 
Lee Atwood is a member of the leftist intelligentsia?


Are you unfamiliar with people like Marcus Garvey or people like WEB Du Bois whose anti-racism activities lead them into sympathy for socialism? The involvement of religious figures was very much a late arrival to the civil rights movement.

EDIT: Also, could you please use the quote function when replying to people? Your post was the last one on the page and I almost missed it. I really don't want you to think I am just ignoring your responses.
What???

I was talking about leftist intelligensia initiating the new term African-American, and you thought I belived that Lee Attwater, a notorious figure among the GOP, was a leftist??? Wow, what a leap. I am speechless.

Of course I know about Marcus Garvey (1914), the black nationalist who thought all black people should go back to Africa replicating the horrible Liberia experiment (1816)started nearly a hundred years prior. What are you talking about? And how does that relate to my post???

And WEB DuBois was a brilliant man who wrote The Souls of Black Folk. I actually referred to this earlier,perhaps days ago, as Democrats though horrid despicable censored word were animals ie lacking souls. He was a Marxist later which pretty much ruined his message in those days and for decades even quoting him was an iffy proposition. I highly recommend reading his book. He didn't say African-American..maybe he adopted it later?


How crazy a post! Christian figures especially pastors were instrumental in civil rights since the first slaves existed. Oh brother! In the New World that began with a priest who basically was the first abolitionist...in the 16th century!
 
Last edited:
What???

I was talking about leftist intelligensia initiating the new term African-American, and you thought I belived that Lee Attwater, a notorious figure among the GOP, was a leftist??? Wow, what a leap. I am speechless.
I thought you were referring to Atwater said because that was the gist of my post. (You see, this is why the quote function is important!)

Of course I know about Marcus Garvey, the black nationalist who thought all black people should go back to Africa replicating the horrible Liberia experiment started nearly a hundred years prior. What are you talking about? And how does that relate to my post???
You had said:
Black pride campaigns began but typically by leftists.
Marcus Garvey was emphatically not a leftist (he despised the Communist Party) and du Bois came into his sympathy for socialism as a result of his anti-racism activities. He wasn't, as you seem to have implied, some leftist coming in to start up trouble.

How crazy a post! Christian figures especially pastors were instrumental in civil rights since the first saves existed. Oh brother!
First, I'm hardly a grammar Nazi, but I encourage you to read over your posts as there are sections - and at times whole sentences- that make no sense. Like the bolded part.
Second, the founders of the NAACP and many early civil rights activists were not religious figures. The involvement of religious leaders in civil rights really only began taking off in the 50s. In cases like the Scottsboro Boys, it wasn't religious figures or leadership coming to their defense, it was the Communist Party and non-religious reformists.
 
And in republican districts it's used as a way to ensure that republicans stay in power.

Both sides flagrantly engage in gerrymandering, and when you get "bipartisan" based splits it almost always results in splits that retain the same people in power...for both parties. "Fair because we both agree we like our own jobs" indeed.

The easiest/best way to stop this nonsense is to destroy its incentive, which means reworking how voting works in this country. If you don't do that, elected representation will consistently misalign with population.
 
Christian abolitionists have been around since the first slaves were taken to the New World, and also taken as slaves in the New World ie indigenous people. That is in the 16th century.

Then the next wave began by Christians in the American colonies.

Then there was an organized abolitionist movement by Christians prior to the Civil War.

Then Christian uplift programs which included African Americans in urban areas during the reformers at the turn of the century.

Then far later, and I am just posting bullet points, the 1950s with Christians and Jews involved directly and by donations for diverse things like facilitating the NAACP, the National Urban League, the Congress for Racial Equality, etc etc. These were full of Christians. There were special initiatives for voter drives and getting around poll taxes.

Have you actually taken a single class in African American Studies? Or a generalized diversity class??? Because you are ignoring like 300 years of civil rights history.

Who said Marcus Garvey was a leftist???

I was specifically discussing how and when the term "African-American" unfolded in the sixties, and you started a generalized black history inquiry.

If typos get you, then ignore my posts. No skin off my nose. I am typing furiously on a tablet with big hands and using Android software which the forum does not like. It hangs all the time..just locks up.

I find the disingenuous idea that blacks affect housing prices to be nonsense. That happened in the seventies. If it happens today, maybe in some squalid hillybilly town...but I scoff at that. There are African Americans living all around me, and always have been, and this is not my first house by any means. They do not affect the home sale prices whatsoever. That includes homes which professionals buy ie physicians and lawyers because golly we have African American professionals gasp. Oh Brother.

Some totally regressive wantonly racist moron will insist this is so on occasion, but I have never seen that to be true.

If some lazy person who happens to be black, does egregious things like puts a car up on cinder blocks, then yeah it could lower the prices. Most African Americans go out of their way to ensure the lawn is cut, carefully trimmed, avoiding leaving things in the yard like toys, because of concern about being judged by a different more rigorous standard.

For example, CORE started with the Fellowship of Reconcilliation, an interfaith organization that existed internationally and domestically.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fellowship_of_Reconciliation

The FOR USA claims to be the "largest, oldest interfaith peace and justice organization in the United States."[3] Its programs and projects involve domestic as well as international issues, and generally emphasize nonviolent alternatives to conflict and the rights of conscience. Unlike the U.K. movements, it is an interfaith body, though its historic roots are in Christianity.
 
Last edited:
Both sides flagrantly engage in gerrymandering, and when you get "bipartisan" based splits it almost always results in splits that retain the same people in power...for both parties. "Fair because we both agree we like our own jobs" indeed.

The easiest/best way to stop this nonsense is to destroy its incentive, which means reworking how voting works in this country. If you don't do that, elected representation will consistently misalign with population.
This is true but it's worth pointing out that one side has gone completely overboard in their pursuit of gerrymandering as one of their primary strategies for winning elections.
 
This spinning of African American history in which the Democrats changed somehow in the 1900s and became benefactors is frankly a bunch of horse hockey.

Rather, that time is full of horrific lynching and generalized intimidation by Democrats. I am curious where in the heck you studied such nonsense?

Did some Democrats help African Americans during the New Deal? Undoubtedly but there was pernicious racism throughout the Democrats even then.

And excising the religious beliefs of thousands and thousands of pioneering civil rights advocates is absurd. I guess a Marxist history, maybe used during the 1950's in the USSR classrooms might have told such absurdities.
 
North Carolina Congressional Map Ruled Unconstitutionally Gerrymandered

Judges have directed NC to redraw the map before the midterms this year.

Also worthy of note - apparently the legislature of NC not only gerrymandered but created an intentional shortage of voting machines to make sure that lines to vote in democratic-leaning districts were hours long.
Or as fox news would call it "Judiciary violates NC's states rights"
Will they actually do anything about this or will sessions give them an amnesty or something.
 
This is true but it's worth pointing out that one side has gone completely overboard in their pursuit of gerrymandering as one of their primary strategies for winning elections.

In all fairness, it just depends on who's in power. In Illinois, most believe the Dems have gone completely overboard in gerrymandering because they know they can get away with it. I'll concede the Repub are a tad more ruthless about it but not to the extent most here seem to claim.
 
In all fairness, it just depends on who's in power. In Illinois, most believe the Dems have gone completely overboard in gerrymandering because they know they can get away with it. I'll concede the Repub are a tad more ruthless about it but not to the extent most here seem to claim.
False equivalency at work.
 
I disagree, I think the main reason that people think the Republicans are worse is because they control more state houses. The Democrats do it where they're in control so if they controlled more state houses, the perception would be different.
 
Also worthy of note - apparently the legislature of NC not only gerrymandered but created an intentional shortage of voting machines to make sure that lines to vote in democratic-leaning districts were hours long.

Don't you guys have some sort of a legal body that makes sure that elections are fair?
 
California delegation is 39/14, which isn't terrible considering how left wing it is as a whole. Washington is 6/4. NY is 18/9. Those are very blue states. If they're gerrymandering they're not doing it very well

Edit : Even Illinois is 11/7, which is quite nice for republicans
 
As Boots once pointed out, IL is a more even mix than most states of Huge City/Surrounding Suburban Sprawl/Everyone Else(regional cities, small towns, rural).

He had numbers. I forget what they are, but I thought they were in the neighborhood of a third a third and a third. You should track how often we run straight supermajorities within the statehouse. Back up to two D federal senators, but we did have one R last time: but then he had a stroke and made a stroke-level mistake in a debate with a particularly sharp opponent. He wasn't going to win anyways. Duckworth was unstoppable. Wonder if she'll keep up the momentum, or lose it like Carol Moseley Braun seemed to.
 
I don't doubt that the state houses are gerrymandered, and that's a problem too. But the federal districts are ok. In 2016, taking into account only D vs R, the presidential election went 59/41 when your house delegation went 11/7 (which means 61/39). Compare that to Virginia.
 
Sure, and compare the hispanicness of the 4th and read why it's drawn that way from the case that decided how it was to be drawn. Everyone tweaks stuff around to feed their political projects. Now I'm not certain packing a 74% hispanic/51% white district by carving out earmuffs in the electoral map is necessarily a horrible thing, and I even like some of the stuff that Congressman Gutiérrez says, but it really makes the principles hard to argue. Since we aren't arguing for a-political drawings of boundaries anymore if you're cool with how IL does it. What we're arguing for is politically-drawn boundaries that we like.
 
Fair? We have no simple system like Costa Rica where an indelible ink is applied to the thumb and cast your vote.

And people are terrified of voter id cards even though you need an official photo id for everything.

We have no idea if only citizens are voting and there are high estimates of abuse. Likewise a lot of dead Democrats vote.
 
California delegation is 39/14, which isn't terrible considering how left wing it is as a whole. Washington is 6/4. NY is 18/9. Those are very blue states. If they're gerrymandering they're not doing it very well

Edit : Even Illinois is 11/7, which is quite nice for republicans

Maryland
(That map is truly horrible)
 
Back
Top Bottom