Let’s just start this blog off with a bang, shall we? The KKK started off as a group of six young confederate ruffians who, after the Civil War, would ride horses through the countryside committing various acts of mischief while wearing white sheets and pillow cases on their heads. But soon it wasn’t just about having fun anymore and the next thing you know, they became a terrorist organization that terrorized and murdered emancipated slaves. They were supported by plantation owners whose lifestyle was being destroyed by the loss of all that cheap labor. President Ulysses Grant said that the Klan worked “by force and terror to prevent all political action not in accord with the views of the members; to deprive colored citizens of the right to bear arms and of the right to a free ballot; to suppress schools in which colored children were taught and to reduce the colored people to a condition akin to that of slavery.”
I’m not saying that the Democrat party wants to enslave black people and put them to work on cotton plantations. Modern-day servitude is much more subtle and involves enslaving the mind rather than the body. But the end result of many government programs and policies, primarily championed by Democrats, has led to outcomes not all to different from that of the KKK. Let’s examine a few, shall we?
1. “to deprive colored citizens of the right to bear arms” In recent news the Supreme Court struck down a Washington D.C. ban on guns. D.C. is 56% black and only 38% white, and blacks are more likely to be victims of violent crime than whites. Blacks are also less likely to get attention when they become victims of a crime. And so it would seem that of all the law-abiding citizens who need legal access to firearms in order to protect themselves, it would be blacks living in Washington D.C. And yet that’s where the nation’s strictest gun law has been in place for the past five years. Who has traditionally been against the right to bear arms? What party traditionally comes out against law abiding gun owners? Who recently said something about bitter people clinging to their religion and their guns?
2. “to suppress schools in which colored children were taught“ A few years ago Washington D.C. began an experimental voucher program. Long story short, it has worked out really well. So well that it’s scaring the living daylights out of those who have a vested interest in protecting our failing public school system from competition–namely the national teacher’s union and the Democrat party they unabashedly support. The NEA is now pressuring congress (who has control over the program) to get rid of it, lest word get out and people start realizing that vouchers can work, which might lead to more private schools > less public schools > less teachers at public schools > less people paying NEA dues. Just follow the money and it all makes sense.
But who suffers if the vouchers are taken away? Primarily black families living in D.C. “I didn’t know my daughter was an artist until she went to Georgetown Day School,” said Miss Cunningham, 42. “She wouldn’t have gotten those needs met in public school. When I think about that, it brings tears to my eyes.” And if the NEA gets their way with the Democrat-controlled congress how many other artists will go undiscovered? How many other black children will be held back, forced to participate in a failing public school system that can’t succeed no matter how much money is thrown at it?
3. “to reduce the colored people to a condition akin to that of slavery” What is slavery anyway, but complete control by one human being of another? 200 years ago a plantation owner used chains, whips, starvation, and other methods to extract what he wanted from the black population. Today, it’s politicians who are enslaving blacks, primarily Democrats. How do they do it? By keeping blacks from succeeding. “But wait,” you say “aren’t Democrats the ones who are always sticking up for the black community and saying how much they care about them?” Yes, and some slave owners also said they were actually helping their slaves and being charitable towards them.
If you’re a politician then you need votes to survive. One way to get votes is to go out and say what you believe, and then the people who agree with you vote for you. The trouble with this method is that people don’t always agree with you, and so you could get voted out. And so politicians have found ways to create a more “dependable” voting bloc and they do it primarily by making the voting bloc depend on them. Here’s how:
a. Lack of education. It’s easier to control someone who doesn’t have a good education. Educated people tend to ask questions and research things and worst of all–they’re all over the map. People without education don’t ask the hard questions, can more easily be manipulated through emotional but meaningless rhetoric, and best of all–they vote in large blocs which makes it easier to craft an effective message.
b. Bribery. If you can make someone completely dependent on you to put food on their table then you’ve got ‘em where you want ‘em. Tell them that if they don’t vote for you the money flow will stop. Sure, it’s essentially buying votes, but if the Republicans do it by promising tax cuts we Democrats can do it by handing out welfare, right? Ok, so welfare isn’t what it used to be, but government subsidized health care, day care, and a score of other programs are having the same effect.
c. Poverty. People who have money tend to get good educations and they don’t need to be bribed, so we’ve got to keep people poor if we want to control them. The nice thing here is that if we can keep them from getting a good education, then of course they’re not going to make much money so it’s a nice self-reinforcing cycle.
d. Family. Children raised in homes with a mother and father tend to be more stable, which can lead to less poverty, better education, and other good things which would cause a lot of problems for this plan we Democrats have. But if we encourage teenage sexual experimentation through sex-ed classes, giving out condoms, and promising free abortions as a backup, we can increase the likelihood these people won’t ever be able to hold together a real family.
e. Scapegoats. Finally, we Democrats need to make sure there’s someone else we can blame for all this mess we’ve created while we tell the blacks we’ve got the solution. Sure, we’ve been telling them that for decades now and things haven’t gotten better, and maybe they’ll catch on some day, but let’s ride it out as long as we can. So we’ll tell them it’s the fault of Republicans, white people, rich people, and conservatives.
And thus the Democrat party has successfully manipulated the black community into voting in overwhelming numbers for them, election after election. Of course things only seem to get worse, but that’s because of Republicans who hate blacks. Nevermind that Martin Luther King was a Republican (they didn’t teach you that in school, did they?), or that it was a Republican president who oversaw the Civil Rights Act, integrated the armed services, was the first president to elevate an African-American to an executive level position in the White House, established the first comprehensive regulations prohibiting racial discrimination in the federal workforce, and was the first president since Reconstruction to meet personally in the White House with black civil rights leaders. Colin Powell and Condaleeza Rice–who hired them? A Republican. Who nominated the first black justice to the Supreme Court? A Republican. And yet somehow Republicans get labeled as being the racist party against blacks.
The aim of the KKK was to hold blacks back and make sure they didn’t have access to the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Even today, too many blacks in too many cities in the US have difficulty achieving those rights. And it will continue to be that way until they recognize who’s really holding them back, and which party is more similar to the KKK. Lies are made of words, but results don’t lie. Look at the results and it starts to become clear.
This is brilliant!