Liberal Policies, Feminism, and their Destruction of the Black Community

At first glance, the title of this thread appears to indicate that my intention is to imply that the sole reason for the destruction of the black community is the enactment of liberal policies coupled with feminism alone. This is not the case. A person’s action is the result of a person’s choice. My intent is to show that the root cause of African Americans’ (in particular) degenerative state came at the embracement of liberal policies, which them lead them to adopt unproductive lifestyles.

It has long been held that the demise of the once strong-knit black community is a direct result of slavery. This is a lie long propagated by many liberals. However, Slavery DID NOT create the trend of broken families and it did not involve the support of destructive behavior.

Immediately after slavery, black families outnumbered whites and other ethnicities in the number of married couples,to include nuclear families. With reconstruction, blacks began to attend college, send their own children to college, own businesses, teach, practice medicine, law, and even held seats in Congress. This is all credited by Republican politicians who sought to not only end slavery, but extended the Right to Vote to blacks. Making this connection, blacks voted Republican hands down, adopting Conservative ideologies, such as aiming to become independent and living a Protestant lifestyle. This included being married before having children, not abusing drugs and alcohol, and had strong work ethics. Fundamentally, they understood the importance of having the man in the home and as head of his household. It allowed the woman to be as nature intended her to be: feminine, nurturing, and domestic.

But then, blacks began to switch political parties ....

During the 1950’s and 1960’s, heated race relations in the United States created a boiling pot of political turmoil. Both President John F. Kennedy and Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. had been assassinated, bringing racial tension to a boiling point as most of Americans saw both assassinations as a threat to any Civil Rights movement advancement. The nation was experiencing a great deal of policy changing, as the reach of government grew larger and the Constitutional values got smaller....

And then came feminism.

Feminism refers to the sentiment that white women felt as they regarded their men (husbands, etc.) as becoming more successful than them with unequal pay. They felt “inferior’ to the white male because they were not able to hold all of the same job positions and even some political statuses as men, and felt a political and social movement was in order to gain this equal footing. Black women, striving to be like their white counterparts, were essentially 'duped' into believing that their men were controlling them and thus joined this movement....

Sadly, it was not intended for them.

Even after slavery, but before feminism and welfare, families were intact with both the father & mother to raise their children who all worked together to form a healthy team. Men went out to work and provided for the rest of the members, while women stayed home and nurtured babies, cleaned the home, and prepared the meals while providing a natural balance to the flow of a family. Instead, with the rise of feminism, women compete against men for jobs and because of this, they are expected to work 40 or more hours per week, leaving babies and young children needing to be reared by nannies or daycare centers, rarely-cleaned homes, and no one home to prepare the meals. Teamwork died. When the woman came home from work, no one was there to help her with the children, and there was usually no time to prepare a good hearty meal. McDonald’s soon became the meal of the day.

Women, before feminism, relied on traditional values and beliefs. Children did not attend daycares very young, to allow their mothers leave their homes and be part of a workforce. Naturally, that was a man’s job. They understood that men needed to be supported and needed; essentially, that was the "woman’s job", so-to-speak. They supported their men not just sexually, but emotionally. Feminism came in and made the man feel weak, and unwanted. How can he go out into the world and be motivated to provide if he doesn’t feel needed at all? Its’ natural for him to feel needed. This duo is the essence of a natural balance.

Feminism was also stated to help usher in the overgrowth of the welfare state.

According to liberals and feminists, the fundamental reasoning for poverty was that it was simply an economic problem. They assumed that poverty victims simply lacked the resources of wealth in the form of capital. Supply them with long term funding, and poverty magically disappears”...

The fact is that poverty is more of a mental state than it is a physical state. It entails a lack of motivation, irresponsibility, drug and alcohol abuse, and violence. These are all results from a dysfunctioning, single-parent household.

Majority of juvenile delinquent teens, and even imprisoned adults come out of single parent homes. Many of these children grow up never knowing their natural fathers. The Father taught the boys respect, responsibility, and most importantly, manhood. Without this, men tend to become effeminate, that is, to carry traits of a woman. They are dramatic, obsess over fashion, can't change oil in a car, live off of their "baby momma's", and tend to argue a lot because they are not equipped to resolve conflict, something learned through manhood.

How did this happen?

Feminism came in and urged women to be ‘sexually liberated’. In other words, be promiscuous because its ‘ok’. This naturally lead to the births of many out-of-wedlocked children. You add that to the welfare programs and at their reward and incentive system. More benefits are allotted to women with multiple children out-of-wedlock.

Liberal policies in general played a huge role in the destruction of the strong, nuclear family, they all agreed. Policies such as legalizing drugs, gay marriage, and abortion were all very detrimental to not only a healthy family, buy a healthy nation. Legalizing drugs sounds to me like an ‘I –can-do-whatever-I want-as long-as it-doesn’t- hurt-anyone childlike attitude”. These proponents aren't realizing that with the freedom of rampant drug use, more irresponsible behavior is bound to follow. More crime, not less crime, as the supporters of this movement would like to argue, because people will not be thinking properly. Reasoning skills are affected under the influence of drugs.

What about abortion?

This is not ‘mistake that just happens’ as its supporters proclaim. The bill allowing abortion, resulting from the 1970’s Supreme Court Case, stands as if it honors women the ‘freedom’ to do with her body as she pleases. However, she is not considering that in doing so, she has now infringed on the body of someone else; the body, or life, of the unborn. Not to mention the cost to tax payers for coverage of these medical expenses for the procedure, as usually these women are already on some form of assistance.

Abortion should not be a "quick fix"...The irresponsible behavior should be stopped before you get to the point of having to ‘fix it’ by taking a life.

Liberal polices mimic this pattern. Curtail and subsidize the behavior after the fact, not stop it before the damage is done. It’s not productive.

What say you?

Sorry but theres so much fail in your post, if you dont like something it dosent mean thats its wrong, the usa as a doctrine of keeping certain people poor, the mass is easier controled by making sure there education keeps them poor.

Drugs legal and illegal is a tool used by government to keep the fringe part of society too busy to care and too busy to affect change.

Abortion is a big no no to touch, if your not a women or a doctor, your opinion means nothing, i am againts abortions but i have no say in its decision.



And for womens right, you gotta be kiding, pretty much saying women became sluts because of feminism, thats so much fail.

dukeofjive696969
Sorry but theres so much fail in your post, if you dont like something it dosent mean thats its wrong, the usa as a doctrine of keeping certain people poor, the mass is easier controled by making sure there education keeps them poor.

Drugs legal and illegal is a tool used by government to keep the fringe part of society too busy to care and too busy to affect change.

Abortion is a big no no to touch, if your not a women or a doctor, your opinion means nothing, i am againts abortions but i have no say in its decision.



And for womens right, you gotta be kiding, pretty much saying women became sluts because of feminism, thats so much fail.

edit on 12-2-2014 by dukeofjive696969 because: (no reason given)

Ahhh...and there are so many spelling and grammatical mistakes in your post. I'll ignore them though and respond to your retort....

At what point did you deconstruct my argument? Which issue, with it's cause and effect, did you prove to be false?

Yes, legalizing abortion was a liberal policy that allowed women to "change their mind" after reproducing irresponsibly. Attack the baby, not the behavior, right?

But the main premise of my argument, which indeed includes feminism, still stands.

Blacks were far better off in the immediate era after slavery, up until the adaptation of feminism and their devotion to the Democratic Party. Show me otherwise.

reply to post by dukeofjive696969


Also, please note that I never justified my claim by simply stating that "I disagree with the policies"...I am dispelling a long-lived liberal myth that the deconstruction of the black family was due to slavery.

I don't disagree with a lot of what you say, but I do hope you brought asbestos underwear.

Great op. S&F.
If you are interested, I have a thread I think you will enjoy. It was my first one (or close to it). I will pm the link to you to keep from disturbing your thread.
Quad

reply to post by Quadrivium



Thanks!!

Please PM the link.

And thanks for responding on here. I wrote about this very topic in an essay for a college course. The professor was a liberal and a feminist (of course), and she really didn't want to grade me fairly. However, she could not deconstruct my argument.

dukeofjive696969
Sorry but theres so much fail in your post, if you dont like something it dosent mean thats its wrong, the usa as a doctrine of keeping certain people poor, the mass is easier controled by making sure there education keeps them poor.

Drugs legal and illegal is a tool used by government to keep the fringe part of society too busy to care and too busy to affect change.

Abortion is a big no no to touch, if your not a women or a doctor, your opinion means nothing, i am againts abortions but i have no say in its decision.



And for womens right, you gotta be kiding, pretty much saying women became sluts because of feminism, thats so much fail.

edit on 12-2-2014 by dukeofjive696969 because: (no reason given)

Wow, do you consider this a legitimate response to his post? How about you argue his points with your own points of view like a rational person instead of just telling him he's "fail" because you don't agree with his point of view? Funny thing is, he mentions in his post exactly what you just proved. You just proved you cannot resolve a conflict with rational thinking, instead resorting to personal attacks, I know something it's something I learned from my father.

QueenofSpades

I don't mean to go step by step through your post deconstructing it, as you said to someone else. It's obvious to me that this is an expression of your own thought-out heart-felt opinion, and as such, you're welcome to it.

A few items though occur to me as I read your words:

1. You're merely using "liberal" and "liberals" as boogey-strawmen in your post. You're grossly over generalizing, jumping over more than a century of American history and implying, for example that a Democrat in 1868 is the same as one in 1968.

2. You imply that the Republican party has always mirrored what exists today, which is simply patently untrue. The Republican party at the time was ANYTHING but Conservative, in fact, they were the rabble-rousers, and the ones working the change the status quo of slavery and discrimination. They were in favor of "national exchanges which secures to the workingmen liberal wages, to agriculture remunerating prices, to mechanics and manufacturers an adequate reward for their skill, labor and enterprise, and to the nation commercial prosperity and independence." They were in favor of free immigration into the Country and against anything that curtailed that process. Were in favor of improvements to national infrastructure and insisted that these were Constitutional. And, they supported Federal subsidies for the establishment of the intercontinental railroad, to name a few. (Republican Party Platform 1860)

3. You imply that after Reconstruction the majority of Black families adopted the lifestyles of their white neighbors. I'm sure there were a few instances of that happening were it was allowed to them, but by and large, the white hegemony South AND North worked to keep segregation in place and maintain the Black population as second-class citizens whenever possible.

4. Blacks began to become Democrats in the 50s and 60s because the Republicans had indeed started shifting toward what they are today, and had no real interest in supporting equal or civil rights, and the Democrats demonstrably did. John F. Kennedy and his brother were among the first to risk the ire of their own party to do the right thing.

... and from there, by and large, your piece merely devolves into typical right-wing cant. Others can take that apart if they wish.

reply to post by Gryphon66


Even though you did absolutely nothing to deconstrut my argument, I'll respond to a few of your points:

1. I never 'implied' that blacks, during Reconstruction, mimicked the lifestyles and morals of their white neighbors. They never 'adopted' any culture's ways, as this being pro-education, having 2 parents in the home, and a good work ethic were THEIR OWN ways.

2. You actually reinforced that the Republican Party worked hard to change the status quo of the day, which was slavery. The Democratic party fought hard to preserve it. How do you not understand which party worked toward the betterment for blacks?

3. Both Civil Rights Acts of 1864 and 1964 were gained by votes of Republican Congress members, even though we had a Democratic president in the office. Check your histry and see how an overwhelmng majority of Democrats fought AGAInST civil rights, both times.

4. Lastly, the DNC remains the same. The party of dependence, especially black dependence. During slavery, the DNC enacted policies to keep blacks dependent- on their slave masters, and today, their policies keep blacks dependent on government.

Different Day, Same Agenda.

reply to post by QueenofSpades


what the hell? i read all your post and i agree with it 80%(except your hate on who and what a family should consist of), and i'm a liberal.


Is Liberal a word for something you don't like? similar to calling someone communist or socialist because you don't agree with it?


I'am liberal about everyone having equal rights, i just don't support feminism, because it ain't equal right anymore, that was achieved in the 80s. My stance on abortion is somewhat in the middle.


edit: im not sure what black community have to do with it, i see how it relates but not enough to be singled out.

QueenofSpades
But then, blacks began to switch political parties ....

Because the Republican party stopped caring for them and refused to end segregation.

Even after slavery, but before feminism and welfare, families were intact with both the father & mother to raise their children who all worked together to form a healthy team. Men went out to work and provided for the rest of the members, while women stayed home and nurtured babies, cleaned the home, and prepared the meals while providing a natural balance to the flow of a family. Instead, with the rise of feminism, women compete against men for jobs and because of this, they are expected to work 40 or more hours per week, leaving babies and young children needing to be reared by nannies or daycare centers, rarely-cleaned homes, and no one home to prepare the meals. Teamwork died. When the woman came home from work, no one was there to help her with the children, and there was usually no time to prepare a good hearty meal. McDonald’s soon became the meal of the day.

You forgot to include the fact that over the last 30 or so years wages have been largely stagnant and haven't risen along with inflation forcing many women to join the workforce so that they could provide the same standard of living that a single income family could provide a decade or two prior.

Women, before feminism, relied on traditional values and beliefs. Children did not attend daycares very young, to allow their mothers leave their homes and be part of a workforce. Naturally, that was a man’s job. They understood that men needed to be supported and needed; essentially, that was the "woman’s job", so-to-speak. They supported their men not just sexually, but emotionally. Feminism came in and made the man feel weak, and unwanted. How can he go out into the world and be motivated to provide if he doesn’t feel needed at all? Its’ natural for him to feel needed. This duo is the essence of a natural balance.

This is super sexist for both genders.

The fact is that poverty is more of a mental state than it is a physical state. It entails a lack of motivation, irresponsibility, drug and alcohol abuse, and violence. These are all results from a dysfunctioning, single-parent household.

Those things aren't the sole purveyors of single-parent homes. First off, show me statistics that say that the majority of single parent homes raise dysfunctional children. Second, you glossed over mental illness which the majority of suffers DO exhibit the behaviors you mentioned.

Majority of juvenile delinquent teens, and even imprisoned adults come out of single parent homes. Many of these children grow up never knowing their natural fathers. The Father taught the boys respect, responsibility, and most importantly, manhood. Without this, men tend to become effeminate, that is, to carry traits of a woman. They are dramatic, obsess over fashion, can't change oil in a car, live off of their "baby momma's", and tend to argue a lot because they are not equipped to resolve conflict, something learned through manhood.

Prove this claim.

Feminism came in and urged women to be ‘sexually liberated’. In other words, be promiscuous because its ‘ok’. This naturally lead to the births of many out-of-wedlocked children. You add that to the welfare programs and at their reward and incentive system. More benefits are allotted to women with multiple children out-of-wedlock.

Promiscuity didn't appear because of that. Women enjoy sex just as much as men. Ever hear of the Kinsey Reports? They were done in the late 40's and published in the early 50's.

Liberal policies in general played a huge role in the destruction of the strong, nuclear family, they all agreed. Policies such as legalizing drugs, gay marriage, and abortion were all very detrimental to not only a healthy family, buy a healthy nation. Legalizing drugs sounds to me like an ‘I –can-do-whatever-I want-as long-as it-doesn’t- hurt-anyone childlike attitude”. These proponents aren't realizing that with the freedom of rampant drug use, more irresponsible behavior is bound to follow. More crime, not less crime, as the supporters of this movement would like to argue, because people will not be thinking properly. Reasoning skills are affected under the influence of drugs.

This is fail reasoning. The fact that humans have functioned and been able to govern themselves for millenia before the War on Drugs started goes to show that you are so completely wrong it isn't even funny. And don't think for a moment that recreational drug use is a modern phenomenon. First, alcohol is a drug, but we can show various other drug uses throughout history including opiates, hallucinogens, marijuana, uppers, and just about anything else that alters your state of mind.

Also how is gay marriage detrimental to a healthy family? How does two gay people getting married make your family worse off? Please explain that reasoning.

What about abortion?

This is not ‘mistake that just happens’ as its supporters proclaim. The bill allowing abortion, resulting from the 1970’s Supreme Court Case, stands as if it honors women the ‘freedom’ to do with her body as she pleases. However, she is not considering that in doing so, she has now infringed on the body of someone else; the body, or life, of the unborn. Not to mention the cost to tax payers for coverage of these medical expenses for the procedure, as usually these women are already on some form of assistance.

Abortion should not be a "quick fix"...The irresponsible behavior should be stopped before you get to the point of having to ‘fix it’ by taking a life.

Look the fact of the matter here is that unwanted pregnancies happen. Women who either don't want to take care of the baby, cannot take care of the baby, or just don't care WILL do abortions. When they are illegal, these women will stoop to unsafe and dangerous methods to do so. I'd rather that they were safe with these procedures. Also abortion isn't a modern phenomenon either. We can find evidence of abortion tracing all the way back to Sumeria.

You know what else can fall under this umbrella? Prostitution. Prostitution being illegal is an example of what abortion would look like if it is illegal. People still solicit prostitutes despite its illegality, but its highly dangerous. STD's, abuse of the prostitutes from their pimps, unfair working conditions and more. If prostitution were legal (like in Nevada) it could be regulated and MUCH safer.

Liberal polices mimic this pattern. Curtail and subsidize the behavior after the fact, not stop it before the damage is done. It’s not productive.

What say you?

Your whole post is a fail and I'm not surprised that others have mentioned this without addressing your points. You are clearly upset that America has gone away from traditional Christian morality, but you disguised your outrage like these are obvious morality issues but I wasn't fooled. You advocate keeping morality illegal, but fail to realize that people will STILL partake in these things regardless of the law except that they will be unsafe when they do so AND be in danger of being incarcerated as well.

reply to post by luciddream


Let me clarify my use of the word 'liberal'.

Many people puport to be on one side of the political spectrum or the other, without really understanding the terms 'conservative' or 'liberal'.

It's all about the way in which you interpret the constitution.

Conservatives support a conservative interpretation of it, meaning, 'by the book', no addition or subtraction to it.

Liberals support a liberal interpretation, meaning 'broad' with room for addition and subtraction to it.

For example, liberals of the DNC supported slavery because even though the constitution said that all men were free, they determined that all were free EXCEPTS blacks.

See?

So when I say liberal, I mean anyone who broadly interprets the constituion. THis is evident of DNC policies. Everyone has the right to Life, Liberty, and Happiness EXCEPT if their life means your discomfort, as in with their policy of abortion.

reply to post by QueenofSpades


Liberalism

Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality.[1] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property.[2][3][4][5][6]

Conservatism

Conservatism as a political and social philosophy promotes retaining traditional social institutions. A person who follows the philosophies of conservatism is referred to as a traditionalist or conservative.

Don't muddy the waters with the definitions used by the talking heads on television.

For instance, your thread is insulting to me as a Libertarian. Libertarians are fiscally conservative and socially liberal and your thread reads as a Republican attack against Democrats like those are the only two political ideologies in the US.

reply to post by Krazysh0t


First, here is a result from some of the first studies in the correlation between single parent criminals vs ones that come from 2 parent homes:

The 1987 "Survey of Youth in Custody" found that 70% did not grow up with both parents. Another 1994 study of Wisconsin juveniles was even more stark: only 13% grew up with their married parents. Here's the conclusion of Cynthia Harper and Sara McLanahan, the doyenne of researchers about single parenthood: "[C]ontrolling for income and all other factors, youths in father-absent families (mother only, mother-stepfather, and relatives/other) still had significantly higher odds of incarceration than those from mother-father families."

Further, you state that blacks started voting for Democrats because....

the Republican Party stopped caring for them?

History of Politics show that the Republican Party, with strong opposition from the Democratic Party:

Were formed from an organization of Abolishionists
Fought to end the status quo of slavery
Enacted the Emancipation Proclamation/ ended slavery
Enacted 13th, 14h, and 15th Amendments which extended rights to former slaves and gave blacks the new Right to Vote
Fought to end Jim Crow
Banned the KKK (formed by the Democratic Party as a terrorist group toward Republicans, mainly black Republicans)
Voted to enact 1964 Civil Rights
Ended segregation and supported Brown v Board of Education

Stop me once I get close showing their lack of care for blacks.....

reply to post by Krazysh0t


I gave a brief description, not a text book, and you know what?

Your definitions still support my definition.

Liberals want liberty, or 'freedom' ....from responisibilty. (ie the institution of slavery, abortion, legalizing drugs, etc....)

Conservatives, even as you stated, seek to retatain tradition, as in the tradition of the words in the Constitution. This is why conservatives are against liberal policies which actually trample on the rights of others.

Liberals support abortion because they do not recognize personhood, as they did not in slavery.....

To me, libertarians, or "democrats-in-denial" simply refuse to give the Republican Party a chance because of the deep indoctrination by liberal leaders, public schools, media, gov't, etc...

reply to post by QueenofSpades


I'll add that without a Conservative interpretation of our Constitution, rights that you currently enjoy are easily eroded.

The framers understood the meanining of freedom and the prevention of an overstepping, out-of-control government.

QueenofSpades
reply to post by Krazysh0t

 

First, here is a result from some of the first studies in the correlation between single parent criminals vs ones that come from 2 parent homes:

The 1987 "Survey of Youth in Custody" found that 70% did not grow up with both parents. Another 1994 study of Wisconsin juveniles was even more stark: only 13% grew up with their married parents. Here's the conclusion of Cynthia Harper and Sara McLanahan, the doyenne of researchers about single parenthood: "[C]ontrolling for income and all other factors, youths in father-absent families (mother only, mother-stepfather, and relatives/other) still had significantly higher odds of incarceration than those from mother-father families."

Further, you state that blacks started voting for Democrats because....

the Republican Party stopped caring for them?

History of Politics show that the Republican Party, with strong opposition from the Democratic Party:

Were formed from an organization of Abolishionists
Fought to end the status quo of slavery
Enacted the Emancipation Proclamation/ ended slavery
Enacted 13th, 14h, and 15th Amendments which extended rights to former slaves and gave blacks the new Right to Vote
Fought to end Jim Crow
Banned the KKK, formed by the Democratic Party as a terrorist group toward Republicans, mainly black Republicans
Voted to enact 1964 Civil Rights
Ended segregation and supported Brown v Board of Education

Stop me once I get close showing their lack of care for blacks.....

First, thank you for the request for the proof, it is the internet after all and this site's motto is deny ignorance. Second, I will cede your point, while you again failed to cite your claims, my own research to try to disprove you disproved me. Though I think you should read this article about the topic of blacks switching from Republican to Democrat:

Why Did the Black Community Leave the GOP for the Democratic Party?

I still think your thread is a fail though since it ties too many things together (feminism, liberalism, black oppression) to paint all Democratic ideals as incorrect, when it reality there are just as many good Democratic ideals as Republican ideals (hence why I'm Libertarian).

reply to post by QueenofSpades

To me, libertarians, or "democrats-in-denial" ...

is the opposite for me, 90% of the Libertarians i met are republicans in denial. Must suck for them to be in the centre.

QueenofSpades
reply to post by Krazysh0t

 

I gave a brief description, not a text book, and you know what?

Your definitions still support my definition.

That is because my definitions are more general then your definitions.

Liberals want liberty, or 'freedom' ....from responisibilty. (ie the institution of slavery, abortion, legalizing drugs, etc....)

This isn't par the course of my definition. You added that "from responsibility" part to the end to paint it in a bad light whereas my definition is neutral.

Conservatives, even as you stated, seek to retatain tradition, as in the tradition of the words in the Constitution. This is why conservatives are against liberal policies which actually trample on the rights of others.

Conservatives want smaller government and respect to the Constitution. You know what wasn't in the Constitution by the way? Drugs, prostitution, abortion, or any other form of morality that you and your fellow Republicans find detestable.

Liberals support abortion because they do not recognize personhood, as they did not in slavery.....

This sounds like you are making up reasons for another person's beliefs. Why don't you let Liberals speak about why they support abortion and not why you THINK they support it?

To me, libertarians, or "democrats-in-denial" simply refuse to give the Republican Party a chance because of the deep indoctrination by liberal leaders, public schools, media, gov't, etc...

edit on 2142014 by QueenofSpades because: (no reason given)

This just shows you have zero clue what the Libertarian party is or stands for.