PDA

View Full Version : Isn't this quaint?




tod evans
08-24-2015, 05:47 AM
WaPo Writer: Black Votes Should Count For More Than White Votes

http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/23/wapo-writer-black-votes-should-count-for-more-than-white-votes/

A writer over at The Washington Post has a bold new proposal he believes can heal the American racial divide: empower blacks by making their votes count more than those of other races.

“Racial reconciliation is impossible without some kind of broad-based, systemic reparations,” writes Theodore R. Johnson, a former White House fellow and current Ph.D candidate in law and policy at Northeastern University. “But if a pecuniary answer can’t fix the structural disadvantage — and it can’t — what can?”

The answer, Johnson argues, is simple: weighted voting, where black votes count for more than white ones. Specifically, Johnson suggests giving each black person five-thirds of a vote, to reverse the old three-fifths compromise written into the U.S. Constitution.

As Johnson gleefully notes, counting black votes more than others would significantly alter many elections in the U.S. In the 2012 election, several Southern states with high black populations, such as Mississippi and Georgia, would have swung over to Barack Obama’s column, and their recent Senate races would have been decided in Democrats’ favor as well.

Johnson justifies his argument by saying it’s the only way to solve the “structural disadvantages” faced by blacks.

“A five-thirds compromise would imbue African Americans with a larger political voice that could be used to fight the structural discrimination expressed in housing, education, criminal justice and employment,” he says. “Allowing black votes to count for 167 percent of everyone else’s would mean that 30 million African American votes would count as 50 million, substituting super-votes for the implausible idea of cash payments.” With black voters so massively empowered, politicians will have no choice to but to put black priorities first if they hope to remain in office.

Johnson pays lip service to the important democratic principle of “one man, one vote,” but then dismisses it on grounds that the term is “unclear,” by pointing to a Supreme Court case that has nothing to do with the topic of explicitly giving one racial group super-votes.

Having taken care of his justification of the policy itself, Johnson goes into detail about how it should be constructed. He says it only needs to last for a set period of time (he proposes 24 years), and he also proposes taking inspiration from the Bureau of Indian Affairs for handling the thorny topic of who counts as black and who doesn’t.

To conclude, Johnson forthrightly says that only reverse racism will be sufficient to achieve the goal of racial justice.

“Of course, weighted-vote reparations are only slightly more politically feasible than a multi-trillion-dollar payout,” he says. “But we have to consider novel approaches to racial reconciliation … if we are serious about ridding the nation of barriers to opportunity and overcoming the racial discrimination woven into America’s fabric. If racism is the culprit, then dismantling it requires the same tools that constructed it.”

juleswin
08-24-2015, 05:58 AM
I was just about to say something but I am at a complete loss for words. Don't get me wrong, its not that I have a problem with some people's vote counting more than others, my only problem is on making it a racial thing

Natural Citizen
08-24-2015, 06:08 AM
It figures it'd be something like that. Heh. Can't make this stuff up.

DevilsAdvocate
08-24-2015, 06:13 AM
You ever hear the saying "whoever smelt it dealt it"? I think the people that accuse others of racism and intolerance are the most racist, intolerant people in the world. The reason they try to shame people over tolerance, is because it's a foreign attitude for them that they are intensely self conscious about.

cajuncocoa
08-24-2015, 06:15 AM
I don't understand fretting over the fact that Barack didn't win Georgia or Mississippi. Those states weren't necessary for his overall victory, stop bitching.

euphemia
08-24-2015, 07:35 AM
Maybe we should weight the votes based on who pays taxes and who doesn't.

tod evans
08-24-2015, 07:51 AM
Maybe we should weight the votes based on who pays taxes and who doesn't.

I'd rather government functionaries and dependants were excluded up front due to their vested interest in continuing to grow the leviathan..

(These folks claim to pay taxes out of their lucre)

Once they were excluded I'd be okay with your proposal......

RonPaulIsGreat
08-24-2015, 08:30 AM
It scares me people like that exist.

DamianTV
08-24-2015, 09:55 AM
Personally, I think it should depend on the situation, not Race.

This town votes to do something, build a new park, pass an ordinance, up to this town but not the FedGov, neighboring town, or non residents of that town / city / state / affected populus. Predominantly black / white / hispanic / asian should make no difference. But the goal is Decentralized Govt where the people that pay and are affected have the voting power.

Anti Federalist
08-24-2015, 09:55 AM
I don't understand fretting over the fact that Barack didn't win Georgia or Mississippi. Those states weren't necessary for his overall victory, stop bitching.

Well, it's because there is a battle much bigger going on than just a presidential election.

William Tell
08-24-2015, 09:59 AM
Pretty disturbing, if only it shocked people as much as someone saying the opposite.

Warrior_of_Freedom
08-24-2015, 10:00 AM
did we just enter the 1800's?

Danke
08-24-2015, 10:03 AM
A PH.D candidate?

Acala
08-24-2015, 10:26 AM
Democracy is just another form of tyranny. This illustrates the point nicely.

limequat
08-24-2015, 11:24 AM
This is a half-assed measure. It should be that ONLY black people can vote. Imagine how quickly that would cure institutional racism.

ghengis86
08-24-2015, 11:27 AM
Maybe we should weight the votes based on who pays taxes and who doesn't.


I'd rather government functionaries and dependants were excluded up front due to their vested interest in continuing to grow the leviathan..

(These folks claim to pay taxes out of their lucre)

Once they were excluded I'd be okay with your proposal......

+1 rep to both

You get a government pay check: no vote
You don't pay any taxes: no vote
You receive welfare: no vote

though not perfect, it'd be a start. then again, if voting mattered, they'd make it illegal outright.

limequat
08-24-2015, 11:28 AM
More seriously, it'd be easier to remove racism by removing race altogether. I propose two checkboxes on all census forms. Race: American. Non-American.

Imagine the headlines:

Police shoot unarmed American teen
American Lives Matter
Jails filled with non-violent Americans

presence
08-24-2015, 11:37 AM
Allowing black votes to count for 167 percent of everyone else’s would mean

http://ct.fra.bz/ol/fz/sw/i58/2/11/9/frabz-Da-Fuck-Is-this-shit-a3a87c.jpg

timosman
08-24-2015, 11:44 AM
http://ct.fra.bz/ol/fz/sw/i58/2/11/9/frabz-Da-Fuck-Is-this-shit-a3a87c.jpg

The reverse of the three fifths compromise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Fifths_Compromise. Now it is five threes.

kcchiefs6465
08-24-2015, 11:46 AM
A PH.D candidate?
He's waiting on black votes to count more.

presence
08-24-2015, 11:54 AM
The reverse of the three fifths compromise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Fifths_Compromise. Now it is five threes.

https://zombiemeditations.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/the-best-of-the-skeptical-3rd-world-kid-meme.jpg