Hillary's America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party Read Online Free PDF Page A

young black males in the inner city are “ill-equipped to secure gainful employment even as productive slaves.” Rivers’s point was that at least slaves had skills like masonry, carpentry, and agricultural skills that made them useful; today’s inner-city black males don’t have any skills at all. They have truly become useless people. 14
    Actually the Democrats have made them that way. That’s because these inner-city blacks, though useless in the traditional sense, are useful to the Democratic Party—first, as voters, and second, as public exhibitions of the need for progressive redistribution programs. Under Democratic supervision, blacks in the inner city must remain poor , becausetheir poverty is required to support and justify the progressive scheme. In this sense the ’hood is an invention of the Democratic Party.
    Progressive Democrats are fiercely protective of these dilapidated, crime-ridden neighborhoods. That’s why they mount fierce opposition whenever some reformer proposes to give poor black parents a choice of sending their children to private or public schools. Here the fear is that poor black children may actually get a good education, and that would liberate them from dependency on the Democratic Party.
    Progressive Democrats also fought welfare reform every step of the way. They were outraged at the idea that single mothers with illegitimate children should be required to work. The progressive scheme is to increase their benefits every time they produce a new child. That child, to Democrats, represents a future Democratic voter. Progressives do not want to change this system of intergenerational dependency that has been working for them politically.
    Finally, progressives scream every time entrepreneurs attempt gentrification projects in cities like Baltimore, Detroit, and St. Louis. No matter that gentrification would bring new money, new jobs, and new people into the inner city. Crime would go down, and people could move up. Here progressive opposition is most revealing of all. A transformation of the inner city is precisely what progressives do not want to happen.
    So progressives talk incessantly about black uplift but no uplift actually occurs, even though black neighborhoods are all run by Democratic officials, from mayors to school superintendents. In fact, the Democratic establishment works to assure that no one gets off the plantation.
    Now, Democrats are working overtime to create new Hispanic plantations called barrios. Long-term, they would like to have some Asian American ghettos also. Democrats have created a plantation model for blacks that they hope can be applied to other minority groups as well. In that case, black suffering would extend more broadly to minority suffering, a real political success from the Democrats’ perspective.
    Why? Because minority suffering is the basic moral justification for the progressive Democratic rip-off. If there were no minority suffering, then where is the need for all the social welfare programs? The sufferingof blacks and other minorities has actually been caused by the Democrats themselves, but in a crafty rhetorical move, this suffering is now blamed on “America.”
    And here we get to the central thrust of progressive education, which is to fault America with the crimes of the Democratic Party. Here’s a choice example from Michael Omi and Howard Winant: “The broad sweep of U.S. history is characterized not by racial democracy but by racial despotism, not by trajectories of reform but by implacable denial of political rights, dehumanization, extreme exploitation, and policies of minority extirpation.” 15
    Well, who exactly did these things? Omi and Winant refuse to point the finger at the real culprits. From their point of view, “America” did this to the blacks and other minorities, and in recompense, America owes them. For Hispanics, this means a right of free entry and a right of amnesty for illegals; for blacks, it means that