Select Page

Black History Month: Democrat Party Owns the Legacy of Racism in America – Part 1

Black History Month: Democrat Party Owns the Legacy of Racism in America – Part 1

This is a topic that gets a lot of my Democrat friends riled up. Of course, they have totally bought into the current bogus narrative that Republicans are racists – from the top leaders to the grassroots voters.  Even worse, we are violent white supremacists.

Do not misunderstand.  There are nutcase Nazis and skinheads who espouse racism while claiming allegiance to the Republican Party – just as there are violent nutcase radicals, such as ANTIFA, on the left.  Neither represents the opinions and views of the massive majority of Republicans and Democrats.  They are not conservatives or progressives.  They are … nutcases.

When I say that the Democratic Party owns the legacy of racial oppression in America, I’m not speaking of the millions of people who identify with the Party.  Anyone who has followed my writings knows that I do not believe that the American people – on the left or right — are racists.  We the people get along a lot better on a day-to-day basis than our political leaders will admit and allow.

The problem is “institutional racism” – the kind that is built into the systems.  Examining institutional racism – and how it has evolved – is the only way to address and solve it.  And when it comes to institutional racism – black oppression – the facts are clear.  It was developed and – to a residual degree – maintained by the Democratic Party.

Although some on the left attempt to engage in revisionist history, the facts are clear.  

If we look at the phases of black oppression in America, we start with the colonial period in which slavery was widely accepted and was first made legal in colonial America in Massachusetts in 1641.  By the time of the American Revolution, slavery was evolving into a regional controversy, with the north and south beginning to divide on the issue.  As the nation geographically divided, it also divided on partisan lines – with Democrats locking in on supporting slavery and the Whigs leaning against, but not fully abolitionists.  The partisan divide came into sharp contrast with the birth of the abolitionist Republican Party.  The pro-slavery Whig faction merged into the Democratic Party.  

It took a Civil War – brother against brother … north against south … the Republican Party against the Democratic Party – to put an end to slavery in America.  It did not, however, prevent the future imposition of institutional racism by the Democratic Party. Even the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteen Amendments, a succession of federal laws, and a smattering of Supreme Court decisions did not end violent black oppression wherever Democrats remained in control of the government.

For more than 100 years after the Civil War, blacks residing in the states of the old Confederacy continued to suffer de jure racism that denied them the basic constitutional rights of assembly, free speech, education, upward mobility, and the most fundamental right to determine their future, the right to vote – even the right to life.

Attempts to secure their constitutional rights were thwarted by unconstitutional laws enforced by the bloody tactics of the of the terrorist wings of the Democratic Party – the Knights of the White Camelia, the Red Shirts, the White Citizens Councils, and the most infamous of all, the Ku Klux Klan.

As institutional racism remained the rule in the solid Democrat Dixie, blacks migrated to northern cities for jobs and in the hope of escaping from racial violence and oppression.   Instead, they found a more subtle form of institutional racism created and implemented by powerful Democrat one-party political machines – de facto racism.  The more powerful the Democrat machine, the more virulent and violent the black oppression.  

Without the necessity of unconstitutional laws, blacks were still segregated, oppressed, and impoverished — not unlike their experience in the south.  Cities, such as Chicago, even had “social clubs” to violently enforce segregation through terrorist tactics, including beatings and murder.  Chicago Mayor Richard J. Daley – who has been described as “da boss” of the most powerful Democrat machine in the country – gained political initial attention as the head of the Hamburg Social Club that terrorized, beat, and reportedly even killed blacks who did not know their place. 

(If you wonder why a bunch of Irish thugs would select a Germanic name, it was their way of honoring the murder of a group of black soldiers in Hamburg, South Carolina in 1876.  The man who proudly claimed responsibility for the killings, “Pitchfork” Ben Tillman, went on to be the Governor and Senator of the Palmetto State.)

To highlight the bridge between southern de jure racism and northern urban de facto racism, Martin Luther King took his crusade for justice to such northern cities as Chicago and Cleveland. In his career, King confronted the powerful political leaders and government officials responsible for institutional racism.  It is noteworthy that virtually all his demands, protests, and marches were against the institutional racism of Democrat officeholders at the local, state, and federal levels.

Many who see racism as part of the Republican DNA are likely unaware of the GOP’s role in the modern fight for civil rights.  That is because the teaching of the history of the 1960s civil rights era has been cynically misrepresented in our modern political/media culture.

Arguably, the most important civil rights case of the era was the 1954 Brown v. the Board of Education decision by the Supreme Court.  The decision to disallow segregated schools was only possible when President Eisenhower named Republican Earl Warren as Chief Justice – replacing the late Democrat segregationist Chief Justice Fred Vinson, who had been appointed by President Truman.

Democrat governors remained resolute in preventing white schools from being integrated.  They created a variety of alternative educational systems to circumvent integration –and even summarily shut down the public schools.  Alabama Governor George Wallace personally blocked a school door.  The opposition was so adamant that President Eisenhower had to send in the 101st Airborne to enable black students to register at hitherto segregated schools and colleges.

The first civil rights acts since Reconstruction were not in the 1960s.  There were the 1957 and 1960 Civil Rights Acts supported by congressional Republicans and signed by President Eisenhower.  They were vehemently opposed by the powerful southern Democrats, such as then-Senate Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson –and such prominent northern Democrats as then-Senator Jack Kennedy.  Johnson and Kennedy only supported the 1960 bill after successfully removing the all-important enforcement provision – as demanded by the Southern congressional leaders.  That is what necessitated the 1964 civil rights bill.

Few folks – including most blacks – seem to be unaware of the fact that it was the Republican Party that drove the success of the 1960s civil rights legislation.  Republicans supported the measures by overwhelming numbers in Congress.  Democrats mounted opposition and filibusters.  It was because of overwhelming Republican support that for the first time a Democrat filibuster of civil rights legislation was ended– and the measure was brought up for a vote. 

The 1965 Voting Rights Bill was authored and introduced by Republican Senator Everett Dirksen – and was also passed because of the overwhelming vote by Republican Senators and House members.

But even then, the Democratic Party continued leading the fight against civil rights and school integration.  No sooner had the 1960s civil rights legislation passed than southern Democrats launched the Massive Resistance Movement against school integration.  It was at that time that several Democrat states added the Confederate battle flags to places of honor – on the state flags, state seals and on state grounds.

This commentary takes through the 1960s civil rights era.  The following 60 years of Democratic Party racial oppression will be covered in a subsequent commentary.

So, there ‘tis.

EDITORS NOTE:  Larry Horist may be one of the nation’s leading authorities on this subject.  He has lived it and written about it for decades and is just completing a major deeply-researched book on the racial history of the Democratic Party.

About The Author

Larry Horist

So,there‘tis… The opinions, perspectives and analyses of Larry Horist Larry Horist is a businessman, conservative writer and political strategist with an extensive background in economics and public policy. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman. He has served as a consultant to the Nixon White House and travelled the country as a spokesman for President Reagan’s economic reforms. He has testified as an expert witness before numerous legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress. Horist has lectured and taught courses at numerous colleges and universities, including Harvard, Northwestern, DePaul universities, Hope College and his alma mater, Knox College. He has been a guest on hundreds of public affairs talk shows, and hosted his own program, “Chicago In Sight,” on WIND radio. Horist was a one-time candidate for mayor of Chicago and served as Executive Director of the City Club of Chicago, where he led a successful two-year campaign to save the historic Chicago Theatre from the wrecking ball. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He is praised by readers for his style, substance and sense of humor. According to one reader, Horist is the “new Charles Krauthammer.” He is actively semi-retired in Boca Raton, Florida where he devotes his time to writing. So, there ‘tis is Horist’s signature sign off.


  1. spaceman spiff

    All right, Frank Stetson. How about a comment on THIS one.? I suppose you’ll find a way to say that Larry is all wet on this issue, too. I don’t think you can. I read history, and he’s right on the mark. Time for the Dumbocrats to “fess up”!

    • Tom

      Hey spaceman spiff, take a few moments and read the articles I reference below. You will see how the history that you have read was written by the same folks that Larry uses as his sources – which is not the full view. I am an independent/unaffiliated voter who sees both sides. Both parties have been racist. You do not need Frank, I am happy to educate you on the other side of the story that does not present itself in Larry’s blog. So get your man pants on and get ready to fess up with those Dumbocrats you mentioned.

  2. Tom

    Nice little history lesson Larry! Darn those demon Democrats! Double darn them!

    What are the basics about the enforcement provision that was removed?

    But Larry, I do think when you view the GOP about racism, you are putting on rose colored glasses. In ten minutes I was able to find several historic articles that refute your rosy view of the GOP. Check out what was written about G. W. Bush back in August of 2000. This article seems to show the “other side” of the GOP – which may actually be the true side at “”

    Bottom line, I think both parties have been fairly equally racist. And I found this USA Today article had two paragraphs that summed it up, as far as what I see today in the GOP and Trump:

    “The picture adds up to dramatically different visions of America held by Democrats and Republicans, with the latter group harkening for a time when the country was home to smaller percentages of racial and ethnic minorities, and when women had less political and social power.

    “Perhaps the most powerful word Trump has ever uttered is the word, ‘Again,’ ” says Robert P. Jones, founder and CEO of PRRI. “His call to ‘Make American Great Again’ – which in Trump’s hands has largely meant a white grievance agenda fueled by xenophobic and racial fears – has transformed political conservatism from a principled philosophy to a rear-guard exercise in nostalgia, an effort to prop up the power of a declining white Christian base amid the changing demographics of the country.”” The full article is at “” By the way, this article appears to have been based on a PRRI survey. Recent PRRI surveys indicate that GOP folks do actually long for the days of the 1950’s.

    Again, both parties are racist at their core and use blacks only to gain votes. This is a great reason to be an Independent / Unaffiliated voter!!!

    • larry Horist

      Tom … Some of the material you cited is simply untrue. You desire to constantly balance the scales in the name of political “independency” does you a great disservice in this matter. If you were to pile all the racism on the two sides of the scale – based on volume and the resulting harm — the Democrat side would be be beyond any effort to find balance or equivalency. Eisenhower not only did not oppose integrating the military, he did it on his own as commander in WW II. Specifically he integrated the Tuskegee Airmen into the regular flyers. Also, He was responsible for the first civil rights acts since Reconstruction — 1957 and 1960. Truman issued the EO in 1948. The military was still largely segregated in 1952 because the EO was never full implements, It was Eisenhower who finished it. You relying on newspaper reports may be the problem — rather than get into the deeper research. It has been the news media that has been proffering the false narratives about race in America. People have read my manuscript on the subject are shocked at how little they knew about the real history — the scope and depth of Democrat Party institutional racist policies. I emphasize the Democrats’ role because that is the part of the history that is being cancelled — and all I hear is about dubious Republican racism — like voter oppression in places where blacks are voting in record numbers and even those votes say the do not feel that their voting is being inhibited. That is just a mendacious political narrative by folks like Al Sharpton and Stacey Abrams. Do you equate that with millions of impoverished blacks trapped segregated communities with poor school, inferior housing, unsafe streets, crumbling infrastructure and unequal justice. Did I mention that those places ae almost exclusively the domain of the Democratic Party? The reason we have those conditions for more than 150 years after the Civil War is because no one is identifying the problem — and who is responsible. By the way .. you are only responding to Part 1. There is more to come.

      • Tom

        Good response Larry. Actually, I am not seeking to balance anything, if you really want to know the truth. When there are two piles of dung stinking up a room, what does it matter if one is a 20 pound pile and the other is a 10 pound pile? Both piles need to be removed!!! And that is my point! Both are guilty, none are innocent! I am not contesting who did more naughty things to our African American population. What you may not have noticed is that behind every Dem trying to oppress, there is also a GOP secretly cheering the oppressor. And the visa versa exists as well. And that was the big thing I learned from the chapter of your manuscript you allowed me to review. I learned that the overt racism is not the big danger, we can deal with that. I learned that there is a sneakier form of racism which I simply called covert racism – and that is what FDR practiced, and so did many GOP. Its like both parties are in a racial volleyball game, and black people are the ball. What does it matter who serves and who hits back, the ball is still getting whacked around! So to put it in a spiritual perspective, none are worthy, all have sinned, Romans 3: 10-12.

        Perhaps if your Part 1 would have been a little more balanced, Independents/Unaffiliated voter respondents would not have to go looking for the other side that they know exists?

        I am not saying your writing is wrong. I am saying your writing is one-sided. You do a deep dive into Dem sins, while lightly smattering the surface of the GOP sins. Why not just clean the whole inside of the cup and not worry which party the dirt came from. Then the whole outside will be clean! You wrote this article for BLACK HISTORY month, not for blame the Dems month. When you overload the one side with the blame, and lighten the other, you miss the point of Black History Month. And their history is that both sides have damaged them and both sides have caused their impoverishment and lack of opportunity, and both sides need to stop it and create opportunities, not words.

        • larry Horist

          Tom … You said Actually, I am not seeking to balance anything, if you really want to know the truth.” But you said in your earlier response, “Bottom line, I think both parties have been fairly equally racist.” Sounds like your are rebutting yourself…lol

  3. Darren

    The comment of MAKING AMERICA GREAT AGAIN by Trump is not of returning America to any specific point in history regarding RACE.

    It is the FACT of when growing up, MADE IN AMERICE was on products referring to something produced better than any were else.
    This made you want to purchase that item because it was MADE IN AMERICA. ( NOT CHINA )

    in fact there was a time when MADE IN CHINA was looked at as junk. Cheap junk.
    Make America Great Again has no racial meaning, if anything it means EVERY ONE has a job waiting for them, with Pride
    and enjoyment in a hard productive day.

    If you are not over 50 years of age you have no idea what this means as you have been listening to the Crap spewing from Washington over the last 30 years. And yes, Both Democrat’s and Republicans have spewed the same crap all in attempts to get rich off tax payers money.

    This explains the the efforts of both party’s to lean against Trump.
    And this is why anyone who owns or ever owned a business or been self employed believes in Trump.

    The new Tech Billionaires worked very hard for their money, but it is a different kind of work.
    Their body did not ack at night and did not loose 5 pounds a day from sweat.

    This is why they do not know what MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN means.

    • frank stetson

      Darren, I have been self-employed, owned a business, and managed many a business and am a liberal as are many of my friends.

      The saying was Made in Japan, not Made in China, numnuts. China didn’t even matter then. It started post 1945 as the Japanese made little plastic things like toys and such as we helped to restart their economy. Yeah, it was on us. By the 70’s they were creaming us and we were smashing electronics on the steps of the Capitol like Trumplicants after an election. By the 70’s, the Japanese products were great and moving up the food chain with more sophisticated products. We started copying them, especially JIT manufacturing.

      That’s were I come in. I begin this life in work consulting with the Japanese on how to take over America. I talked in their boardrooms, I walked their factory floors, I trained, I taught. As a US manufacturer, we found “Made in America” to be funny since it meant so little. Even dropped a half million to prove it statistically. Matter of fact, it meant shit quite often in those days. US autos got their asses kicked on quality for awhile by the Japanese. By the mid 80’s, I returned to American business sharing my Japanese/Taiwan/SK experiences so we could return volley. And we did. But NEVER did I use Made In America as my selling point. It was worthless. It was on the box, in the lower part of the brochure, but there was no value in highlighting it. If that’s you main competitive sales point, you will lose every time. I used customer satisfaction first, then quality, then price, then features, not factory location, to win. That theory always works.

    • Tom

      Well Darren, I am well over 50, I owned a business, and I do remember the days when “Made in USA” was on many tags. It was not Made in America, or as you misspell it AMERICE, it was “Made in USA” on the tag. So much for your memory!!! And by the way, just want to inform you that those days were very “white days” where only 4% of women worked, MADD was not yet in existence and driving drunk was considered an act of God, abortion was not legal, neighborhoods were highly segregated, FHA loans were not available to blacks and many minorities, MLK was thrown in jail in Birmingham, racial issues abounded, but to someone like you, “Make America Great Again” simply means a tag “Made in America” that never actual existed and those jobs for anyone who wanted one was mostly jobs for white males. This is what the “Again” means in his slogan. He wants to time warp you back into when he could get away with anything because he was white and rich! But hey, you go ahead and keep your belief in the “Made in America” tag that never existed!!!

      And by the way, back then, we got very few products from China! We were getting products from Japan until we unfairly economically squashed them in the 1980’s to save Unions!

      I have probably forgotten more history than you remember Darren! So peddle your BS to those under 50 folks who will gulp it down for you!

  4. Darren

    Frank, I am sorry to hear you lost a half a million dollars in business. perhaps that is when you decided to be a liberal.

    • frank stetson

      I was born a liberal. Ask my Mom :>)

      I said dropped, I did not say lose. We actually made money by not wasting it on some useless ad campaign to promote something that no one really cared about. We instead focused on what they did care about. That’s my mantra in business: “find out what your customer really, really wants, and then let them REALLY have it.”

      The key is that it’s the bottom line that really matters.

      And that’s why the Japanese, Taiwanese, South Korean’s, French, Spanish, English, Canadian, Belgiumese?, Germans, Norwegians, and so many others hired me, and my firm, to squeeze us dry like a sponge of knowledge to better their bottom line.

      And yes, I think making Ukraine great again would benefit the US and the world. A rising tide lifts all boats. However Ukraine is not without racism which is on the upswing and even worse during the war. I don’t think Made In the USA will change that either.

      So as you bed down on your Maiden Home bed resting your head on My Pillow, feel good. I will stick with my Egyptian cotton pillowcases and sheets comforted by my Chinese silk pj’s. I figure anytime some Chinese fellow wants to give me silk pj’s in return for useless green paper that ultimately must be redeemed in America, it’s a good day.

  5. Darren

    Tom, sorry your childhood was so tough. Perhaps the saying for you and Frank should read. Make Ukraine Great again.
    After all this is the Biden agenda.

    • Tom

      Darren, you astoundingly show your ignorance in so many brilliant ways! I had a great childhood, I was very white and very privileged! I have no complaints about my childhood!!! LOL So no need to be sorry for me, and I would not want the sorrow of a person like you anyway. LOL

  6. Darren

    Glad to hear it Tom.
    I guess I would be considered white, but of no privileges’.
    My Father worked very hard for the things we had. I wore hand me downs when possible.
    My Father and Mother later in life achieved many great things by the hard work of Farming and Construction.
    I learned that work ethic from an early age. I also have been able to count my accomplishments for this reason as well.
    My Father was a Berkley Grad and taught for many years with a life time teaching Credential in Political Science.
    I understand Life Time Credentials no longer exist. He quit teaching before I was born, and told us of the ridiculous pay and petty ness of
    most teachers. Their ability to not be able to think logically, but just do as told. The narrative of today.
    He later made in months what teachers made in years. by using his common sense and working harder than a teacher is ever required of.
    It is not of sorrow I feel for you, just an understanding. What you refer to as ignorance is nothing more than walking a mile in my shoes.
    Good luck in future endeavors.

    • Tom

      I have probably walked several miles in your shoes! And maybe then some.

      First of all, while I do appreciate your story, you make conclusions that are ignorant. 1) My father was an orphan63, do you know what that is like? Only because of WWII he got a chance to get out of a life of extreme poverty by volunteering for the US Army Air Corps 8 Airforce that had a casualty rate of over 20%. He worked very hard to provide for his family. We did not have our first tv until around 1963 and it was a second hand tv from my grandmother. I was a middle child, middle children NEVER get new clothes, especially when you are lower middle class. But my father worked his way up with hard work and brains applied with much sweat equity. He worked for everything he had, and so did I – that is after I got back from the military which was my only option because there was no extra money to educate me.

      So when I say “very white and very privileged” you have no clue what I mean, and that is what I am calling your ignorance. Even though we were lower middle class, we had options and government systems available to us that were not equally available to all Americans, especially black Americans. We could work hard and get ahead, black Americans could not in most cases!!! And that is the “Again” that you advocate we go back to when you support MAGA!!! Trump knows that America very well! He didn’t even have a silver spoon. He had a golden spoon!

      Like you, and Frank, I have many accomplishments and can count all of them as well. Again, the conditions behind my accomplishments were in my favor, because the system was in my favor. You do not seem to understand this!

      And by the way, I was based in SFO at Mare Island for a short while. I know Berkley U. It was the most liberal college on the West Coast, so your father is most likely a liberal (back then at least – and most likely protested guys like me back in the Vietnam War Era) like the people you seem to despise. In case you do not know, the common name out there for Berkley U was “Bizerkly U” and it was called that for a reason! When guys like me and many others who did not have the money for college got back from the Vietnam and South China Sea theater, we found the ideas of Berkley students to be very strange! Kind of bizarre! So if you intend on being a card carrying MAGA dude, best not to wave daddy’s Berkley credential at me – I was there!!!! I know how liberal they were. You are the son of a liberal!!!!! LOL And that does not mean liberals cannot be hard working. There are many hard working liberals, just like Frank.

      Unfortunately, you do not realize that since then, back in the 1960’s until now, there has been a political reversal. Back then Dems had a much more GOP platform, and GOP actually had a much more Dem platform. But racism and all the garbage I talked about earlier in this blog happened because of both parties. Neither party is innocent like Larry tries to paint the GOP. And MAGA capitalized on white discontent with the multicultural system, they want the white rule system from back then!!! That is part and parcel of their plan to make America great again!

      You just do not get it. You had privileges!!! You had an all white system that gave you a leg up that minorities did not have!!!!

      Yes teaching back then was much more about the free exchange of ideas and critical thinking than it is today, I agree. I was a teacher for ten years. Do you know that back in the late 1950’s to early 1960’s average lawyer pay and teacher pay was not much different? Back then in the early 1960’s this country worked off of what was called “Absolute Law” which is the law tracing to an absolute righteous law of the Bible. Later in the 1960’s around 1968 we switched to what is called “case law” where we started making all kinds of exceptions to absolute law based on cases being tried in the court. Berkley was very involved in this legal system transformation. You father worked (if he taught there) at a place that was very instrumental in getting our system where it is today! Your father, as a student, would have been for the institution treating people equal, black Americans and other minorities getting FHA loans and decent paying jobs, Affirmative Action would have been his priority, he would have enjoyed the hippie blanket sales on the pavements of downtown Berkley (I liked them too! LOL) . Your father would have been repulsed by Trump and some of the MAGA white populist rhetoric.

      By the way, as I said, I was a teacher for ten years, K-12 and college Mathematics. I do object to your snipe about teachers. I was very hard working, worked weekends writing lesson plans and math experiments, attended summer classes for new teaching methods. My day started at 7 a.m. and I got home around 8 p.m.

      So maybe before your writing judges me as not having to work hard for my things, being liberal which Frank will tell you I am not – and Larry will say I lean slightly right, before you think I am not understanding, before you think that I always had new clothes and a fine education, befor you think my father the orphan had it easy, before you think that I did not have to work as hard as you, before you think I do not have countable accomplishments, maybe you should walk just a half mile in my shoes!!!

      Please understand that all I was doing was pointing out how things really were back then and all of the things Larry is not pointing out about the GOP.

  7. frank stetson

    Once again Larry drags out his “it’s all their fault” conclusion for racism as being only a Democratic thing; past, present, and future.

    He says: “they (Democrats) have totally bought into the current bogus narrative that Republicans are racists – from the top leaders to the grassroots voters. Even worse, we are violent white supremacists.” For the umpteenth time, from my understanding, and how I have always seen it said: NOT ALL REPUBLICANS ARE RACISTS, but most racists vote Republican. They enable each other. Same for White Supremacists. You need their vote and they think you cater to them.

    Also, Larry can say it, but Larry does not know IF Antifa votes Democratic, he just makes that up for crowd appeal. These people pretty much dislike Democrats. Larry can’t even tell you how many “members” Antifa has, who they are, who they vote for, which party they belong to if they belong to any party at all. Pretty sure they are not Democrats or Republicans.

    “When I (Larry) say that the Democratic Party owns the legacy of racial oppression in America,” he is correct, the key word being legacy. That’s our sad history having nothing to do with the current Democratic party, or even today’s Southern Democrats. The Democrats of old that Larry references are probably Republican today. People change. Party’s change. And people change party. Ask Tom, he’s an Independent, a mere ripple of people until the 60’s. They just did not use to exist and now they are a majority party.

    When Larry says: “The problem is “institutional racism” – the kind that is built into the systems. Examining institutional racism – and how it has evolved – is the only way to address and solve it,” he is spot on IMO. When he says: “And when it comes to institutional racism – black oppression – the facts are clear. It was developed and – to a residual degree – maintained by the Democratic Party” he is not correct. He bases this on the his perceived overwhelming control of State and Local governments by Democrats today — this is not entirely true. About a third of major US metro’s are controlled by Republicans — do you think there is no systemic racism there? Tell us the magic they use to correct it.

    I believe there is systemic racism in America. I believe some of the worst is in the North East, a liberal stronghold. However, I am pretty sure it’s similar in the third of our metro’s currently controlled by Republicans. I am also sure it is not an invention purely of the Democrats.

    Larry has indicated the general types of problems and policy areas for systemic racism. He never has proven it’s not in Republican controlled areas or which party’s supported said laws in Democratic areas. He hasn’t really specified the exact laws or who authored, supported, and voted for them. It’s just all bad, all Democrats. He speaks in broad generalities with the most specificity as to the cause: Democrats. It’s lacking on the underling specifics, the root causes.

    Larry regales us with tales of reconstruction, of blacks moving North, where they “found a more subtle form of institutional racism created and implemented by powerful Democrat one-party political machines – de facto racism. The more powerful the Democrat machine, the more virulent and violent the black oppression.” Specifics….. Somehow, Blacks fled Democratic rule to arrive in Democratic rule. As Pete Seger said: “where have all the Republicans gone, long time passing?” Or did the Southern, poor, rural Democrats migrate after the Blacks and then bought the US cities up North……

    Up until, during, and after the civil war, where do you think most Republicans lived — North or South.

    A quarter of the Black migration occurs before 1940 — Republicans may still control most Northern cities at that time.

    Three quarters of the migration is from 1940-1970: now there is a number of things happening: factories, higher paying jobs, more accessible education, fodder for liberals and socialists to gain traction. The US is not alone in this; liberalism world-wide follows a similar trend line. It’s a general tendency for higher density dwellers to lean liberal in their own self-interest because they think Republicans suck when it comes to meeting the needs of higher density citizens. But metro party ownership is not clear cut: this chart from PEW shows that highly dense areas cut both ways until 1988: **

    According to PEW, “This wasn’t always the case. Up to the 1990s, in fact, urban America was competitive territory for both Republican and Democratic presidential candidates: Ronald Reagan carried solid majorities of the 100 largest counties in both 1980 and 1984. In 2012, by contrast, Mitt Romney won only four counties with populations greater than 1 million: Maricopa County, Arizona; Orange County, California; Tarrant County, Texas; and Salt Lake County, Utah.”

    It’s not that I think Larry is wrong, I honestly don’t know. I do know there is systemic racism; I do know Democrats can be blamed. But I doubt he is 100% right in his simplistic black hat/white hat way of thinking and it’s just the Democrats. I really don’t know who held the cities every year from 1865 on, but the chart pretty clearly says there are Republicans there and I wonder: did they object to these laws, did they vote for them, or were they the authors? Same with the third of American major metro’s under Republican control today: no systemic racism there? How did they avoid it? I just don’t know but I don’t buy the conclusion that it must be because Democrats run all cities today or because Larry says so and his resume/editor say he’s researched it a lot. I really just don’t know, but doubt it’s 100%, unilaterally, without exception, just the fault of the Democrats.

    Just like I am pretty sure the same shit still happens in current Republican metro’s as well, or worse, but not better. So far, every trend I have looked up occurs where both parties live. Sometimes more one way than the other, but still occurring in both.

    IOW – Larry simplifies the problem, casts blame only in one direction, and has not a clue IF Republicans have the cure, or that he does. Pretty weak tea that is, IMO.

    • Tom

      I agree Frank, and most polls and articles that I have read on the subject (a couple I referenced) seem to agree that both parties can and should share equally in the racism blame, both individual and institutional. When I moved to NC and expressed interest in buying a house, the first thing my white GOP coworkers did (and I was leaning GOP back then) was they got a map of the county and hashed out places I should not buy a home. Their reasoning was “the blacks are moving that way.” And this happened in 1987!!! I was a bit shocked. I think racists and racism exists in both parties and probably always will. Yes I do remember the days when Independents/Unaffiliated voters were a mere trickle, and generally considered an anomaly. LOL Now there are more of us than of either party. I view this as encouraging because what it tells me is that people are moving towards looking at individual issues and what is best for the whole USA, not what is best for party dominance. And we need to remember that first and foremost, we are all Americans, regardless of party. And if we want to truly be on that high moral plateau that we think we are on, then we need to do what is the greatest amount pf good for the largest number of Americans, its that simple.

      • frank stetson


        I am pretty sure it’s not equal and leans left, but yes, I am pretty sure both are culpable. I just don’t have a clue as to quantity and quality for each. Larry has stepped up and estimated a 90/10 relationship; I am sure he is wrong. The reason I say that is that Northern cities, and most cities, turn more liberal as densities increase. Like I said, it’s a global trend. But Republicans still have votes, they still hold a good number of cities, and I bet both voted for some of these laws.

        I think, at this point, it’s only important to know so that we can improve and not repeat, if we ever take the challenge to fix.

        • frank stetson

          Sorry, it was 95/5, not 90/10. Camel’s head is in the tent!!!

        • larry Horist

          Frank Stetson … You are “pretty sure” both are culpable. You KNOW I am wrong about the ratio. Okay. I will give you that one. It was a rhetorical statement to make a point, not a studied fact. Maybe it is only 90/10. Your suggestion that the northern cities are less racist because the are more ‘liberal” is laughable. You obviously have not spent meaningful time in the inner cities or have taken a close at the condition’s in the segregated communities over time. What is so remarkable is how little things have changed over generations. And of the cities that have experienced periodic riots and unrest, which have one-party Democrat rule for ages? Miami is about the only major city with a Republicans mayor — and even there the ACTUAL STATISTICS are not as bad as, say, Chicago, New York, Baltimore, etc., etc. ,etc. You and Tom may BELIEVE in an equity, but the facts are your enemies. In Part 2, I bring the FACTS up to date — from the 1960s to today.

          • frank stetson

            “. Your suggestion that the northern cities are less racist because the are more ‘liberal” is laughable. You obviously have not spent meaningful time in the inner cities or have taken a close at the condition’s in the segregated communities over time. ”

            Not sure where you are coming from, I was responding to Tom’s 50/50 on party for racism ownership, and I did not believe that, didn’t know the number, but believe it does lean left — your point wise guy.

            Then, I said: “The reason I say that is that Northern cities, and most cities, turn more liberal as densities increase. Like I said, it’s a global trend.” IOW — more density, globally often means more liberal. Actually makes sense where community begins and individuality diminishes, and vice-versa for the rural areas.

            I was thinking about the fact that you blame Democrats owning the cities and doing their evil racist things. But in 1865, the Democrats you are referencing rule the South, the Republicans leading the civil rights war are mostly in the North. In the cities. As it is post the war. Over time, densities increase, liberalism increases and there is a political shift — Dems to the cities, Repubs to the rural. And the South is more rural.

            My point is I am not sure where the crossover is, but I am betting much of the systemic racism table is set while Republicans are still power brokers in northern cities. Don’t know, just spit balling.

            Nonetheless I didn’t say or mean whatever you took away.

            Also, cram it with the “You obviously have not spent meaningful time in the inner cities or have taken a close at the condition’s in the segregated communities over time.” In 1866, we started as puddlers in the Conshohocken Steel Mills living on Whiskey Row as the indigenous ones named it. In 1912, my other half worked the Scranton Coal mines. My Grandmother used to say, on Fridays, after shopping, “good eats tonight” which was code for we will be able to eat…. I was born in a part of town outside NYC that you are too afraid to enter. You’re from Chicago, give it a rest midwest boy.

            Yes, we moved out, yes, we moved up, but in the 60’s, we were still eating 1950-army rations that Nana got for payment for services rendered from the washing machine store when people paid with the food supplements they got for being poor. You really are off base there.

            I believe in equity? I don’t have a clue what you even mean. In the weeds you are.

          • frank stetson

            FYI: from the top 100 cities in America, about 25% have a Republican mayor, many of which are considered “strong.” Miami is number 43 with under a half million in population. Try Jacksonville genius, it’s number 12.

            In 1962, Judge Bryan Simpson ordered the Duval County School Board to stop running a segregated school system and ordered the county to submit a plan for system-wide integrated schools. The School Board filed a plan with the court, but, by 1967, they had made only small steps toward school desegregation.

            ** Hmmm, a school board, a plan, court, sound familiar? Look, there’s a document for de facto racism in a Republican city….. Took till 1999 to have the court’s approval….

            In September of last year, for the third time, racist hate-speak fliers were all over Jacksonville.

            In the 60’s they were beating the folks who staged sit-ins for civil rights. In Jacksonville. Where “whites-only” was the way, not the law.

            I know, some de facto, some de jure, but my point is systemic racism exists everywhere; it is not bounded by political party. As to who is worse —- I don’t know, probably Democrats by the very nature that we control more urban areas. Maybe 75/25 is the split Larry can prove. But it doesn’t matter, the same shit is going on whether it’s Democrats, Republicans, or purple people eaters. And it’s global to boot. It’s not just America.

            And Larry, there may not be a law, but dimes to donuts, there is always a document, a plan, regulations, rules, applications, whatever. Even with the best intentions it happens.

            My other point is that you are probably wrong to highlight just Democrats. It’s your right, but seemingly a choice that will sell books on the partisan blogosphere, but not the NYT best seller list.

            To digress on how insidious this stuff is, a favorite example is the WWI draft registration cards. Federal. In the lower left corner, you tear the corner off if the applicant is Black. Who the hell thinks of these things? I mean, you’re not even checking off that the guy is black, you just tear the form so you can collate the complete cards against the torn cards. Someone decided they needed to know; but they didn’t want to even ask the question as they would other parts of the form for height, weight, eye color; instead after the form was completed, they just tore off the corner and put it in the torn-corner pile probably to hit the trash can. Why do it this way? They didn’t want whitey to even have to ask the question. They didn’t want blackie to see a line item calling them out based on race. And you know the result, racism. You say de facto, I say that’s de insidious.

            I know it’s a minor, trivial, thing but, to me, this speaks to how ingrained this stuff is and how fearful we all are of it.

            And that’s that. I appreciate you showing us how what might seem normal is actually systemic racism with roots far back in history but current today. I just think it’s more universal, global even, versus your concept that it’s just the Democrats. Good luck with the book.

          • larry Horist

            Frank Stetson … Thanks for providing more example to prove my point. You talk about Jacksonville in 1962. That was not a Republican community back then. In fact, the city had Dem mayors until 1993. So the problem you saw in 1962 was under Democrats. For the next 30 years, the problem was not resolved, according to you. But when it was resolved, it was after Republicans took the leadership in the city. You are not one to question my research. You already got busted for thinking the Democrat-Republican party was a precursor to the Republican Party of 1856. You are not aware of Jackson dropping the Republican half of the name. The older political divide was between Democrat and Whigs. It was Whig Party that split and dissolved on the issue of slavery with the abolitionist Whigs — like Lincoln — forming the GOP as the abolitionist Party. And this is the second time you have dredged up events in the 1960s you you misunderstood … and that are basically irrelevant to the point of the commentary.

          • frank stetson

            Larry, you talk about me proving your point: GOD only knows which one.

            You said “Miami is about the only major city with a Republicans mayor — and even there the ACTUAL STATISTICS are not as bad as, say, Chicago, New York, Baltimore, etc., etc. ,etc.,” to which I said: “from the top 100 cities in America, about 25% have a Republican mayor, many of which are considered “strong.” FYI: Miami is number 43 with under a half million in population. Try Jacksonville genius, it’s number 12 in size, it’s a much bigger almost major city. Miami is NOT about the only major US city with a Republican mayor and it’s not even close to being in the same density class as any of the other cities you mention. Even Baltimore has a 50% higher population.

            Then you talked about “the plan” being from 1962 when Democrats ruled the South, including Jacksonville. Democrats who are probably Republicans today, but let’s not go there. My bad for not expanding, but let me clarify my “Hmmm, a school board, a plan, court, sound familiar? Look, there’s a document for de facto racism in a Republican city….. Took till 1999 to have the court’s approval….” OK, what I was trying to say is: look, it’s the same plan in Jacksonville as in Harrisburg, or similar, or racist. Yes, Dems passed it here, Republicans in Harrisburg. The Northern Republicans do it, the Southern Democrats do it. As power in Jacksonville morphs to the Republicans, nothing changes in this regard, and it takes to 1999 to gain any traction. You guys took over in 1993, do you think you made major changes or that they were already underway.

            WHO CARES?

            My point is, and has been, is that everyone is doing it, it’s everywhere, and when you write your “racism be solely the Democrat’s fault,” you will be shot down on the merits by much better people than me.
            Further, de jure racism is alive and well in Republican-controlled Jacksonville, a MAJOR US city, bigger than Miami even. Wanna bet a DeSantis Presidential vote that de facto racism can be found there too? Just like Northern Democratically controlled metros?

          • frank stetson

            I think it’s more like this Larry:

            Jefferson and Madison created the Democratic-Republican Party around the 1790’s. After 1815, the Federalist Party kinda of collapsed, the DR’s were the cat’s pj’s, but during the 1824 Presidential, the DR’s split with the majority becoming the modern Democratic Party. Jackson’s Democrats. (FYI – everyone of them would be tossed from the modern Democratic party) A minority faction of the Democratic-Republican party merged with other party splinters forming the core of the Whig Party.

            Actually, after the 1824 election, the Democratic-Republicans split into four different rival groups: a minority faction supported President Adams, the majority faction backed General Jackson. Jackson’s faction became the modern Democratic Party, Adams’ faction became known as the National Republican Party, which later merged into the Whig Party. In 1854, the modern Republican party was created from the anti-slavery Whigs while taking its name, and many members, from the old National Republican Party membership within the Whigs (all would be considered RINOs today). Ironically, they held one of their first conventions near Jackson, Michigan.

            Perhaps not a direct line or simple renaming, but close enough government work for me, Larry.

            However neither the Jacksonian Democrats or the anti-slavery Republicans looking anything like their modern namesakes.

        • Tom

          I agree. And I hope we all, both parties and Independents/Unaffiliateds all take up the challenge to stop trying to apportion blame and start trying to repair damages. I agree, I do not see how one can determine which side has more blame unless you not only look at the unfair laws but also look at how the law played out in practice, and how much damage was created by each individual law that discriminated against black people.

          Like I said to Larry, ” When there are two piles of dung stinking up a room, what does it matter if one is a 20 pound pile and the other is a 10 pound pile? Both piles need to be removed!!! ” I also gave him a volleyball example. And I threw in couple of verses from Romans. Then I crossed the finish line with what are we trying to accomplish. The article was written under the banner of Black History Month, not “blame the Dems month” so lets realize Black history is a history of realizing both parties have done them damage, and lets not diminish that thought with this tit for tat argument of who did the most damage.

          • frank stetson

            It’ a tough one since much is unintentional and many push back not believing it’s true. Like CRT, they just want to say NO and pretend it does not exist. Maybe that’s why Larry seeks so hard to blame it in one place; a simple response to a very complex problem.

            Plus, in it’s inevitable fashion, those looking to correct will go too far and ask for impossibilities. Because the systemic stuff blends money, politics, race, religion, whatever —- hard to see where race ends and poverty begins as the root cause.

            We can try though and I applaud Larry for doing that. It’s just too bad that he blindly sees it as a Democrat problem and not an American problem. The simple truth is that Southern Democrats own slavery, the civil war, reconstruction racism and beyond. But to say todays problem is Democrats, Northern cities, is to believe that Northern Republicans got replaced overnight…. Nope, they were still here, they are here today, there has been a migration, but there are still Republican cities, states, and they have systemic racism in similar manners to Democratically controlled cities. We may be able to talk degrees of differentiation, but your bags of shit theory holds.

          • Ac

            Tom. may recall the greatest teacher coming with his disciples on a woman caught in immorality and a crowd having judged her guilt deserving death. The mob with stones in hand were about to stone the woman to death. Before one stone was thrown the respected teacher interjected with convicting words. He said, “Let him who is without sin through the first stone”. In short order one by one all there left and not one of those who had condemned the women threw a stone.
            Would not all people be better off hereafter that past sins of our own and others be used more as lessons learned of history wished stopped no longer continued, not allowed to be repeated.
            We are now held back by this country’s sins both in commission and more done by omission. Larry’s writing is doubtless a creative dictation of wrongs committed in his perception’s opinion by great majority he refers to as Democrat Party. Yet, with what authority does any author claim so readers may belief as true fact what is written. When, questions arise and arranged facts ring flat. The history scholar will surely scrub the assertions with alternate sources’ fact comparison. If found not quiet as portrayed in the written work. The readers confidence in the text reflects on the author and authority resident in both . If research affirms written words then reading farther will provide education. When comparison shows otherwise not affirming facts presented as authoritative. Then, continuing reading author’s words change from information gathering and worthy for serious contemplation to regarding the work as recreational fictional history, no more than other political propaganda.
            Reading through Larry’s Part 1 and all persons’ comments offered in reply, I found my interest peeked in the continuing debate. What emerged drew from autobiography as much as pertinent knowledge developed into practical understanding. Differentiating between Larry’s understanding explained in writing and Frank’s, Tom’s and others’ understanding pose grounds for debate among the ranks.
            How discussion evolves teeters on the edge of one sided argumentation as a lively debate more about process and political party facts, is principally up to Larry’s discerning. That the wheels may remain or entirely fly off provide followers on PBP’s so called blog necessary drama induced excitement. Whether or not the story being related contains mutually known agreements or another theory stirring of evidence in controversy will soon be made plain. Each successive episode in Larry’s commentary series is sure to evoke discussion contributed by those the longest regular readers. For us readers not of the conservative political persuasion, the PBP blog is an acquired taste. Our friends who are politically liberal and progressive will find no seat at the table or corner on the mat of competition,
            Like in society where bias and prejudice reigns void of consideration demanded from those professing democracy central, is this blog under PBP administration operated. Since the blog is a house privately owned its house rules are law. Therefore, not a wit of investment in productive (pragmatic) debate is employed in the purpose of discovering some solution for the several persistent problematic issues in modern society.
            To organize an enterprise assumedly purposed for accumulating profit, the population segment identifying favorably with the conservative doctrine is this organization’s targeted market. In this endeavor PBP has competition.


    • larry Horist

      Frank Stetson … It is sad when you attack me with lies. I know lies are the foundation of the imaginary Larry Horist of your invention. But it is not me. I may have said ANTIFA is on the left, but I never said they vote Democrat because a lot of radical leftists do not. I am not sure what PEW was referring to, but anyone who thinks the major cities were competitive in the 1990s — and I am specifically refereeing to cities with largen segregated and oppressed minority populations. Check out the cities with the re-occurring riots. Here is a list of key cities and the last year they had a Republican Mayor. If you check out the city councils, they are overwhelmingly Dem. And even where you get a rare Republican Mayor, the other offices, the city councils and the bureaucracy are deeply Democrat. I have no idea what PEW is seeing. No it is not 100 percent,,,, by at least 95 percent Democrat racist policies. Republicans ruling with racist policies is rare … with Democrats it is predominant. I focus on Democrats because (1) they are mostly responsible for the remains of institutional racism and (2) because folks like you keep pushing the bullshit narratives not based on fact.

      Chicago, IL D (1931)
      Philadelphia, PA D (1952)
      Detroit, MI D (1962)
      Houston, TX D (1939)
      Memphis, TN D (1991)
      New York, NY D (2011)
      Baltimore, MD D (1967)
      Los Angeles, CA D (2001)
      Washington, DC D (1961)
      Dallas, TX D (2011)
      Atlanta D (1879)
      Boston D (1930)
      Newark D (1953)
      Philadelphia D (1952)
      Pittsburgh D (1934)
      San Francisco D (1964)
      St. Louis D (1953)

      • frank stetson

        Yawn, your mantra is typical, boring, and entirely adequate, for you.

        You are correct, you never said Anitfa votes Democratic, per se. Thank you Larry, esq. You DID say: “There are nutcase Nazis and skinheads who espouse racism while claiming allegiance to the Republican Party – just as there are violent nutcase radicals, such as ANTIFA, on the left.”

        OK, nutcases, Nazi’s allegiance to Republicans JUST AS ANTIFA on the left. OK, on the left, just as allegiance to Republicans. Your words, your sentence, JUST AS I see it. For a party, what is allegiance? Words, sure. Actions, definitely. What are party actions: you can volunteer to man the info tables handing out pamplets…..but the highest form of allegiance is the vote. Matter of fact, it’s the only form of allegiance that counts and can be counted. My bad for interpreting correctly the words you incorrectly wrote or wrote incorrectly.

        PEW is PEW, a respected source. You are you. I agree, it looks hinky, but it’s there. Take it up with them. Link was provided. You probably didn’t even look as your knee-jerked you into action.

        Now you say: “I am specifically refereeing to cities with largen segregated and oppressed minority populations.” Of course when you cull it down to segregated, oppressed, populations, you will find oppression…..

        I have no idea what your list is, what the councils are, whatever. It’s unsupported gibberish.

        Try this, you have some major areas, pick three like: 1) education, 2) segregation 3) employment and you pick three laws that reference one or more of those issues, for three cities (or one city, don’t matter). I will research from there. Deal?
        Meanwhile, I will lob some things in your direction as though provokers on how BOTH SIDES create systemic, institutional, and structural forms of racism: both sides being the operative clause.

        Across American, lending guidelines, starting with the Federal Government but adopted by most major lendors, featured explicit neighborhood racial and ethnic composition ratings including generalized neighborhood income data to assess mortgage risks. This unfairly denied loans to minorities independent of their individual abilities. I am pretty sure this was not just done by Democrats. Entire neighborhoods were denied loans.

        People in these areas routinely face higher financial charges and rates; this is not Democrats alone doing the charging. These are financial institutions.

        Another one: to support public schools, we rely on property taxes, a definite form of systemic racism. This is done in both Republican and Democratic areas. Then, in many states, the state doles out a baseline, benchmark, amount to each school district; however, the property tax collected above that is used locally. Thus, the rich get richer schools, the poor, minorities mostly, do not. This tax structure is not owned solely by Democrats.

        Pollution: historically, since man started burning things, it’s has always been better to be upwind. True for Democrats and Republicans alike. If you go to almost any American city, Democrat or Republican, you will find the poor folk downwind. Often with some ugly utility churning out toxins right in their neighborhood, but always downwind from the rest. NYC is an anomaly, but it’s all bad there :>)…. But Main Line – North West of Phili. NW DC – swanky. SE, not so much so. Winnetka, North of Chicago. Quite often you will find this form of systemic racism in either party’s-controlled cities.

        When we started grabbing Native American kids and forcing them into our boarding schools, it was systemic racism. That was under John Q Adams, a Jeffersonian Republican and continued until 1978 under Presidents from both parties, including Lincoln, your Republican civil rights warrior.

        And I’m just getting started. Get the picture: both parties, long time, found everywhere.

        Good luck with the book; that’s so cool. Hope this critique helps. Just find us some laws!!!

        • larry Horist

          Frank Stetson … your rebuttals are getting less and less informed. You underlying motivations seems to demean me rather than make good counter arguments. But that is on you. You call for a listing of the oppressive laws? There are some to be found, BUT you seem to be totally ignorant of how DE FACTO racism works. It words OUTSIDE the the law. DUH! Every argument you made shows the lack of understand of de facto racism. Come on, Frank. Up your game or give up the ball.

          • frank Stetson

            Ignorant? well, fuck you very much, sir. with all due respect.

            Yes, I understand de facto versus de jure racism. Now. Wasn’t like you defined them though was it. Just of book tease? I chose to be in the present rather than locked in the 60’s. We hipsters use Systemic Racism, Institutional Racism, and Structural Racism. Sometimes, Interpersonal and Internalized. Then we mix up the definitions, use them interchangeably, and basically blather on. Speaking of that, unlike this article, perhaps define your terms in your book. Chances are your readers aren’t from the 60’s either. Might have avoided a lot of this.

            But actually no — the facts don’t change. What I request is just modified. If you are looking for racism without a law, chances are there is always a rule, regulation, plan, or something you can trace back to it’s source.

            One of the first de facto racism cases was the 1971 Balsbaugh v. Rowland in Harrisburg, a Northern City if you ever saw one. It was based on the Harrisburg BOE “A Plan for Quality Desegregated Education for the Harrisburg City School District” which, you are right, it’s not a law. But it’s a freakin plan, it’s written down, government type peeples did it. It’s a document. The “plan” was based on a Human Relations Commission report, another document.

            Sorry, Larry, pretty sure Harrisburg was heavily Republican at that time…..

            So, sorry, still would love to see some of these examples if you know them. Or continue to say it’s in the ether, outside the law, like pigeons cooing racist slurs in the dark. It’s always nice when you can’t find a root cause so why not “it’s just those evil Democrats.” I think you can do better.

            Thanks though, now I have two more racism labels to clog my mind’s drain.

          • larry Horist

            Frank Stetson … What is your point? You are saying that the Republican leaders of Harrisburg had offered a plan to desegregate the schools in 1971. Good on them. BUT … you again do not know your history. The Mayor at the time of the case was Democrat. You could have scored a point for your team with that, but instead you give the point to my side. Digging out one 50 year old case is not a very good argument. there will be outliers, but you you refuse to look at all of that poop on the Democrat side of the scale. Urban de facto racism is a cancer and you are countering with the equivalence of a skin rash.

          • frank stetson

            “Frank Stetson … What is your point? You are saying that the Republican leaders of Harrisburg had offered a plan to desegregate the schools in 1971. Good on them. BUT … you again do not know your history. The Mayor at the time of the case was Democrat.”

            First off, there is no us or them, there are no teams, there are no points. At least IMO. I am just trying to understand, and understand you. And it’s difficult. My premise is simple: everyone participates in de facto racism; it is not the sole purview of either party. Perhaps do to SIZE, Democrats own more, but I really doubt they up the “quality” of racism above Republicans. Everyone does it; but in the cities — Republicans are less prevalent because basically they have little to offer and a really bad story line.

            I did not say that the Harrisburg mayor was Republican. I said: “Sorry, Larry, pretty sure Harrisburg was heavily Republican at that time…..” That is true. However, a Republican Mayor served from 1917 to 1970; a Democrat took over with the council structural change in 1970, and served to 1978 when the Republicans regained the seat which they lost four years later never to retake it since. In 2023, Dauphin County is still majority Republican, including local BoE.

            The “PLAN” was written in the late 60’s; the Supreme Court case was in the early 70’s. Pretty sure, given the makeup of the county, Republicans were involved. Also, there was documentation for this de facto racism court case, studied today under that topic (points for Larry’s book). BUT — Republicans involved and a paper trail.

            You say it’s chump change, too small, too old, but these “plans” proliferate throughout the country as most students of de facto racism readily know. What’s in your wallet?

            Still waiting for more examples. Glad I could help out. Don’t want a byline :>), already seen that, done that. I would like to use your editor though :>)

            I am not refusing to look at anything. I am begging you to give some specificity to things that cause this that can be attributed to anyone. NOT just some stupid conspiracy theory that racism is in the air and only the Democrats can smell it….. I am sure you have some examples, why not share?

            I have some more, some really big ones, but why bother. Can’t change a closed mind who rationalizes any discrepancy to his theory as bogus, and the person daring to say it as ignorant of the facts, biased, and not very nice….

            On the list: I am not saying anything you say. I thought is was pretty clear, “I have no idea what your list is, what the councils are, whatever. It’s unsupported gibberish.” Let me know if you need further clarification, but I see some cities and some dates. You said: “Here is a list of key cities and the last year they had a Republican Mayor. If you check out the city councils, they are overwhelmingly Dem. And even where you get a rare Republican Mayor, the other offices, the city councils and the bureaucracy are deeply Democrat.” OK, so what? Gibberish. Although I thought your request for me to look up city councils, their political demographics, across like 17 cities and 100 years was priceless. I put it on the “list.” :>)

            What’s your score now? Do you change the editor’s note?

        • larry Horist

          Frank Stetson … Even when given the list,, you say there is not evidence. You produce phony information and give it high credibility. Are you saying that the list is inaccurate? You just cannot give up your obsessive obstinance – even in the face of hard facts..

          Adams was an ancestral Democrat — the party that claims its founding with Jefferson. At the time it was called the Republican Democratic Party (or vice versa) until Jackson dropped the Republican moniker. So, you are ignorant of the history and your point is wrong. Also, irrelevant. The relative stances on racism between political parties came into full bloom in 1856 with the founding of the GOP. That is why I do not dwell a lot on the pre-Civil War era. The two major eras I deal with in the book is the era of segregation (1865 to 1956) and the era of Democrat hypocrisy (1956 to present). Those are the forces (the residual racisms) that are in play today. Frank, you just are too ignorant of the facts — and too unwilling to accept facts — to mount an intelligent counterpoint,

          • frank stetson

            wiki: During Adams’s presidency, the Democratic-Republican Party split into two major camps: the National Republican Party, which supported President Adams, and Andrew Jackson’s Democratic Party.

            Adams politicians, including most ex-Federalists (such as Daniel Webster and Adams himself), would gradually become members of the National Republican Party; and those politicians that supported Jackson would later help form the modern Democratic Party.

            ignorant again you say???? hope you researched your book more thoroughly.

            and quit being a dick about it.

  8. larry Horist

    What is going on here. Are we playing “my pitiful log cabin story is better than yours”? So what? Maybe it is just me, but I find your personal family histories uninteresting. Every one has one. I grew up in a poor household. So what does that have to do with anything? Frank thinks he was responsible for the rise of Japan and China — or at least wants us to think so. Not only is it not interesting, methinks he is embellishing, I give this chat 5 zzzzz’s

  9. Tom

    Wow Larry and Frank, you got a good one going here!! Larry must be making a bunch of money on this one!

    Larry, the reason Frank posted his quality management consulting experience was due to a comment made by Darren that MAGA is about being made in America again. Frank posted (and I agree) that the reason we lost our manufacturing in America is because we lost our customer satisfaction focus – which he is correct in stating as one of the reasons. I believe there are several like giving China a “most favored nations status”, etc. But to the point, Frank listed his quality consulting experience to affirm and legitimize his statements to Darren. I agreed and also listed my credentials. This is no different that your bio at the front of every blog.

    Now Frank has a few excellent points that I wish you would address after you calm down a bit. Man, Frank is twisting your knickers just like Biden twisted GOP knickers during the SOTU address over Medicare and SS cuts. Remember how GOP moaned and groaned!? LOL

    1) Frank has a good point about the property tax as it relates to the quality of schools. I think he is making the case that posh schools in more suburban areas are nicer because the property values are higher thus more taxes are collected to fund the schools. I do not think this is the case in Alamance County NC where I live because all taxes to to the tax department, and schools receive what has been budgeted from the central budgeting authority within the county government. What I have observed is that the latest technologies seem to go to the posh suburban schools first, not the inner city schools. And as an inner city school mathematics teacher, I was always told by the county that there is only so much budget for technology and that we will have to wait a year or two. Then what happened was we got the old tech from the posh schools and the posh schools got the new tech again. This was a cycle I observed. This county is a GOP county.

    So how do you respond to this observation and Franks comment?

    2) Frank made a very good assertion that land fills, and other environmentally hazardous operations always seem to be located in poor black/white areas. This has been an issue for years and I think we can all agree that such cases have been on the news, so we know this type of environmental discrimination and toxic racism exists. According to PEW (which you affirm as a good source, not a newspaper :), PEW says the following, ““If you look at which communities are getting dumped on, getting the greatest share of pollution impacts, race is the most potent predictor,” said Robert Bullard, a professor at Texas Southern University…”

    So how do you respond to Frank on this one?

    3) An issue in my states is Affirmative Action. Our GOP state (all we have is a Dem Gov, all else is GOP) is saying Affirmative Action violates Amendment 14 of our US Constitution. This case is the Supreme Court is expected to rule this year on a pair of cases questioning admissions policies at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. Opponents of the policies argue that race-conscious admissions violate the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection under the law. (THESE ARE YOUR GOP BUDDIES SAYING THIS)

    So how do you answer this case? This is the GOP trying to destroy opportunity protections given to minority races.

    I look forward to your answers Larry.

      • Tom

        Yes the funding picture is part of the problem. But I am also talking about the fact that 58% of students in Alamance County are minority, 42% white. But the schools with more white students always got the technology first and we waited for hand-me-downs. Here are my specific county figures for 21-22 at “” .

        The county once upon a time 1970’s had a county school system and a city school system. They merged them. But I was never confident that they merged the funding appropriation in the same way!

        Funding disparities have existed in our county for many years. The attitude towards the inner city schools for a long time was “as long as they behave, we will push them through and not worry about scores.” The attitude in the county schools was “push for excellence”. And this attitude is confirmed by the stats on number of college acceptances per school. Funny that when our inner city school won the state football championship, the whole county wanted to claim the credit and wanted to be a part of that success. They just didn’t seem to want to be a part of individual minority student success. But this is just my view from ten years of teaching.

        • larry Horist

          Tom … Talking about the 1970s is a far different debate … and you say you only wonder if the funding was equally applied over the combined district. That is not a good argument.

        • frank stetson

          I think you will find it’s not based on race, but on tax and budgeting structures, which are based on race…. IOW, capital spending, aka pc’s, are funded locally in NC, I think property tax, but local revenues. Thus areas with greater revenues, pricier properties, have more local dollars to put at the problem. That’s why it takes poorer NC places, usually minorities, longer to get new capital assets like computers.

          It’s like this, perhaps with variances in the actual funding sources like property or general fund, but all local. IOW, the “state” provides the operational costs, but the local provides the capital expenditures thus the places with bigger pockets get more capital assets. Often the only local funding mechanism is property tax. It’s systemic racism based on both Democratic and Republican taxing schemes.

          And all you have to do is tell the rich people they have to share so everyone can be equal. Get that done next week, would you :>) And in NC, something tells me you’re not going to Democratic Party headquarters to start.

      • larry Horist

        Frank Stetson … You are believing in narratives, not facts. The correlation between educational outcomes and money has been the big government left’s standard argument. Unfortunately, it does not hold up. You might as will believe that Roosevelt helped black.

        • frank stetson

          You’re once again not even close. I explained how the funding goes, and how that might cause systemic racism, and how difficult it might be to change it.

          You left the reservation early on this one. Roosevelt? All I can say is I see your wager and raise you one Trump.

    • larry Horist

      Tom …. You need a tutorial on the impact of property taxes on racism in education. When it comes to funding, many of the worse segregated communities have the highest per pupil funding. The idea that more money means better education is not valid. You need to study the difference in equality education between white and black communities in the major cities — where the property tax benefit is exactly the same and there are other state funding benefits. Why such a difference in educational quality between blacks and whites in the same school system? That answer is racism. Parochial schools and many private schools provide quality education at much less per-pupil cost that the large urban school system. While some suburban and rural school systems can raise more property tax for schools does not mean that they do. The per-pupil funding between the majors urban school systems and all the others is a mixed bag. Republican regions tend to have lower rates of school funding while producing high quality education But … there are places were fund may be too low and it does affect educational quality. Mississippi is often citied to as an example — but even there quality varies among districts. The bottom line … it is very difficult to find a correlation between quality education and funding. Other factors dominate. Having said all that … some suburban districts have a unique funding advantage — parental contributions. When our Evanston grade school did not have the money for a nice new play ground, we held auction (with me as the auctioneer) and raise the money. But that is not a standard benefit across the board.

    • larry Horist

      Tom … You raise an interesting factor — industrial racism. When you talk about landfills and potentially hazardous factories where there have been problems, you are mostly looking at communities with Democrat administrations. Where there is state or federal complicity, there is not clear cut partisan bias in each case. They can involve both sides. The key is to determine who bears the most responsibility — and that is the local leadership … with state official second and federal the least culpable. Talking about the location of those operations. That is local permitting, first. They solicit those operations for tax revenue and jobs. They are sold as great for bringing jobs to the black community. It is a two-sided argument. When something goes wrong — the partisan name-calling takes over. You see the same thing with Planned Parenthood aborting minority babies at a much higher per carta rate and locating in mostly minority communities. Is it a matter of serving the community …or genocide? That is the crux of the toxic location debate. Is the government the overseer or the participant, The water issues are usually government culpability. Toxic releases maybe corporate with government oversight culpability. Since black mayors and the black community often solicit the business developments, it is hard to lay any overall blame on the GOP. It is not a clear racist issue — although some like to frame it that way. The problem of toxic water clearly rests with local leadership. Toxic dumps are a local leadership situation. Corporate contamination is open to debate on a cased-by-case basis.

    • larry Horist

      Tom … Ever since Nixon created the affirmative action programs, there has been debate as to whether violate the equal treatment requirement of the Constitution — and since conservative (Republicans) tend to be the constitutionalists, I would expect that they would raise that question. They are against racism and for equal justice and equal treatment. Their arguments are not based on racism — but it does tend to oppose special treatment for blacks. I understand the compensation for past injustices and racial oppression — but the question of constitutionality is legitimate and not racist based. You will also recall that the accusations of racial bias against Harvard were brough by Asians — one of the protected minority groups. However, you make the argument, you cannot say that affirmative action provides equal opportunity. It was designed to create special privilege. When Nixon created the Affirmative Action programs (and I was there at the time), there was a deep sense among Republicans that the past had to be brought into balance. Nixon got a lot support for Republicans over the opposition of a l lot of congressional (southern) Democrats still holding sway on that side of the aisle But there was also a feeling that it was a temporary adjustment to address the past — and would eventually be ended when there was not more need — when fair employment and housing laws took effect. Are the a necessary benefit today .. or just a privilege that has out lived its necessity. Is the fight because we need the benefit or because those with the benefit want to keep it? Do you personally believe that it is a benefit … and advantage … that should be maintained permanently? The high unemployment rate in the black ghettos have never been diminished by affirmative action because national laws have not been effective where institutional racism remains part of the standard operating procedure. The problem is local — and that is why no national solutions have been effective. You have to know where the problem and who is responsible before you can fix it. That is why the problem of racism in the segregated communities has not ended in more than 150 years of federal laws and Supreme Court decisions.

  10. frank stetson

    On the second one, I agree. I was also trying to say even without that, in America, and I would gather the world, you find poorer places downwind where the pollution more readily flows and richer neighborhoods up wind. Not just what they put there BUT the very location itself. Most important, happens no matter what party is in control.

  11. Ac

    This commentary piece ignited a firestorm within you regular readership. It does not appear from the many reply eateries that containment of its fallout is working. In fact my reading the back and forth comments between you and each faction (Frank, Tom, and Darren vs Larry) seems as if you are tossing fire accelerant on the mess.
    As a reader of your commentary on chosen topics of the day compiled over the past few years and dabbling in PBP archives. Several takeaways form a fabric of thought coming from a particular philosophy of irreverence toward the masses with him you disagree.
    That’s an apparent choice to poke into the fire so to stir up disquieting prognostications.
    The situation with the opinions based commentaries especially during Biden’s Presidency has deteriorated and now destructive.
    Irony flows calling others out for lying, when your claims of objectivity, critical thinking, and fact assessments stink of political bias.
    This is a free country where freedom of speech is foundational. But freedom does have its limits. Yelling FIRE in a crowded theatre does not qualify as a freedom of expression. It produces unacceptable collateral damage costs.
    Morality and ethics we associate with democracy does not shine through when conservative philosophy seeks autocracy in governing.
    One philosophy like conservative beliefs is not a one size fits all. Try as you might, you only serve in frustrating the masse.
    If garnering more votes in the 2024 contest is your objective, then change from arrogantly bullying to caring listener
    The adage depicting old dogs’ ability in caring about learning new tricks, let alone actually accomplishing such a feat seems to fit.
    Biden’s birth year and yours are the same or close. But, he’s lapped you over and over.
    May this be last words once more.

  12. larry Horist

    Ac …. I find the most important element of your grandfatherly advice is this quote.

    “This is a free country where freedom of speech is foundational. But freedom does have its limits. Yelling FIRE in a crowded theatre does not qualify as a freedom of expression. It produces unacceptable collateral damage costs.”

    It is clear that you think my freedom of speech should by tempered or eliminated according to YOUR philosophy. You suggest that my words are dangerous. Of course, that is only your opinion — or perhaps others who hold YOU political bias. Political debate was never intended — nor could it every be — non=controversial. In politics, one opinion begats a counter opinion. That is a good thing. I do have my self-imposed limits — not using crude language pr childish insults. None of which I would censor. I stick to the facts, as I understand them.. I have constant critics, who attack both me and my opinions. But I appreciate that they are engaged.

    You and others say I am too focused on criticizing the left — specifically Democrats, especially Biden. To some extent there is truth in that. However, those who make those accusations seem to have short memories and forget my criticisms of Republicans and conservatives. Oddly, I find that my critics seem to be unable to find any fault with Democrats and Biden. Mostly I am responding to the information and opinions rendered on the left-wing media — which constant attacks (dishonestly) all things Republicans and conservative. Since they make the case for the prosecution (against Republicans) and the defense (for Democrats), I find myself taking up the opposite role — but not without facts and a basis for my opinions.

    The fact that the feisty debate takes place here is a credit to the owner of the site — and to some extent me — because we are First Amendment extremists. It would be sooooo easy to just block disagreement — as you seem to prefer. If Gilbertson was like you, YOU would not be posted here and we would not be having this exchange. Think about that when you whine about political debate — even contentious debate. Yes, I have strong disagreements with Frank or Joseph Bruder (whatever happened to him), but I still admire their willingness to use their First Amendment rights to disagree with me –and even to insult me. Yes, it gets a little impolite at times, but nothing that would create a slander suit. I do try to keep vicious or gratuitous personal attacks out of my responses — and admittedly fail on occasion. But I do not hate the critics. I have a back-handed admiration for their willingness to engage — even when a bit nasty.

    As Harry Truman once wisely admonished … “If you cannot stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.” That was actually an endorsement of political free speech.

    And as a footnote … If you understood conservative limited government philosophy (which you obviously do not), you would not say “conservative philosophy seeks autocracy in governing.” The two concepts are oil and water. They never homogenize. We are the LIMITED GOVERNMENT end of the political continuum. Anyone who claims to be conservative but endorses powerful central government is a fraud.

    • Ac

      I appreciate the fact that you would make an effort in reply.
      Your points are well taken as is it’s positive constructive tone not being mean tempered. That people may be of disagreement in opinion should bring one to be altogether disagreeable .
      Constructive debate on the issues dividing parties into sides need not devolve in sniping at each other. As you know something of competitive debate and its rules governing its practice and discipline.
      In the end, points made meant to prove validity of one side’s view even when masterfully composed will not bring on mass conversion. And, this must be well understood by the variety in opinions among respondents. Negative judgement of other’s opinions and recrimination distracts and dulls whatever the point is for the commentary originally offered.
      If no ground rules are understood, then meaningful debate can be expected. But, adversarial competition will.
      On the subject of the present commentary, your position stimulated some lively comments and more interplay by yourself than usual. Probably the amount of response reflects the issues importance. Say what you will of who you believe failed and must bear the responsibility for the fallout. An injustice has been perpetrated greater than one political party could possibly invent on its own.
      The fact of racial inequity’s injustice is bipartisan. Sure Democrats have a share in the problem. However, conservative Republicans can not duck responsibility. Consider the predominate race of those historically identifying as Republicans.
      It must be every American’s responsibility, otherwise are we all not hypocritical.
      What is the motto engraved on the coins in our pockets and the bills in our wallet
      The many are one is how it translates. How silly is that which the founders thought!
      The other thing printed on American currency compares in it hypocrisy. “In God We Trust” amounts to a conspiracy theory upon our heads.
      That We the people are fractious and argumentative naturally lends itself to division.
      Shame on us all for thinking highly of ourselves , but do not recognize others’ value as equals.

  13. frank stetson

    The confusion between de facto and de jure forms of racism can even baffle the “experts.” Throw that on top of the terms institutional, systemic, interpersonal, internalized, structural racisms and you have a word stew of problems if only in the definition of said problem.

    Larry notes that Blacks fled the Democratic de jure racism in the South only to be met with Democratic de facto racism in the North. And therefore, it’s the Democrats. And the more powerful the control, the worse the racism, an even more difficult claim to establish. Democrats, they’re everywhere.

    I have contended that the similar de jure racism, beyond slavery and early reconstruction period, is found in both Democratic and Republican controlled cities across the Nation, perhaps tilting left to Democrats given the original sin. For de facto racism, I have shown an example of a Republican controlled Northern city with de facto racism. As well as a Democratic controlled Southern City that acted similarly, and where Republicans did not appreciably change this upon taking control. Matter of fact, today, under Republican control, this city has a lot of overt, in your face, racism on a routine basis. It is super easy to find more of the same, and probably even more outside of the public education arena.

    My point is racism is everywhere. Systemic racism is everywhere. De jure is less prevalent than it was, but de facto and systemic are still with us almost anywhere you live in the good ole U S of A.

    Larry tends to mix and merge these themes as readily as he merges city with state with national. It makes for a nice word salad with the foregone conclusion: it’s all the Democrats fault. While I find his facts fascinating and illuminating, I think not so much for his conclusions and spin.

    Larry says, or at least I think he says, but don’t hold me to it until he approves it in the first person:

    Democrats created, established, and maintained slavery.

    Democrats control all the vast majority of US cities where they overtly, covertly create, establish, and maintain de facto racism.

    That’s not only pretty harsh, but one just has to wonder: where have all the Republicans gone? First we have the Southern Democrats who were vanquished by the Northern Republicans. Then, magically, we have Northern Democrats controlling ALL US cities and all the de facto racism in America. Did they come from the South? Were they here, but just sleeping?

    Again, where did all the Republicans go and why, since the civil war, have they become so powerless and ineffectual?

    • larry Horist

      Frank Stetson … more nonsense, misinformation and petty bickering– and the usual use of the Larry Horist if your invention as your personal straw man — this time suggesting I said things I never said. You are hopeless. LOL

  14. EMMA


  15. JPop

    MADE IN CHINA or…MADE IN JAPAN. Whichever…. the shit made and shipped to America was f**king crap..and still is.