Deleted tweet detection is currently running at reduced
capacity due to changes to the Twitter API. Some tweets that have been
deleted by the tweet author may not be labeled as deleted in the PolitiTweet
interface.
Showing page 31 of 332.
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
My paradigm (roughly) matches BLM/1619 doctrine up to 1865, but then acknowledges the century of Black Excellence that followed in the face of discrimination, and sees modern disparities less as a function of "the legacy of slavery" and more as a result of 68 years of socialism. — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
His alternatives: 1) Housing vouchers (Section 8); 2) School vouchers; 3) A simplified tax code and social safety net: a flat tax married to a negative income tax (which is now called "UBI"). Together, they provide a far more effective social safety net for the same price. — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
Whereas a better approach would be to revisit the decisions of 1965 onwards. My hero Milton Friedman (all genuflect) saw this would happen. He warned against ghettoizing broken Black families into substandard housing and substandard schools. https://t.co/JeKTcaq2uL — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
And now what I hear from Democrats is: "Let us double down on Socialism!" Thus, the essence of @DrIbram's theory: "You can either be racist or anti-racist; Anti-racism = pursuing equity; Equity is pursued through socialist policies; Thus you can be racist or socialist." — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
The federal government happened. Johnson's "Great Society" happened. 100,000 federal agents were hired to convince Blacks to split up so moms could get welfare (which was promoted as reparations). Know-it-alls with big ideas is what happened. Socialism is what happened. https://t.co/HZ4H3DpgO5 — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
In 1960 Black labor force participation was HIGHER than White. Black out-of-wedlock births (21%) were LOWER than White (23%). I haven't done the math, but my sense is if nature had run its course these issues would have washed out of society by 1990-2000. So what happened? — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
Nonetheless, the great tradition of Black excellence went on, though progress was slower than it would have been absent this Progressive opposition. Then came the "Golden Age" from Brown v Board to Civil Rights Act of 1964 (which revived Reconstructionism). — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
That is the true origin of minimum wage laws passed that decade. The economic analysis of such laws is that they reduce the cost of discrimination to $0. When the cost of something falls, society consumes it more if it. This includes discrimination. — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
In 1931 Congress passed the Davis Bacon Act to shield Whites from Black competition. See this fine 1994 National Black Law Journal article: "The Davis-Bacon Act: Vestige of Jim Crow" https://t.co/0Ovz9GspJ1 — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
In response to that, Blacks began migrating North (leading to the Harlem Renaissance). These arriving Black workers competed with White labor. Firms hiring Black construction workers were underbidding firms with unionized White workers (whose unions would not admit Blacks). — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
Nonetheless, Blacks progressed, though more slowly than otherwise similarly-situated immigrants (e.g., Irish & Italians) in the face of such discrimination. By the 1920s a Black middle class was emerging. Envious Whites resorted to race riots, such as in Greenwood/Tulsa). — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
Progressivism arrived demanding a government big enough to protect Whites from Black competition. That was the promise of unionization; Confederate Statues went up; Woodrow Wilson (Progressivism's patron saint) resegrated military & civil service; The KKK exploded & peaked. — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
In 1878, resurgent Democratic power rolled back Reconstruction. Civil War gains (Amendments 13, 14, & 15) became legal formalities replaced by near-substitutes for slavery (e.g., sharecropping). — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
TRIGGER WARNING! Typical Democrat advertisements of the era: https://t.co/Zj2AdOMJHu — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
In what I wrote so far, everything evil was Democrat, and anything good was Republican. Democrats were the party of slavery + "Injun'-killing". Democrat SCOTUS : Dred Scott + Plessy. Republicans: abolitionism, Lincoln, & Reconstruction (all Blacks in Congress were Republicans). https://t.co/i2oy862TkG — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
Has fair has been my account been so far? — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
But Blacks were also stymied by new laws such as, "You can't be Black and be a butcher." In 1873 SCOTUS allowed this (Slaughterhouse Cases"). In 1893 (Plessy v. Fergusson) SCOTUS endorsed "separate but equal." Thus arose the Jim Crow South. — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
Reconstruction did bring much improvement... Under Union occupation, Blacks had real voting rights: 21 Blacks were elected to the House. 2 Blacks (one a former slave) were elected to Senate. The military & civil service became integrated (-ish). — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
Lincoln is criticized for not being as abolitionist as Douglass would have liked. He was a politician, he said one thing one place & other things other places. But on balance, we fought a Civil War over slavery (as @DrIbram acknowledges). Lincoln led that war. That counts. — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
So (these quibbles aside), I generally concur with BLM re: 1619-1860: Yes slavery was 1 of our 2 greatest crimes; Yes it was hell on earth; No the Revolution was not fought over it; Yes it became a significant (5%) part of GDP; Yes it spurred our economy but not uniquely so. — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
Second, while slavery-cotton spurred development of transport & markets, it was not UNIQUE in that regard. For example, Irish & Chinese labor built the railroads. Do they get credit for everything that rolled on a track? No. Others contributed to our development, too. — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
Two exceptions: First: it seems improbable to me that our Revolution was fought to preserve an institution that was .5% of GDP. The 1619 Project originally claimed otherwise, but has retreated from that claim. — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
Cotton also contributed to broader US progress. It spurred development of railroads & shipping able to transport cotton to the mills of England. It spurred growth of Wall Street commodity markets. To this point, my claims and BLM-1619 doctrine line up. — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
Slavery then grew steadily until by the 1850s it was generating 5% of US GDP (with 4 million enslaved). In comparison, our automobile industry reached 5% at its 1973 zenith. Thus it IS fair to say that slavery was a substantial part of US GDP by the time of our Civil War. — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
At the time of the American Revolution, slavery was responsible for .5% of GDP. But with the invention of the "Cotton 'gin" (1793), slavery became much more profitable, and hence began robust growth. — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
In an act of remarkable scholarship, WEB Du Bois first calculated that 320,000 number. A century later, Harvard's Chair of African American Studies Dr. Henry Louis Gates (@HenryLouisGates) revisited the work of Du Bois, and discovered it had been stunningly accurate Du Bois. — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
Of the 10.5 million sent to the New World: 6 million came to what became Brazil; 320,000 - 350,000 came to what became the USA. The other roughly 4 million were scattered across the rest of the Caribbean and Americas. — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
Our involvement with slavery was also reprehensible. Europeans enslaved 10.5 million Africans in the ATLANTIC slave trade. NB In comparison: Africans enslaved 1.5 million Europeans ("Barbary Pirates"); Muslims enslaved 50 million Africans after Muhammad endorsed the project. — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
The genocide of Native Americans was reprehensible. One might note that the BULK of those killed died from contact with germs brought by Europeans (from their contact with livestock). Just as the Han did in Asia. Just as the Bantu did in Africa. (cf. "Guns, Germs, & Steel") — PolitiTweet.org
Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne
First, the TRULY easy stuff: the two great stains on the honor of our nation come from how we treated Native Americans (we likely reduced their population 95%), and how we treated Blacks (both slavery and thereafter). — PolitiTweet.org
