The factory boom increased employment decreasing poverty. The War on drugs put Black men in jail increasing poverty. A man with an anti affirmative action agenda sees the world as a nail and sees causation at every turn.
Edit to add:
The problem that many outside the Conservative bubble have is that the Black Conservative argument is simplistic. The laughter around despite lynching a Klan police is disgustingly. The stock market crash of 1929, led to a 50-70% Black unemployment rate in 1934. There was no laughter.
The Great Migration followed. Boycotts were formed against businesses who would not hire Blacks. The idea that political power is not important is nonsense. The Southern Negro Youth Congress, formed in 1937, registered voters. Because, Republicans ignored Black voters, Blacks were told to turn the face of pictures of Abraham Lincoln to the wall. The Republicans had been paid in full by Black voters. Blacks accepted the crumbs from the New Deal over the benign neglect of the Republicans.
FDR received 70% of the Black vote in 1936. FDR had a Black cabinet and appointed the first Black federal judge. Blacks used political power to effect change. Pulling oneself up by ones own bootstraps is a physical impossibility. (Booker T Washington meant it as a joke).
There has always been a very easy solution. Make preferences tied solely to economic disadvantage and not race. This is meritorious because two candidates with equal scores or other achievements would be fairly distinguished by who overcame greater obstacles to get to their results.
It further naturally creates fair upwelling - races suffering economic disadvantage get to see more of their numbers helped by the policy, during the time they are overrepresented in the lower classes.
It avoids unfairly helping rich people who don't need it but are in a race that gets preferential benefit. Whereas race-based policies give Jay-Z's kids a leg up that they just don't need.
It further naturally reaches a steady state balance - when there is no difference between races in terms of their economic situations, you don't need to change the policy. Simply by continuing to draw from those in the economically underprivileged groups you can keep the policy going but no longer draw from one race more than another, relative to demographics of the overall population.
The factory boom increased employment decreasing poverty. The War on drugs put Black men in jail increasing poverty. A man with an anti affirmative action agenda sees the world as a nail and sees causation at every turn.
Edit to add:
The problem that many outside the Conservative bubble have is that the Black Conservative argument is simplistic. The laughter around despite lynching a Klan police is disgustingly. The stock market crash of 1929, led to a 50-70% Black unemployment rate in 1934. There was no laughter.
The Great Migration followed. Boycotts were formed against businesses who would not hire Blacks. The idea that political power is not important is nonsense. The Southern Negro Youth Congress, formed in 1937, registered voters. Because, Republicans ignored Black voters, Blacks were told to turn the face of pictures of Abraham Lincoln to the wall. The Republicans had been paid in full by Black voters. Blacks accepted the crumbs from the New Deal over the benign neglect of the Republicans.
FDR received 70% of the Black vote in 1936. FDR had a Black cabinet and appointed the first Black federal judge. Blacks used political power to effect change. Pulling oneself up by ones own bootstraps is a physical impossibility. (Booker T Washington meant it as a joke).
https://www.history.com/articles/last-hired-first-fired-how-the-great-depression-affected-african-americans
Edit to add:
If things were so great in the post, why were Blacks pushing so hard for change?
Perhaps Blck Conservatives would be happy if we created a Time Machine and took them back to the good old days.
You are running into 2 problems now.
Black fatigue and pattern recognition.
There has always been a very easy solution. Make preferences tied solely to economic disadvantage and not race. This is meritorious because two candidates with equal scores or other achievements would be fairly distinguished by who overcame greater obstacles to get to their results.
It further naturally creates fair upwelling - races suffering economic disadvantage get to see more of their numbers helped by the policy, during the time they are overrepresented in the lower classes.
It avoids unfairly helping rich people who don't need it but are in a race that gets preferential benefit. Whereas race-based policies give Jay-Z's kids a leg up that they just don't need.
It further naturally reaches a steady state balance - when there is no difference between races in terms of their economic situations, you don't need to change the policy. Simply by continuing to draw from those in the economically underprivileged groups you can keep the policy going but no longer draw from one race more than another, relative to demographics of the overall population.
As long as you do not lower the initial standards, it sounds promising.
However, when the race and gender card is denied, get ready for some real howling.