1964 Civil Rights Act

How Did Blacks Benefit From this Act?

1) Their family purchasing power was three times greater before the act than today.

2) Less than a quarter of black children lived in fatherless households, compared to more than three quarters today (more than 80% now, per some recent studies).

3) Less than a quarter of black men under the age of 32 had been imprisoned in their lives, compared to more than three quarters today.

4) Less than 30 per 100,000 black male youths were murdered, compared to more than 300 today.

5) Their AIDS death rate was infinitely lower than it is today.

If you see a pony in all that bs, where exactly is it

If you want something done wrong, ask the federal government to do it for you.   The nation learned just how effective this government is at problem solving during the Microsoft anti-trust suit, which to date, April 15, 2000, purged two trillion dollars from the stock markets, caused the biggest point drop in a single day in the Dow Jones Industrial Average (618 points), and reduced the NASDAQ by more than 30% in less than 4 months.  To get back to where Microsoft stock was just three months ago would require that stock to increase in value by 62%.

So it is with the 1964 Civil Rights Act from which nobody benefited and everybody except our foreign economic competitors suffered.  Even though blacks were the intended beneficiaries of the act, their family purchasing power was three times greater before the act than today.  Less than a quarter of black children lived in fatherless households, compared to more than three quarters today.  Less than a quarter of black men under the age of 32 had been imprisoned in their lives, compared to more than three quarters today. 

The CRA gave the federal government unprecedented power, power which the US Constitution specifically proscribed from government, and which the government used to destroy the black family, which spilled over to all families.  "Compassionate whites" assure the average black mother who tosses the father of her children out of the family home that she will get a 32% raise by merely accepting welfare from Uncle Sam.   The "man out of the house rule" makes sure he doesn't return, and our courts make sure he can't even talk to his own children.   If he doesn't like that arrangement, we will gladly throw him in American jails and prisons which already contain a third of the world's men behind bars and 40 times as many black men as are in South Africa's prisons.  An American man is 80 times more likely to be imprisoned for sexual assault as a Japanese or Italian or Greek man, but an American black man is 560 times more likely. Once charged with a serious crime, a black man's odds of avoiding a conviction by our courts are less than one out of twelve.

The justification for this abrogation of all of our Constitutional rights, and particularly those of fathers, was that blacks in the US were "discriminated against", a term which turned the formerly good word "discrimination" into a bad one.  Attaching the word "against" to the word "discrimination" made it tantamount to an assault.  But how valid is the argument considering that no other black anywhere in the rest of the world had it as good as American blacks, and that even they had it better before the CRA than today?  Before this act was passed, the average one-working parent family in the US had five times the purchasing power of the average Japanese family, but today the one-working parent family of Japan has twice the purchasing power of a two-working parent family in the US.  Even with this plunge in family incomes, the average black family in the US still earns more than 100 times as much as the average Ethiopian family.  And more than 80 times as much as a family in Chad or Zaire.  And more than 50 times as much as a family in Gambia, Togo, or Uganda.  And more than 40 times as much as a family in Rwanda, Sierra Leone, the Central African Republic, Guinea, Somalia, or Zimbabwe.  And more than 30 times as much as a family in Ghana, Djibouti, Sao Tome, Senegal, Sudan, or Cape Verde.  And more than 20 times as much as a family in Angola or Egypt.  And more than 10 times as much as a family in Cameroon, Tunisia, Congo, Botswana, Cote d'ivoire, or Swaziland.   In only three African countries, Algeria, Gabon, and South Africa, do the the average family incomes approach those the average black American family, yet even they earn less than a fifth as much.

Both the British and the French made gallant attempts to spread patriarchy to Africa, but both failed miserably and have now abandoned all of their former colonies there.   Many Africans can still read and write English or French, and they still speak with fine British accents, but the the prevailing mood is that the presence of whites made the condition for blacks in Africa even worse than it was before.

It is time for whites to stop "helping" blacks, before black families are erased from the face of the land.  It is time for us to abandon welfare and the 1964 Civil Rights Act, just as the British and the French abandoned these African colonies.   It is time to remove these perverse economic incentives which made ghettos of black motherhood.  It is past time to allow black American fathers to take control of their own families, once again, just as our Christian heritage demands that we do:

To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.",  Genesis 3:16

It is also time to free American white men from slavery.  For each $1.00 earned by a black household, the white male taxpayer adds another 68 cents through "welfare".  According to the 1999 Statistical Abstract of the United States, Table No. 702 http://www.census.gov/prod/99pubs/99statab/sec13.pdf , 8,393 black workers earned a combined total of $265 billion in 1998.  The Heritage Foundation estimates that welfare costs taxpayers $360 billion per year.  Half of that, or $180 billion, is paid to black households even though blacks constitute only 12% of the population.   If the 1.4 million black government workers, who are essentially on an extended welfare program, were instead to join the work force, total incomes of black workers would increase by $31 billion, to $296 billion, for a total per capita of $8,970 for American blacks.

This is STILL 27 times greater than the per capita average in Rwanda and 74 times that in Ethiopia.

If American blacks are "discriminated against", then what do you call the condition of the average blacks in Ethiopia or Rwanda?

If the white man hadn't brought black men from Africa in the first place, we wouldn't have to subsidize them to the tune of $180 billion each year. But of course they would still be in Africa where blacks across the continent earn an average of $655 per year, which is one twentieth of what they earn in the US including welfare, and one thirteenth excluding welfare. No black man in the rest of the world lives as well as blacks in America, with or without welfare.

The blacks are right. It's time for reparations. It's time for blacks to pay us back the $180 billion in welfare each year which they, so far, haven't even begun to pay back. Do they really think this is a free lunch? They also need to pay back the difference between their average incomes here and the average in Africa, which is $8,315 per capita. With 33 million blacks in American, this is $274 billion which they owe us, each year.

The apology from us decadent white men is this, Congressman:  If the blacks of America refuse to reimburse us for the extra costs of welfare and affirmative action, each of us white men will personally pay the complete cost of repatriating one black American man and his wife and children to any African nation of his choosing, including airfare, 3 inflight meals, two inflight movies, a house with land, 3 pigs, 4 chickens, AND a job earning at least the average African income of $655 per year.

93.5% of welfare recipients are women http://www.census.gov/apsd/www/statbrief/sb95_2.pdf

John Conyers and John Johnson are right--it is time for reparations.

If the 33 million American blacks had lived in Africa for the last 30 years, they would have earned an average of $650 per year, rather than the $8,970 that they earned in the US. In other words, just being in the US increased their per capita incomes by 14 fold compared to being in Africa. This is a grand total of $8.2 trillion EXTRA dollars earned by American blacks just because they were in the US.

They also received $3.6 trillion in welfare, for a total of $11.8 trillion, which we want back, now. Reparations.

Can they ever pay it back? If all 900 million blacks in Africa were put to work to pay it back, and if 100% of their incomes were used to retire this debt to White men, it would take them 20 years to pay it all back. Conversely, if 100% of the incomes of the 33 million American blacks were taken to pay it back, it would take them 40 years to pay it back. If these 33 million American blacks were living in Africa instead, it would take them 550 years to pay it back.

There is no free lunch, Johnny Johnson. It is time to call your bluff. We want reparations. We want $11.8 trillion now. We do not want to continue to subsidize amoral behavior which did nothing but give black women the ability to throw the fathers of their children out of their homes so they could raise fatherless children, which INCREASED the poverty rate of American blacks. We do not want to pay another $11.8 trillion over the next 30 years. We want a repayment plan from you, Johnny. How are you going to get blacks off of welfare at the same time that you raise $11.8 trillion to pay back your White American men slaves?

Copyright @ 2007 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party