Jim Pinkerton writes in Breitbart:
by JAMES P. PINKERTON 12 Aug 2016
… Also in 1992, presidential candidate Bill Clinton had his celebrated confrontation with rapper Sister Souljah. She had advocated the killing of white people, and so, in June of that year, Clinton called her out on it, expressing the revulsion of most Americans. Indeed, to this day, a moment when a politician does the right thing, even if it offends a key part of his base, is known as a Sister Souljah Moment.
Yet of course, in the end, before the larger jury of the American public, Clinton was handsomely rewarded. Yes, his words rankled a few, but he won the November election in a landslide.
But that was then. Today, Black Lives Matter-type activists have a complete hammerlock on the Democratic Party, and so Hillary Clinton, panting after the 2016 nomination, has felt compelled to walk back the Clintons’ earlier centrism. In particular, Hillary, on behalf of her husband, has repeatedly apologized for Bill’s signing of a tough 1994 crime bill.
Moreover, the 2016 Democratic platform is a feast of leftist cliches about crime, including,
Democrats are committed to reforming our criminal justice system and ending mass incarceration.
Indeed, the platform uses the word “incarceration,” dismissively, a total six times, and also includes a lengthy discussion on ending “systemic racism.” So if the Democrats win this year, the Justice Department’s assault on BPD is sure to be replicated, many times, across the country.
So there you have it: The Democrats have gained the favor of #BlackLivesMatter, but they have given up on the anti-crime issue; Hillary didn’t even bother seeking the endorsement of the Fraternal Order of Police, which had endorsed Bill in 1996….
Does Hillary even intend to have a Sister Souljah moment this year?
So as we step back and think about cities in post-war America, we can see long trends: first, the trend of suburbanization, as whites (and others) fled crime in the cities. And second, the trend of gentrification, as the young and the affluent moved back downtown.
Yet if the crime surge continues, we’re now on the edge of a third long trend: re-suburbanization. Yes, the suburbs are as “boring” as they ever were, but personal safety is not boring. Okay, actually, maybe safety is boring, but for the vast majority of Americans, that kind of boring is good.
Perhaps, but that’s what Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing is intended to prevent: the idea is to encourage white gentrification of downtowns via population transfers of the Problem People out to the formerly white suburbs and small towns.
This has a number of advantages for Democrats:
– Nonwhite Democrats tend to be too concentrated in inner city districts for Democrats to optimize the number of Democrats elected in state and Congressional legislative districts. The Republicans use the Voting Rights Act to draw heavily black or Latino districts that will elect black and Latino legislators. That means the Democrats win a lot of seats 80-20 while the Republicans win more seats 55-45. The Democrats would love to move their black base into a lot more outlying districts so the Dems can win more 55-45 elections.
– Democrats believe that moving blacks to the suburbs won’t turn them into Republicans, but moving whites to gentrified inner cities will turn them into Democrats by delaying family formation. I don’t know if this has ever been studied quantitatively, but it sounds plausible.
– Urban real estate developers tend to be in bed with Democratic politicians, while suburban real estate developers tend to be in bed with Republican politicians. As Obama says, politics is rewarding your friends and punishing your enemies.