All of this. And let’s not forget that Republicans went so far as to develop computer algorithms to optimize anti-Black gerrymandering. That isn’t a theory - we have the receipts.
REDMAP - Wikipedia(short%20for%20Redistricting%20Majority,determination%20of%20electoral%20district%20boundaries.
yeah. i’m still on the fence if computers have made things better or worse for society overall. they seem to have benefited entrenched interests on many fronts. we can see what they’ve done more easily, but they’ve also managed to build up the walls higher
Just because this is phrased civil-ly, doesn’t make your point civil. This is the kind of “polite white supremacy” that propagates hate.
It’s an established fact that Republican gerrymandering targets Black communities for disenfranchisement. Undoing that racist gerrymandering isn’t gerrymandering and it isn’t “broken.”
And if you find that characterization of your post a problem, the edit button is at the bottom of the interface to allow you to clarify your point.
As @anon61221983 and @DukeTrout have said, the solution proposed is not gerrymandering. You must have a really messed up idea of what gerrymandering is if you see making maps that strive for fair representation as gerrymandering.
What? I’m arguing the system needs a larger overhaul by instituting multi-member districts so that minority groups get better representation and end gerrymandering altogether.
How is that police white supremacy?
Characterizing the undoing of gerrymandering as gerrymandering is, most certainly.
Both-sidesing always favors the entrenched powers and disfavors the unempowered. This may well not have been your intention, but it is the effect.
I was describing the problem of complying with the order by packing more black folks in a district than would be required for them to elect their preferred candidate in order to reduce their vote elsewhere.
In what universe would that not be gerrymandering?
The proposed solution by the court was redistricting the state to provide fair representation for Black communities. What article were you reading where the court was ordering further gerrymandering. Because that’s not what was in the linked NPR article.
I was referring to the fact that Alabama was asked to redraw maps once before and came back with another gerrymandered map.
Ugh. I swear I really need to stop writing long things because I have to cut things out in order for them not to be stupidly long and I always seem to leave out something important.
Ultimately, I was just arguing for multi-member districts so we didn’t have to go through this bullshit every decade.
The proposed solution, gerrymandering districts to increase the percentage of black residents in them, is also broken, because the entire system is broken.
This is what you said. It is not remotely clear which proposed solution you mean (the court or the second map the legislature put out).
The second map was a bad faith attempt to “comply” with the court order, and is gerrymandering. Proposed actual solutions were an attempt to correct gerrymandering.
If you wish to communicate via text, make sure you’re clear in your meaning or prepare to be misunderstood.
So, you’re proposing changing the constitution, because this is all constitutional law with regards to redistricting. In the meantime, we have to deal with the system we have, that is being used to deny people voting rights. We need to deal with both the short-term and the long-term, and your utter dismissal of the short term isn’t helpful, and will only cause greater suffering in the mean time.
But why would they need multi-member districts to “fix” the problem? It’s not rocket science. Fair districting can be accomplished by independent committee, computer algorithm (just set it to do the opposite of the crack-and-stack gerrymandering), or just by following existing county and munincipality boundaries. Alabama doesn’t have the kind of huge, multi-district metropolitan areas of other states. With just shy of 50% minority population, simply making 4 of the state’s 7 congressional districts the cities of Mobile, Huntsville, Birmingham, and Montgomery would do the job.
Because multi-member districts are how you do proportional representation and proportional representation gives minority groups proportional power.
It also extends to every minority group (and again, I mean that in the wider sense of a group with a minority of the population) which is pretty much impossible to do by redrawing maps, so if the left or greens or what have you has more than 8% of the population (in Alabama), they have a good shot at getting a representative.
That’s not a thing.
Incorrectly.
So you want to do a massive overall of our political systems? But the racism is okay in the meantime? 
So it’s worth delaying the voting rights of Black communities indefinitely for a chance that The Green Party might gain representation in Alabama?
Yeah, I’m gonna go back to the White Liberal quotes.
you can fix racist outcomes by focusing solely on “big ideas.” you have to focus on and dismantle the racist systems themselves
I did not suggest delaying it. How would that even work? The old districts have uneven populations and I sure as f’ck wasn’t suggesting using the rejected gerrymandered maps.
My suggestion was how you fix it so we don’t go through this same thing every decade in the future.
I mean, not like anything important is on the line, right? These are all just fun intellectual exercises for smart men to ponder over… it has nothing to do with basic human rights or anything like that, right? /s
We have to deal with reality, not just dwell in the realm of ideas. The people who can afford to only focus on the ideals and not with what’s happening on the ground are more often than not, the people who are least impacted by the real world forms of oppression, I’ve noticed. Yes, big ideas matter, and working toward those ideas is important, but so is dealing with the direct outcomes of these systems in the short term…
You DO realize that involves changes to the constitution, right? You seem to be suggesting that we just snap our fingers and fix it…
Yes, you really did. By saying that “the ultimate solution” was multi-member districts rather than simply enforcing fair districting as per the court order, you’re saying it’s OK to forego fair districting in the near term in order to accomplish “perfect” solutiins that would take decades to implement as part of multiple, sweeping changes to the state constitution.
ETA:
To add clarification to my own point - the current districts are gerrymandered. They will continue to be used until new districting is approved by the court. So any seeking of “perfect” solutions just delays fair representation.
This is what happened in N. Carolina, where the gerrymandered district maps were successfully challeneged but the legislature delayed new maps until it was too late to include them in the 2022 midterms.
