text:
Urban areas that flipped red (and a few that flipped blue)
Both the Establishment media and conservative regulars are framing Trump's success as an uprising of non-urban America over urban America. The media provides its consumers with ego flattery in the form of reassuring them that Trump voters are hicks in the sticks, while conservatives pride themselves on not being urbanites and want to flatter their own egos about the electoral strength of non-urban America.
It's not that there's no truth to this -- a thousand voters in this rural county, a thousand voters in that rural county, pretty soon you've got a narrow victory.
But so much of non-urban America was already sour on the Democrats that there wasn't a whole lot more blood to be squeezed from that stone.
Rather, the key new partner in the Trump coalition was urban areas -- not just any, but those in de-industrialized regions. Industrialization produced large populations who are still there in the Rust Belt, even if it's down from their peak around 1970.
They may be forgotten cities, but they are still cities. In the Establishment and conservative mindset, whether you love 'em or hate 'em, only the thriving glamorous cities represent urban areas.
An earlier post on Election Day discussed these issues, and now we can see where exactly the large numbers of new Republican voters came from. We can also see which urban areas that used to be Republican have defected to the elitist party.
To keep the numbers round, I'm using "urban area" to mean a county with about 100,000 people or more. I only counted it as a flip if it was the same color during both Obama elections, and switched during the Trump election. Otherwise it already flipped due to Obama, McCain, or Romney. We're interested in the re-alignment brought about by Trump vs. Clinton.
First, a brief reminder of where urban areas are located:
We can't expect flipping urban areas in the Upper Plains if there aren't any there to begin with. And they'd already be Republican anyway.
This map shows urban counties that went for Obama both times and then for Trump (red), and those that went for McCain and Romney and then for Clinton (blue). Click to enlarge.
See the Appendix for tables listing the county, state, largest city, population size, and the last time it voted Republican (if it went to Trump) or Democrat (if it went to Clinton).
Let's start with the handful that went from red to blue. If Trump cities are forgotten cities, then new blue cities are thriving magnets for aspiring elites. Trump cities lie in the Rust Belt, new blue cities in the Sun Belt.
The worst offender is Orange CA, which hasn't voted Democrat since 1936. Next is Fort Bend TX, part of the Houston metro, that hasn't been blue since favorite son LBJ ran unopposed in 1964. Another favorite son, Jimmy Carter in 1976 and '80, was the last Democrat chosen by three counties in the Atlanta metro (Cobb, Gwinnett, Henry).
The only new blue county outside of the Sun Belt is Anne Arrundel MD, part of the Baltimore metro and home to Annapolis ("Drain the swamp"). It only narrowly voted Republican the past two times, though, so it's not as dramatic of a reversal. The last Democrat they voted for was LBJ in '64.
These counties are all affluent, and are natural defections as Trump re-aligns the GOP toward its Progressive Era dominance, when its guiding principle was husbandry of America's industries, relying on the native working class and industrialists alike.
What's disturbing is that when these new blue counties voted Democrat many decades ago, they were in line with the rest of the nation -- FDR, LBJ, Carter. Now they are voting blue at a time when the country has swung decisively red. They are joining their fellow nouveau riche parasites to make the Democrats the party of reactionary elites.
Turning to the blue-to-red counties, the bulk of them lie in the former industrial powerhouse of the Greater Northeast -- east of the Mississippi, and not the South. The two main sub-divisions are those along the Great Lakes and those in eastern major river valleys (Delaware, Hudson, Connecticut). Most of them contributed to winning the state for Trump, or at least substantially narrowing the margin (as in Rhode Island). The exception here is New York, where the gains outside of New York City were offset by the worse-than-usual Republican numbers within it. Not surprising, given all the yuppies, transplants, and immigrants there.
The largest counties here, with over half a million residents, are Suffolk NY (Long Island), Macomb MI, and Montgomery OH. I said in the Election Day post that a major Rust Belt city would turn red, and although it wasn't as big as Cincinnati, its large satellite Dayton turned red for the first time since 1988.
Just under half of these Rust Belt counties voted GOP for the last time as recently as 2004, although that doesn't mean they were reliably red before then. For some, 2004 was like 2016 a risk-taking year for the reliably blue county. For others, they had been drifting away for awhile, and 2008 was the crossing-over point. So Trump has both brought back lapsed Republican counties, as well as piqued the interest of blue counties who only vote red when things look really bad and they want someone to shake things up.
Nearly half last voted Republican during the 1980s, and a handful for Nixon in '72. Only two counties last voted GOP when it was a losing party (St. Lucie FL and Suffolk NY last voted red in '92). So unlike the new blue counties, the red-for-Trump counties have generally been on board with the rest of the nation -- for Nixon, Reagan, Bush I, Bush II, and now Trump.
And although W. Bush won many of these counties, he didn't win the states they're in because he didn't win enough of them at once, and by large enough margins. Sure, W. Bush won Racine WI in '04, but Trump also added Kenosha, which hasn't voted red since the '72 landslide. And W. Bush won Macomb MI in '04, but Trump added Saginaw and Bay, which haven't voted red since the '84 landslide. So W. Bush could only make a dent in Wisconsin and Michigan, while Trump won both of them. And W. Bush didn't win any of the three in Pennsylvania that Trump flipped, which last voted GOP in '84 or '88.
Outside of the Rust Belt, there are two flipped counties in Florida that helped win the state. Although it might not seem like a historic upset since Florida goes back and forth, these two counties (Pinellas and St. Lucie) have been solid blue since '88 or '92. I'm guessing the transplants there are refugees from the Rust Belt. They vote like them, at any rate.
Secondarily, there's a pair of Southern minority cities where Trump's no-BS appeal to blacks managed to convert two urban areas that are traditionally Democrat because they're majority minority. These are Robeson NC and Jefferson TX, which only voted Republican in the '72 landslide, and were Democrat before that at least back through 1960. Chesapeake VA is also nearly majority minority, and no doubt flipped red with the help of the blacks for Trump. That was a W. Bush county (and state), though, so it's not such a major reversal.
Finally, there's an outlier out West in Cowlitz WA, which is actually on the Oregon border and part of the Portland area rather than Seattle. (Oregon is the reddest state on the West Coast, notwithstanding the recent colonization of Portland -- imagine that for twice as long in Seattle, and five times as long in San Francisco.) There's no single big city there, but a collection of small towns with roots in the lumber industry. Since 1960, they've only voted Republican in '60, '72, and '80.
That flip is part of the "grungers for Trump" phenomenon that I've pointed out several times before. This now includes the hometown of Nirvana (Aberdeen WA), whose small county (Grays Harbor) has not voted Republican since 1928! At least they picked winners when they did decide to go red. Truly a return to the Progressive Era of the GOP.
This makes it clear that the main issue determining the election was populism vs. elitism, and that gaining the white working class in forgotten cities was smarter than trying to reach out to minorities in mega-cities. The losses on the GOP side reflect that: it was elitist whites who left, not blacks, Hispanics, or Asians (such as their numbers were in the GOP).
If we don't internalize these lessons, we'll slip back into the same anti-urban mindset that lost so badly over the past generation. Rescuing and re-building forgotten cities is not blind worship of urbanism, unlike the failing mindset of Establishment Republicans whose idea of urban outreach is making themselves as cosmopolitan as possible in order to win the votes of yuppies in thriving cities. The Trump movement can prioritize urban areas, as long as it's coming from an attitude of stewardship over American industries, rather than maximizing the incomes of carpet-bagging yuppies.
Red to blue counties
State County Largest City Pop (100K) Last voted D
CA Orange Anaheim 32 1936
GA Cobb Marietta 7 1976
GA Gwinnett Peachtree Corners 8 1976
GA Henry Stockbridge 2 1980
MD Anne Arundel Glen Burnie 6 1964
TX Fort Bend Sugar Land 6 1964
Blue to red counties
State County Largest City Pop (100K) Last voted R
CT Windham Windham 1 1988
DE Kent Dover 2 2004
FL Pinellas St. Petersburg 9 1988
FL St. Lucie Port St. Lucie 3 1992
IL Winnebago Rockford 3 2004
IN Porter Portage 1 2004
IN LaPorte Michigan City 1 1988
IN Vigo Terre Haute 1 2004
IN Delaware Muncie 1 2004
ME Penobscot Bangor 2 2000
ME Kennebec Augusta 1 1988
ME Androscoggin Lewiston 1 1988
MI Macomb Warren 8 2004
MI Monroe Monroe 2 2004
MI Saginaw Saginaw 2 1984
MI Bay Bay City 1 1984
MI Calhoun Battle Creek 1 2004
MI Eaton Charlotte 1 2004
NC Robeson Lumberton 1 1972
NH Hillsborough Manchester 4 2004
NJ Gloucester Washington Twp 3 1988
NY Suffolk Brookhaven 15 1992
NY Niagara Niagara Falls 2 1984
NY Oswego Oswego 1 2004
NY Broome Binghamton 2 1984
NY Orange Newburgh 4 2004
NY Dutchess Poughkeepsie 3 2004
NY St. Lawrence Ogdensburg 1 1988
NY Saratoga Saratoga Springs 2 2004
NY Rensselaer Troy 2 1988
OH Montgomery Dayton 5 1988
OH Stark Canton 4 2000
OH Wood Bowling Green 1 2004
OH Lorain Lorain 3 1984
OH Portage Kent 2 1988
OH Trumbull Warren 2 1972
OH Ashtabula Ashtabula 1 1984
PA Luzerne Wilkes-Barre 3 1988
PA Erie Erie 3 1984
PA Northampton Bethlehem 3 1988
RI Kent Warwick 2 1984
TX Jefferson Beaumont 3 1972
VA Chesapeake Chesapeake 2 2004
WA Cowlitz Longview 1 1980
WI Racine Racine 2 2004
WI Kenosha Kenosha 2 1972
WI Winnebago Oshkosh 2 2004
Categories: Economics, Geography, Politics
Bruce 12/1/16, 8:07 AM
St. Lucie is my home county. Traditionally it's transplants from the Midwest, Northeast and some lower class whites from places like West Virginia. There's a sizeable black ghetto population and Mexicans to pick citrus. The county is now demographically dominated by Port St. Lucie at the south end which is transplants from all over including the Muslim that shot up the Orlando nightclub.
Erie County was once home to one of GE's largest locomotive factories. It was also home to a lot of other manufacturing companies and a major Great Lakes port.
Feryl 12/1/16, 9:33 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/01/opinion/count-those-votes-again.html?ref=opinion&_r=1
Vomit inducing. This partisan dickhead is still (still!) bitter about 2000. Do these people realize that 3rd party candidates have kept the GOP from winning? And that Johnson did more damage to Trump than Stein did to Clinton?
Get a frikkin clue. She says Gore wouldn't have invaded Iraq. Who cares at this point? The Dem elitists are if anything getting more insular, more territorial, and more haughty. Instead of shaming Green voters, how 'bout improving your party. Go ahead and keep up the arrogance and deceit ("we're not the war party"). It served you so well in the last 3 election cycles.
Marcus 12/1/16, 11:05 AM
So Sec of State is going to be Giuliani or Romney? So far there are worrying signs that Trump isn't fulfilling our hopes of remaking the GOP, but as someone reminded me, he has experience with firing people..
agnostic 12/1/16, 3:04 PM
David Lynch connection: Robeson County NC's largest city is Lumberton, where Blue Velvet is set (though filmed in a nearby county).
Cowlitz WA might as well be the Twin Peaks setting.
Most of these cities that ought to be made great again could have been the setting for his Midcentury nostalgia.
The red-to-blue counties are much more of a historic reversal. They're reverting to a party they haven't voted for since the '60s and '70s. The blue-to-red counties are reverting to a much more recent pattern from the '80s, '90s, and 2000s.
So the major angle of re-alignment is not so much Trump making the GOP friendly to the working class, which Reagan managed to do, but to make it so hostile against the elites.
Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II were all very friendly to the country club cliques -- Trump says I don't need their dirty donor money, and we're going to drain the swamp.
That populist / anti-elitist angle hasn't been mainstream in the GOP since McKinley / TR in the Progressive Era.
In fairness, the elites were not debauched anti-American parasites and monopolists back in the 1960s. Not since fin-de-siecle decadence and octopus-like trusts have the elites been so awful that the rising GOP had to campaign on cutting them back down to size.
Marcus 12/1/16, 4:55 PM
Eisenhower and Nixon made the GOP the party of the working class. Reagan kept them onboard with his cornball patriotism and cowboy persona, while he was IRL eviscerating them (see "how can he lie like that?" in American Psycho). Nixon's winning formula of separating New Left from blue collar could work every time if the GOP purged the randroid/libertardians who seized control in 1980. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_Hat_Riot
The face of the libertardian Midwestern evangelical #NeverTrumper
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Sasse#/media/File:Ben_Sasse_Official_photo.jpg
TGGP 12/1/16, 8:47 PM
"Now they are voting blue at a time when the country has swung decisively red."
Hillary seems to have won the popular vote, so it didn't go that decisively red. A small shift in the right places and she'd have won. And I wouldn't have thought of Dayton as a "major Rust Best City". But other than that you made some good points. We talk a lot about votes at the state level (particularly those comparing Red States today to the Confederacy) overlooking changes in counties. When a county votes differently than it has in many decades, that's interesting even if the state as a whole doesn't flip. And speaking of granularity, I'd like to see some breakdowns of those majority-minority cities that flipped to Trump.
I don't think Progressive-era Republicans were that anti-elite. Progressives were not the same thing as Populists. Progressives typically WERE the urban elite crafting what they saw as a more acceptable version of modern industrial urban capitalistic democracy. I don't want to hold up a Marxist like Gabriel Kolko as the representative of truth, but his Triumph of Conservatism is a valuable resource on that time period. Most of the reforms were made at the behest if corporate leadership, with legislation written by their lobbyists. Kolko is hard to satisfy, with anything less than than full-scale socialism or adoption of the Populist platform taken as a way to head off what he saw as necessary changes, but it's hard to look at what actually happened and view it as Bedouins invading the capital rather than the existing elite having asabiya themselves.
Like Trump said, subtract the illegal votes in California (13+ % of residents are foreign-born), not to mention millions of illegals voting elsewhere, and there goes the "popular vote" talking point.
Dayton is under a million people, not a big-league city like Cincinnati.
The big Republicans like McKinley and Teddy Roosevelt were against the elites, else McKinley's campaign to push through tariffs as a Congressman would have gone through smoothly, and it would not have been a re-alignment away from the laissez-faire Gilded Age.
They did get the industrialists on board, but that's different from saying the elites got their way -- not those elites who were not industrialists, and not those who wanted global commerce uber alles. The run-up to WWI was an earlier surge of global interconnectedness, both political and economic.
Marxists are wrong when they suggest that anti-elite policies are secretly pro-elite just because the elites formally draft and sign the legislation. Their hand was forced by the populist uprising.
Here's an online election atlas that goes back to 1960 for free, and longer if you pay:
http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/
You can pick a year, then look across the states. Or pick a state, and look across the years. States have county-level info on the winner, though not by what margin (except in recent years).
Color code is reversed -- blue is R, red is D. ("It's preserving an older arbitrary standard," i.e. confusing everybody today.)
Anne Arundel County has Annapolis and surrounding towns. Glen Burnie up north must have been solid Trump, the capital must have gone solid Hillary. I think you're right, massive elite support for Hillary in Annapolis area likely.
Polichinello 12/1/16, 10:28 PM
Ft. Bend has been largely transformed by immigration. It's a classic case of how wrong the cucks have been about immigration. Ten years ago it was a largely white evangelical county with orthodox conservative leanings. Now it's full of Asians, East and South. Sugar Land will have bindi mayor pretty soon.
agnostic 12/2/16, 1:50 AM
Ft. Bend is no different demographically from 4 years ago, when Romney won it by 7 points. This time Clinton won it by 6 points.
A 13-point swing in just 4 years is mostly due to the elite whites rejecting the populist message of the Trump movement.
TGGP 12/2/16, 8:56 AM
I found this interesting, arguing that the real story is Clinton losing voters in the Rust Belt rather than Trump gaining them. Individual Democrats seemed to be staying home or voting third party:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/12/the_myth_of_the_rust_belt_revolt.html
There's an element of the elite responding to popular sentiment in the progressive era, but much of it was them carrying out things they had already seen as being in their collective self-interest.
Polichinello 12/2/16, 9:00 AM
Out of curiosity, do you have the numbers of the people who voted and their ethnic breakdown? I'm pushing back a little, because I can tell you, there has been a significant change in this area (even in the last four years). I've seen it as my kid has progressed through elementary school. The classes get less and less white. Also, of those who are classified as "white", do they break out Arabs? We have a YUGE Middle Eastern demographic that's shown up.
Because of Texas' safe red status (for now), did whites vote less, and did Trump's villainization and immigration policies increase the turnout of Hispanics and Asians (particularly Muslims) in this county?
I admit I have not seen the presidential vote number for the county until now, and I'm a bit surprised. I expected Ft. Bend to eventually turn (every year, more offices are contested by Democrats where they were usually settled in the GOP primary), but I did not expect a change this dramatic. That's because the whites in this county are not what I'd call typical "elite". They're more like Ted Cruzians. Sugar Land is Tom DeLay's home. Yes, he was in leadership, but he was always seen as a bit declasse by more elite Republicans.
The leading industry here is oil, so the American whites working tend to be more middle American in their views. However, you could be right, in that the medical and technological industries here are growing as well, and they will tend to bring in a different white demographic.
Feryl 12/2/16, 2:52 PM
Barone has an article today about a couple things I haven't seen discussed anywhere else. First, he says that the Midwest tends to reject the party run by crooks(the GOP in the 70's, The Dems now). Second, he says that the Upper Midwest in particular doesn't stomach wars. The area was a hotbed of anti-Vietnam sentiment, while Trump's blistering of post 9/11 foreign policy served him well and dragged down Hillary whose fingerprints are all over recent misadventures.
Barone also thinks that a more conventional GOP candidate wouldn't have matched Trump's performance in the "outstate" Midwest on account of truecon trade policies alienating people, though a cuck might've bested Trump in the Sunbelt and among cosmopolitans.
For those who think that any GOPer would've had the election in hand, keep in mind that such a candidate wouldn't have fought as hard against the Clinton's chicanery. The Dems have basically been running an ongoing psyop since Bill's first run to the White House. Relentless polling (down to what phrases and words play best), oppo. research, Hollywood speech writers and ad creators, memes crafted by experts in manipulation (remember when "dark" was used monolithically by the MSM/Dems/Cucks to describe Trump after the GOP convention?), etc. There was a time (the late 60's-late 80's) when the GOP had a reputation as the party that played dirty. The birth of PC in the early 90's forced the party to sheath it's sharpest blades pertaining to racial issues (no more Willie Hortons), while the Dem's burgeoning class of Boomer yuppies started playing to win. Thanks to cuck cowardice, the GOP managed to cede damn near every issue to the Dems. The Dems and the MSM badgered McCain and Romney into bending over backwards to prove that they cared about non-whites as each candidate failed to even appeal to many whites. Result? Losing to the Manchurian candidate, the smooth non-entity Obama whose racial neuroses and dubious background would've been picked apart in the 70's or 80's.
It doesn't include race data, and there was no exit poll in Texas this year or last time. But the demographics are basically unchanged from the 2010 Census to 2015 estimates. Can't account for a 13-point swing among hundreds of thousands of voters.
Minorities in Texas are already maxed out for Dem support -- and remember that Trump flipped nearby Jefferson County into the red column, a large majority minority area that has only voted R once since 1960 (in '72, when everyone did).
If anything, Southern minorities warmed up to Trump big-league (see also Robeson County NC).
Whites descending on Ft. Bend are only in it to maximize their incomes and their conspicuous leisure / consumption. They don't give a damn about the rest of the country, or the local working class -- who does their landscaping and kitchen / bathroom remodels? Illegals.
Lots of Californians and other blue staters have been carpet-bagging in Texas, too.
"the real story is Clinton losing voters in the Rust Belt rather than Trump gaining them."
Well, the only people allowed to write postmortems titled "The Myth of..." are those who got everything right -- not left-wing blogs like Slate, Salon, WaPo, etc.
Back in August, I showed that there was not going to be a "monster vote" for Trump, as most of his supporters were arguing (most notably, Conservative Treehouse). I was right.
But trying to spin the utter collapse of the Democrat coalition as just a flesh wound, is just the partisans trying to reduce cognitive dissonance.
Trump and the Trump movement took a sledgehammer to the cracks that existed in the Dem coalition, and shattered that sucker wide open.
There would have been stay-at-homes even if it were a wimpy cuck as the GOP candidate, simply because the breaking point had been reached for the Dems. But with Trump unrelentingly hammering away at their contradictions (Bernie endorsing Hillary is like Occupy Wall Street endorsing Goldman Sachs), they were even more decimated on Election Day.
Having wiped out a yuge chunk of the enemy's forces before the major battle, Trump didn't need to have double the numbers on his side compared to the last time.
And remember how, all before the election, if you stayed home or voted third party -- you were as good as a Trump voter, and a traitor? Well now that so many did just that, the commentators ought to believe that these legions of Rust Belt non-voters count as de facto Trump voters.
However you frame it, it was a revolt of historic scale.
"For those who think that any GOPer would've had the election in hand, keep in mind that such a candidate wouldn't have fought as hard against the Clinton's chicanery."
What I've read from the historical models suggests that the main weakness of a non-Trump candidate would have been the lack of a strong coalition on their side, not so much the predictable opposition.
Without Trump, it was shaping up to be the most bitterly divided and evenly contested primary in GOP history. "The splitter strategy," as Conservative Treehouse called it. Nominate Jeb, who would never get more than 25% of the polls / votes, by splitting up the non-Jeb vote into as many small pieces as possible, by fielding a wide variety of nano-niche candidates.
It could have been Jeb 25, Cruz 23, Rubio 20, etc., as the popular vote around Super Tuesday. That means no clear leader and no coalition in the fall.
Trump wiped out the next place by double digits early on, so there was no possibility of a weak divided coalition on Election Day.
In 1992, the big change was the collapse of the Reagan-Bush coalition in the GOP numbers. Clinton only moderately improved the numbers on the Dem side in most of the new blue states. And Perot took more from Bush than from Clinton.
Yet libs will describe '92 as a revolt of liberalism over ossified conservatism.
I keep your forces at home = I triumphed before the battle even began.
You keep my forces at home = You're lucky my side stayed at home.
Wonder what will happen next http://grabthem.blogspot.com/2016/12/election-recountl-shockers.html
The Left-Right battle doesn't neatly apply to the 1992 election, anyway. Clinton ran (and mostly governed) as a cultural and fiscal moderate, not a SJW, appeasing Boomers with tough on crime policies and his welfare reform was part of the reason the atrocious black ghetto baby boom of the 60's-early 90's finally ended. Boomers hated the welfare largesse of the 60's-80's (Reagan's welfare "queens" driving welfare "Cadillacs). It took the first Boomer president (and the rise of his generation mates) to overhaul naïve policies implemented by G.I.s and Silents. Say what you will about Clinton, but it's probably the best thing he ever did.
America was still quite conservative in the early 1990's, per the GSS, the MPAA ratings policies, the DARE program, controversy (warranted) over rap music in an age of urban unrest, attempts to crack down on massive inner city crime rates, and so on. Gay characters were still largely non-existent in media produced from 1990-1992.
The GOP could've easily won in 1992 if Bush wasn't such a putz, and if Perot hadn't called out the establishment's globalism. Speaking of which, both parties' elites were committed to globalism by the '92 election. Globalism also doesn't neatly align with Left-Right ideology. Rather, it's a sign of being in an era that embraces striving and inequality.
GOP had no chance in '92. Elections are not won over the course of campaigns, but over the whole four years preceding Election Day.
Already in '88, the Democrat was heavily chosen by the cross-over voters -- hard to imagine otherwise, with Reagan '84 having won over such a large swath of the electorate. The Democrat was also the choice of the infrequent voters (didn't vote last time). These are a more reliable sign of where things go next time, if a 2nd+ term is being sought by the incumbent party.
http://akinokure.blogspot.com/2016/09/where-does-electoral-pendulum-swing-ask.html
Also the re-alignment away from the Nixon-Reagan coalition was already apparent in '88, with the Pac NW and Lutheran Triangle breaking away, and California damn near turning blue as well.
The only relevant aspect of campaigns is party unity -- measured by how bitter and evenly contested the primary is, particularly in the early stages when money and media exposure is not so much of a factor (later stage is more a war of attrition).
And even the bitterness of the primary is a reflection of the past four years -- if the partisans are not happy with where their party has been going over the past four years, it's unlikely that the other side's voters will feel like crossing over either.
In '92, early primary results showed Buchanan the culture warrior giving the the moderate Bush who dismissed "the vision thing" a real run for his money.
Again, only a minor factor compared to the entire four years preceding Election day '92, but the only part of the campaign that mattered.
Sibling rivalry remains worse for generations rais...
Is the next Star Wars trailer out yet?
Divided Establishment can't even unite around anti...
Les Miserables at Inauguration?
Culture is downstream from politics: TV shows adap...
Conspiracy theories spring from losing side: Now l...
Trump slump cycle continues: An excitable system m...
Media erase news of pedo ring bust; Pedo symbol us...
At re-Americanized industries, a new level of job ...
Pedophile symbols on child welfare and adoption lo...
Bring Levi's production back to America
PizzaGate beyond DC: Eight more pizzerias to inves...
Urban areas that flipped red (and a few that flipp...


text:
Science, Tech, Math › Computer Science
Definition of Int in C, C++ and C#
An int variable contains only whole numbers
Thomas M. Scheer/EyeEm/Getty Images
C & C++ Programming
Javascript Programming
Ruby Programming
Computer Science Expert
B.A., Computer Science, Queen's University Belfast
David Bolton is a software developer who has worked for several major firms, including Morgan Stanley, PwC, BAE Systems, and LCH.
Int, short for "integer," is a fundamental variable type built into the compiler and used to define numeric variables holding whole numbers. Other data types include float and double.
C, C++, C# and many other programming languages recognize int as a data type.
In C++, the following is how you declare an integer variable:
Int Limitations
Only whole numbers can be stored in int variables, but because they can store both positive and negative numbers, they're also considered signed.
For example, 27, 4908 and -6575 are valid int entries, but 5.6 and b are not. Numbers with fractional parts require a float or double type variable, both of which can contain decimal points.
The size of number that can be stored in int usually is not defined in the language, but instead depends on the computer running the program. In C#, int is 32 bits, so the range of values is from -2,147,483,648 to 2,147,483,647. If larger values are required, the double type can be used.
What Is Nullable Int?
Nullable int has the same range of values as int, but it can store null in addition to whole numbers. You can assign a value to nullable int just as you would for int, and you can also assign a null value.
Nullable int can be useful when you want to add another state (invalid or uninitialized) to a value type. Nullable int cannot be used in loops since loop variables must always be declared as int.
Int vs. Float and Double
Int is similar to the float and double types, but they serve different purposes.
Takes up less space than other types
Has faster arithmetic
Uses only whole numbers
Uses caches and data transfer bandwidth more efficiently
Float and double types:
Uses twice as much memory
Can contain a decimal point
Can contain more characters
The difference between float and double types lies in the range of values. The range of double is twice that of float, and it accommodates more digits.
Note: INT is also used as a formula in Microsoft Excel to round numbers down, but it has nothing to do with int as described on this page.
Definition of Double in C, C++ and C#
Definition of Float in C, C++ and C#
Definition of Variable
C++ Handling Ints and Floats
Definition of Unsigned
Programming Games in C - Tutorial 1 Star Empires
Primitive Data Types in Java Programming
How to Convert Strings to Numbers and Vice Versa in Java
What Does Null Mean in Computer Programming?
How Do I Roll Dice in C, C++, and C#?
What Is an Identifier in C, C++ and C#?
What Is a Variable?
Programming SQLite in C Tutorial Two
What Is an Enum in Programming Languages?
Learn About Input and Output in C++
Introduction to Functions in C#

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


3d character holding a red archery target. 3d character holding a red archery target. conceptual illustration.
Red arrow in the center of the target. 3d image. White background.
3D Character holding a red balloon. Isolated on white.
3D Character holding a red alarm clock. Isolated on white.
3D Character holding a giant red magnifying glass. Isolated on white.


text:
Eurovision: the Politics of Pop
BBC Radio 4 FM, 7 May 2005 10.30
It started as a project to promote television across
Europe -14 countries linked in respectable black ana white. Fifty years later and it's a billion-euro business that can make or break a small country's budget. Paul Henley quizzes fans, presenters and performers across the continent and gives a new view on the pop and politics that is the Eurovision Song Contest. Producer Leonida Krushelnycky
Unknown: Paul Henley
Producer: Leonida Krushelnycky
Feedback about Eurovision: the Politics of Pop, BBC Radio 4 FM, 10.30, 7 May 2005
Please leave this link here so we can find the programme you're referring to: http://genome.ch.bbc.co.uk/d5898491e0514116aab987df7847d5b6


text:
Forums > Lagniappe > Free Speech Alley >
California is SO bad that
Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by Bayou Tiger, Jan 16, 2018.
Bayou Tiger Founding Member
California doesn't want to be part of the State. Lmao.
New California took the first steps to what they hope will eventually lead to statehood. CBS Sacramento reports they don't want to leave the United States, just California.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/f05ce9b1-87d6-3623-a6b3-adefb8e9a9f3/ss_new-california-declares.html
Bayou Tiger, Jan 16, 2018
Kikicaca Senior Member
Bayou Tiger said: ↑
Good by yellow brick road
Kikicaca, Jan 16, 2018
Bayou Tiger likes this.
BAY0U BENGAL I'm a Chinese Bandit
It's such a weird time to be alive
BAY0U BENGAL, Jan 16, 2018
el005639 Founding Member
i was stationed in Fresno California for about 4 years. the central valley has more in common with the pan handle of Texas than the rest of the state of California
el005639, Jan 16, 2018
LaSalleAve when in doubt, mumble
There is a place in north CA that has been trying to separate for a long time, it's eirher Jackson or Jefferson or something like that.
I thought Cali was awesome but I got to leave.
LaSalleAve, Jan 16, 2018
California is a microcosm of what can happen to a whole country if liberals get control. No doubt in my mind.
watson1880 likes this.
Kikicaca said: ↑
LaSalleAve said: ↑
Jefferson. Saw a feature about that on the History Channel. Movement was at it height in the 30's and may have actually happened back then had the war not broken out. Still a few diehards up there trying to keep the idea alive.
mctiger, Jan 16, 2018
Can't understand why....
"The estimated cost for the first phase of California's bullet train climbed by 35 percent on Tuesday to $10.6 billion, the latest increase for the ambitious project to run a high-speed rail line from San Francisco to Los Angeles.
The $2.8 billion price hike for a 119-mile (191-kilometer) segment in the Central Valley puts the entire cost of the project at roughly $67 billion, although officials said they hope to recover the newly announced costs later. It was projected to cost $40 billion in 2008 when voters approved bond financing.
"I want the public to count on us to tell the truth, whether it's good, bad or ugly," said Dan Richard, chair of the California High Speed Rail Authority's board. "We're going to do every single thing in our power to drive these costs down."
Some of the fresh costs stem from trouble acquiring the rights of way for the track in the Central Valley. The authority entered into construction contracts before fully securing rights of way in all areas, a decision officials said they wouldn't make again. The decision to enter into contracts quickly was partly due to the need to spend $2.5 billion in federal stimulus money by last fall."
Taxpayers agree to this sham with a $40B cost which is now $67B and we're still on phase one. Of course the increase is because we borrowed money from the feds which we HAD to spend quickly, so we didn't bother to get the accurate contracts for access through, wait for it......the Central Valley. Lol. SO many people going between Bakersfield and Merced....NOT. But don't worry they tell us, we'll make up the cost at some point. Fuckers
http://abc7.com/travel/cost-climbs-by-$28-billion-for-california-bullet-train/2955165/
uscvball, Jan 17, 2018
The estimated cost for the first phase of California's bullet train climbed by 35 percent on Tuesday to $10.6 billion, the latest increase for the ambitious project to run a high-speed rail line from San Francisco to Los Angeles.
Aren't they going to build Elon Musk's high speed hyperloop? 30 minutes between LA and Frisco.
Bengal B, Jan 17, 2018


The tech giant's mobile operating system gets smarter at controlling battery juice by using adaptive brightness and predicting what apps you use.
Dave Burke, VP of engineering for Google's Android, talks about how AI can save your phone's juice.
Battery drain is often the scourge of many a phone user.
That's why Google has been working on finding a way to keep your smartphone running longer. And it's doing it by using artificial intelligence.
For its new Android P operating system, the tech giant worked with Alphabet's Deepmind on a new feature called "adaptive battery." It uses AI to look at how you use your phone and find ways to stop quick battery drains.
One of the things it does is predict what apps you'll use in the near future and those apps you only check once in awhile. Google puts to sleep apps that aren't used as frequently. The company said that can lead to an average of 30 percent reduction in app wakeups and make the battery life of your phone last longer.
Google is also aiming to save battery life by using a feature it calls "adaptive brightness." This feature controls how bright your phone's screen is based on your habits. If it's day time, Google can turn down your phone screen and save on battery juice.
"We've seen Android become more than just a mobile operating system," said Dave Burke, VP of engineering for Android.
Burke was debuting the new features of Android P at Google's annual I/O conference, which kicked off on Tuesday at the Shoreline Amphitheater in Mountain View, California. Along with its mobile operating system, the company also talked about what new products and services we can expect over the course of the coming year.
Google Assistant could become the most lifelike AI yet: Experimental tech called Duplex makes you think you're talking to a real person.


This was back when Jaime was just a wee lad with a motorbike. I find that you can do some interesting things with the flour though you need to be aware in all instances of hydration and its relative times. I used unbleached flour today and it was nearly half again the water recommended below. I've had good success substituting about half the bread flour with whole wheat flour. Its gives the crust an interesting texture and flavor.
You can do this by hand by making a volcano or through skillfull use of the dough hook and a scraper to form a dough ball in the electric mixer.
Mix flour, sugar and yeast with dough hook at medium speed. Altnerately form a mixed mound in with a well in the center for water. Gradually add water making sure that as the dough comes together all ingredients are getting equally wet. Add the water gradually, adding or subtracting as your flour requires.
For a airier crust, form into a neat ball by folding in on itself and rolling in a lightly oiled bowl before covering it with a wet tea cloth for 90 minutes. Dough can be used pretty nearly immediately for more cracker-like crusts.
Tonight I think I rendered six nice medium risen balls and had best crust on a stone at 450F.
Some topping suggestions: salty+sweet (pineapple and salty meat (prosciutto), olives, etc), tomato+basil, mushroom and olive, spinach+ feta. Meatza: salami, pepperoni, loose sausage, linguisa. chorizo, "back bacon," bacon-bacon.
Sauce is a matter under development: paste is overly thick and raw tomato sauce is a bet wit. Some ratio of the two is required. Also: seasonings.


text:
January 1, 2014 by Nate Barton
Photo Courtesy of The Malibu Times
In a time when most Seaver students had yet to walk, the Malibu campus burned. It was 20 years ago that the Old Topanga fire marred the November sky and scratched the Malibu campus.
Fanned by the Santa Ana winds, the fire lasted from Nov. 3 to Nov. 11, 1993 and torched 359 homes across 18,000 acres. Students and staff were evacuated to Firestone Fieldhouse as the flames blackened main campus. No structural damage was reported by the Malibu Times.
"I remember just finishing class in early November 1993 and walking outside to get a breath of fresh air," said Professor of Biology Lee Kats. "The smell of smoke was already strong. I was still relatively new to Southern California but I suspected I knew what the distinct odor meant … that a fire had broken out somewhere nearby."
Hilary Squire ('96) was a student at the time of the fire, and is now an administrative assistant in the Business division.
"If you believe things happen in threes, the Old Topanga/North Malibu fire was the first of the three," Squire said. "Then we had the Northridge earthquake in January of '94. And then we were hit with the California deluge and everything that had burned in '93 turned into mudslides. Needless to say my years at Pepperdine were quite exciting."
See the statistics below, which are courtesy of the Malibu Times and malibucomplete.com.
– 18,000 acres damaged
– fire lasted from Nov. 3 to 11, 1993
– smoke clouds rose to 30,000 ft.
– 7,000 firefighters dispatched
– 359 homes destroyed
– winds up to 60mph
"I was in my first semester at Pepperdine as a transfer student living in Crocker Hall. The word quickly spread in our dorm that there was a fire, so many of us went outside and stood on the road in front of the dorms. The sky was gray with smoke but it also had this yellow glow to it. The wind was something else. It was so strong it could almost blow you over. I had to pull my t-shirt up over my nose and mouth just to breathe. I turned around to look at the ridgeline above campus and could see the flames licking up the backside of the mountain. It was very surreal. I probably should have been afraid but I wasn't. It was actually pretty exciting. One minute we are being told to evacuate to the gym, the next we are being told to stay." – Hilary Squire ('96), Business Division Administrative Assistant
Follow Nate Barton on Twitter: @TheNateBarton
As published in the Nov. 7 issue of the Pepperdine Graphic.
Filed Under: News Tagged With: fire, Malibu, Nate Barton, pepperdine, Pepperdine University


In Cuba, the metaphor of the revolutionary utopia presumed that, with the mass creation of social equity programmes, racism and racial discrimination would disappear spontaneously. Unfortunately, the irruption of the 21st century has rapidly demonstrated that the epistemology of racism does not disappear in a natural manner because its historic incidence in the cultural thinking requires a mechanism of specific dismantling endorsed by a production of knowledge that is not always visible or accessible to those who, from social activism, do the most to organise antiracist proposals.
The reestablishment of diplomatic relations between Cuba and the United States has awoken multiple interests about diverse subjects regarding Cuban society. In that context, raciality seems destined to take up the media's attention, especially outside the island.
For the national press the issue seems to maintain the historical suspicion, while other subjects like the economic opening, different exchanges – including the cultural – are taking up prioritised spaces. The silence on the issue of raciality perhaps has logic, since it is not a matter that is still on the Cuban national agenda.
The risk, however, is that the lack of an appropriate treatment in Cuban publications, supplemented with those made abroad,does not always represent the reflection of reality, at times despite the good intentions. Another variable is that, on occasions, the analysis is concentrated on persons or groups that do not sympathise with the Cuban revolution and the void in raciality provides them with an ideal space to emphasise the criticisms. At times, from Miami, they maintain the traditional focus that denies the existence of racism or there are those who take advantage of the presence of racial concerns to try to discredit the Cuban State and society. It would be necessary to repeat once again that racism and racial discrimination, unfortunately, form part of the planet's current conflicts.
In the United States, some persons with certain naivety presumed that the arrival to the White House of an Afro-descendant figure, on its own, could mean the end of racism in U.S. society. Regrettably, the most recent events have taken care of showing the presence of a police violence that seems to focus above all on Afro-American youth;a conflict in which the culprits, like in remote times, are exonerated of serious crimes like murders in public view.
In Cuba, the metaphor of the revolutionary utopia presumed that, with the mass creation of social equity programmes, racism and racial discrimination would disappear spontaneously. Indeed, in the first decades, after the revolution in 1959, it seemed that racial discrimination would really be dismantled based on policies of inclusion, with the incorporation of millions of Afro-descendant women and men to study and work. Many examples demonstrate their presence in sectors like education, public health, sciences, culture, sports and others.
Unfortunately, the irruption of the 21st century has rapidly demonstrated that the epistemology of racism does not disappear in a natural manner, because its historic incidence in the cultural thinking requires a mechanism of specific dismantling endorsed by a production of knowledge that is not always valid nor accessible to those who, from social activism, do the most to organise antiracist proposals.
In this sense, it seems that for the antiracist social movements the struggle for racial equality will not be an easy task, even in nations with programmes that promote a greater social equity. Latin America and the Spanish-speaking Caribbean still drag the negation of racism based on the cultural model of the Hispanic world, whose pretext for the mixed race says that we are all equal, though racialised inequalities account for poverty and discrimination in large sectors of the Afro-descendant population. Apropos, this space provides the opportunity of bringing up the controversy about this terminology.
In recent times it is possible to observe the advance of an agenda that defines the impact of racial discrimination in Cuba as an urgent matter which the revolution will have to assume as part of its historic proposal of social equity. Some voices that are more concentrated in the terminology of Afro-descendant than in the conflict of racial inequalities associated to racial discrimination are appearing in this favourable scenario. It is a view that has prevailed throughout time, with different nuances, despite Fidel Castro's call in 1959 to combat that social injustice.
It is clear that the issue of raciality is one of extreme complexity, not just for Cuba but also for Latin American and Caribbean societies;in the first place, because of the impact of the slave regimen on the population of African origin and their descendants. Later, because of the way in which the republics conceived in an excluding manner the citizen participation of native peoples and Afro-descendants.
While the arrival of the revolution dismantled the most exacerbated forms of racial discrimination, it did not go into depth about certain specificities that would enable a much more profound and sustained racial inclusion. Actually, this is also a generalised challenge for the rest of the continent's countries, which neither have been able to dismantle the different manifestations of racism.
Cuba's current challenge would thus be to transform the social inequalities associated to racial discrimination, precisely based on its institutional stability and structural advances in decisive areas of Cuban society. That endeavour would mean breaking away from the historic myth according to which to publicly analyse the historic and current causes of racial discrimination would weaken national unity, when actually making raciality visible would make it possible to consolidate more the work of the revolution.
Cuban society has given irrefutable proof of its political understanding of the most complicated social subjects. That vocation for solidarity makes it possible to deduce that the appearance of a group of antiracist actions would have the required social backing and would contribute to a greater opening for an issue that has remained outside the national agenda.
It is important to specify that Afro-descendant is not synonymous to Afro-American and has a very different genesis. Afro-American emerged in the United States in the struggle of the African diaspora to obtain civil rights and improve their living conditions and opportunities in the face of racist policies in the context of the 1960s. Afro-descendant emerged in 2000, as part of the preparatory political consensus for the world meeting held in Durban, South Africa, in 2001.
The objective of the Afro-descendant agenda is to change the extreme poverty of more than 200 million persons of African origin in the American continent, according to data from the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), in the areas of greatest vulnerability and inequalities. This proposal which has an international character in Cuba played a decisive role to ensure its fulfilment and the island is a signatory to that programme.
Why does the term annoy some persons? The most frequent cause that promotes political suspicions is identifying as synonymous the U.S. terminology of Afro-American with Afro-descendant. We could find another of the reasons in people's lack of knowledge about the regional debate held during the entire decade of the 1990s, in which Cuba did not participate because at that moment it considered that it was a problem that the country had already completely resolved.
From a historic vision, African slavery was the decisive economic mechanismto expand colonial power in the largest of the Caribbean islands, at the expense of the physical and spiritual abuse of the population of African origin, which at one point got to represent the great majority on the island. Already by the start of the 20th century, the power classes tried to modify that racial composition through large-scale migratory processes from Europe, to impose the white as the legitimate social archetype paradigm.
As to the current debate about whether the Afro-descendant terminology is valid or not valid, some persons express in a naïve way that we are all Afro-descendants because Africa was the cradle of humanity. But based on that focus the essence of a conflict whose main cause are the inequalities associated to raciality remains hidden, a cultural and psychological process that is not exempt of pain for those who have believed that Africanism expresses inferiority.
Other pretexts that try to justify the social inequalities in the sphere of raciality appear in the cultural discourse that concentrates its focus on the legacy of Africanism indissolubly united to Cubanness, which, while it is absolutely right, makes the social conflict invisible in representative segments of Cuban society, where poverty and raciality are inseparably linked.
An important matter in the deconstruction of the consequence of racism, as a global cultural phenomenon, is that it determines the relation between raciality and power, based on the impact of racial discrimination on the sphere of social participation. It is important to stress that the phenotypical identity does not spontaneously mean the assumption of an antiracist ideological position, but rather that it is the evolution of the social conscience that determines the political position of persons and groups.
The Afro-descendant terminology'sobjective isto not be part of ethnic classifications, with stereotyped signs, created by the colonial system, and simultaneously it hopes to find a conciliatory means that goes beyond skin colour, like the historic stigma of discrimination. The final aim is to construct an encompassing political agenda capable of transforming structural racism into spaces of racial and social equity.
In their daily life people will continue calling themselves according to their traditions, that is, they will identify themselves as Afro-Cubans, Afro-Colombians, Afro-Brazilians or simply blacks, dark, mulatto, whitish blacks, according to their individual perspectives and their status or feeling of personal identity.
Like all contemporary movements, in the interior of the Afro-descendant leadership, the groups organise their projects against racial discrimination based on diverse contexts. Some opt for neoliberal programmes that facilitate personal benefits, and other groups get involved in progressive and socialist proposals.
It is important to take into account that the Afro-descendant proposal also involves emotional aspects. For those who since childhood were victims of pejorative forms and humiliating actions, the terminology is a form of restoring their cultural and political identity, from the essences of a self-esteem that colonialism tried to destroy. In short, Afro-descendant means fighting for the right of a citizenship that was denied to them. It is possible that for those who do not suffer every day the stigma of being classified as inferior because of the colour of their skin or other traits, Afro-descendant can mean a mere rhetoric.
In the continental struggle, the most progressive Afro-descendant sectors consider that Cuba represents a fortress against neoliberalism because the country precisely has the best institutional and social conditions to assume the subject based on the social advances obtained. This reflection seeks to promote a greater understanding of the proposals that seek to organise more progressive programmes, fundamentally in countries of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA), the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and other organisations to eliminate the social inequalities related to raciality.
Afro-descendant has started to form part of an already generalised social practice in the entire region, which means assuming a commitment and a responsibility based on a conceptual humanist equality in the emancipatory search for the inclusion of the historically oppressed groups in the new political contexts of the 21st century.
When the popular speech repeats the phrase "divide and conquer," attributed to NicoloMachiavelli, to a certain extent gives a feeling of impotence in the face of circumstances that express fracture, separations and lack of unity. But in the context of human beings who have been victims of exclusion, the effect of that manipulation to create ruptures obtains better and faster results.
In this sense, it is almost spontaneous or natural that it be difficult for the persons who suffer the discrimination for diverse reasons to find rapid and solid organisational forms. Colonialism, with its devastating impact, is responsible for maintaining the lack of self-confidence in persons and in those who surround them, as a consequence of the exclusion to which they have been submitted, which implies that they prefer the solitary struggle.
The fear instilled in the historic memory, due to the systematic exclusion, leaves such damage in the self-esteem of the affected segments that it promotes a spiritual and psychological inability to overcome the stage of isolation and to be able to design collective strategies. The history of African slavery demonstrated that it was only when the enslaved persons were able to consolidate projects of collective struggle that they overcame the coloniser.
In current Cuban society, it is difficult for the persons of African origin brake away from the anti-black racist project, anchored for centuries, in which the consensus to give space to an antiracist project lacks the required understanding, while other discriminations are finding the opportune structures to change the negative impact of institutional and personal exclusion.
In the face of anti-discriminatory social actions, at times the proposals are received as deceptive actions based on an accumulated experience of projects prepared precisely to maintain the fragmentation, because they do not have all the indispensable political, or institutional, structure to jump the historic and contemporary barrier of racism.
The closest proof of this is the antiracist projects that emerge from different spheres that disappear in the short term because they are dissolved or self-dissolved since they do not have the indispensable social accompaniment to create the structural base that the situation demands. The lack of consensus, in institutional spaces as well as from the very sector discriminated against, represents serious impediments for the group that attempts to take over the social space due to them.
The Cuban section of the Regional Afro-descendant Alliance for America and the Caribbean (ARAAC), created in 2012 with the support of the Culture Ministry, has not been able to escape from this "syndrome of void." Because of the weak and at times incoherent institutional perspective as well as because of the lack of a structural focus to the interior of the very group, where at diverse times the focuses repeat the same sequences of mistakes that for several centuries have characterised this problem, creating a discouraging vicious circle.
In that sense, it is clear that achieving a common programme demands a great deal of time and also a high dose of patience and understanding. The question is that it is not about an accidental phenomenon but rather the result of a deliberately designed exclusion to hinder the consolidation of a common strategy. A social process where the social stereotypes that disqualify persons of African origin have been placed in the social imagination, precisely so that the non-white persons continue being in a subordinate position and do not achieve the immersion in the decision-making spaces.
This is a phenomenon that at times is repeated with disparaging words or discourses from inside the very group.
A substantive difficulty has been the impossibility of making the proposal grow by extending it to other territories and sectors of the country due to the lack of institutional legitimacy. Because for some persons and institutions if the required institutional endorsement does not exist, any proposal that deals with raciality creates doubts if it does not have the regulatory official backing.
A no less important matter has been the lack of the minimum financial resources to organise mass activities. An important factor of the mistakes was to not make known the website created with a quality design, but which was never publicised because its socialisation has depended on a more than two-year institutional process, The history of the late 19th and early 20th centuries showed that the Cuban Afro-descendant population was unable to organise the space for political participation that was due to it because of its contribution to the nation's emancipation.
Concentrated on achieving independence, the Afro-descendant leaders in the 19th century thought that, with their enormous effort to free Cuba, their social space in the country's leadership would be guaranteed once the Spanish regime was toppled. They weren't able to forecast that, behind the scenes, a sector of the moderate independence fighters was conceiving their exclusion and that the alliances with the non-white fighting vanguard would become only an interim military strategy in the face of the disappearance of leaders José Martí and Antonio Maceo.
This is a conflict that currently requires an analysis that must be submitted to a more in-depth political vision. The events clearly show the presence of an anti-black racist thinking, just 12 years after the constitution of the republic. The history of the early 20th century shows clear proof of the massacre of 1912, when not only the members of the Colour Independent Party were murdered but also hundreds of persons simply because there weren't white; researchers of the subject estimate that the casualties of that armed conflict in the eastern region of the country could surpass the figure of more than 3,000 persons.
This is a chapter of Cuban history still not sufficiently studied but that makes it possible to understand the consequences of a very deep pain in generations very close to ours, as part of a premeditated programme which sought the exclusion of the non-white vanguard of the Liberation Army and where the "pretexts" offered reasons to conserve the status quo of exclusion.
Through literary essays, newspapers from the period and other sources registered in the National Archive of Cuba, it is possible to see how the Cuban proposal of the republic was designed to maintain the population of African origin out of the decision-making spaces, not just because they were Afro-descendants, but rather because its agenda contained a radical independence matrix. The proposals, at times with signs of supposed integration as was the case of the Constitution of 1940, lacked the necessary political will to transform that status of exclusion.
These are proposals that fail because of lack of social consensus. A recent example of the "syndrome of void" faced by Cuban raciality lies in the very speech of the historic leader of the Cuban revolution, Fidel Castro, when in Match 1959 he declared that racial discrimination was one of most complex and difficult problems the revolution had to face;a proposal that again showed the presence of lack of consensus in the face of the subject of racial discrimination in the Cuban social imagination and the unwillingness to construct an anti-discriminatory programme and of racial inclusion in the national agenda.
In this sense, ARAAC Cuba, similar to other groups in the rest of our America where the Afro-descendant population is trying to find their corresponding power participation spaces, is hindered by similar historical difficulties that slow the validity of a discriminatory thinking toward the non-white population. The barrage of conflicts that prevents that obligatory inclusion is long and complex, as can be seen in the different social contexts. Among them, in addition to the basic conflict of rejecting the inclusion of an antiracist programme, there are the difficulties in the interior of the leaderships, at times for lack of political maturity, ideologically weak discourses among its members or erratic strategies due to the lack of knowledge about the historical magnitude of racism and racial discrimination and, above all, the habits of working alone for a long time, which makes it difficult to create a framework of unity within diversity.
A serious difficulty is the perspective of the so-called discourse of the victim, also promoted from the discourse of exclusion, in which discriminated against persons usually get bogged down in blaming the system that attacks their identity, with the useful short cut that is concentrated in the engrossment. In this context, in a dichotomised manner, the discourse of the victim, inserted in the colonial history, establishes a polarisation between "them" and "us" based on a colour, which conspires against building a new communicative language that allows for initiating a project of dialogue, where together with the challenge, alternative solutions appear.
It is also important to add the tendency of supposing that only non-white persons will be able to find the strategies that the Cuban society demands to develop an antiracist programme. The mistakes and good moves of the ARAAC Cuba seem to be interpreted as new phenomena, but history shows that it is a cyclical repetition in which the social subjectivities, the cultural stereotypes and the lack of faith permanently act to prevent an inclusion in Cuban civil society that guarantees a more equitable and fairer nation, where the non-white population has access to the equity that is due to them.
The current challenge of the ARAAC is to accumulate the necessary emancipatory energyto face the external as well as internal impediments. The prolonged silence on Cuban raciality has a direct incidence, induced or underhanded, as a repetitive expression of the discriminatory Cuban history toward the persons of African origin, a phenomenon that goes beyond those skin hues that make it possible to hide the true identity.
A decisive element at present is the institutional political neglect for creating a concrete antiracist proposal, with the indispensable participation of that social sector. The projects to create a national consensus demand the participation of the Afro-descendant population as a whole. The world historic experience says it is only possible to obtain a consensus when the voice of the discriminated against persons is present, as the key piece capable of transforming the national consensus, with its decisive and enriching experience, to construct an antiracist national agenda.
This reflection hopes to be just a warning call to remember that the proposals where only elitist groups participate, without the ideas and personal stories of the discriminated against groups, does not allow for deconstructing racism and discrimination, beyond the socio-cultural aspirations that create them. Only the experiences of the discriminated against persons enablegiving access to the inclusion of those who have been excluded. It is necessary to specify that institutional projects have already existed on the island, like the so-called "Quota systems," during the 1980s, an organic proposal that failed for the same reason: lack of general consensus and lack of knowledge by the discriminated against groups of their rights and opportunities in the face of the absence of a political discourse.
Already by the late 1990s and early 2000, inclusive proposals were again created to promote thousands of young people throughout the country who were not linked to study r work, in their majority Afro-descendants. But once again it was explained that it was a proposal against discrimination. It is impossible to transform the social conscience of any human group without the required ideological debate, because the transformation of the political conscience does not operate by omission.
Right now the social conflict of raciality has in its epicentre an important problem, which is the presence of social inequalities that are manifested in a status of poverty and raciality in sectors of the Afro-descendant populations, with an important incidence in children, women and senior citizens. But perhaps it would be worthwhile to take a look at the challenges of the 21st century, where the lack of economic as well as symbolic resources caused by racism and discrimination creates social rifts that do not disappear spontaneously, even despite an intention of change.
In plain view it would seem that the Cuban Afro-descendant population is trapped between the lack of institutional backing and the low level of racial awareness of certain segments of Afro-descendants. But the reality is much more complex because neither can the blame fall on a society that for more than half a century hasn't had access to the debate on racism and racial discrimination; where the issue has remained practically invisible in the public spaces, with a very weak acceptance in academic spaces and practically absent in the written press, television or radio.
As we know, the formation of social awareness demands visible and sustained ideological action. But if the discourse that corresponds to raciality because of its role in the Cuban nation, permanently absent, it would then not be a happy decision to make responsible those who suffer a low self-esteem induced by the lack of pride of their African origin and reject getting involved in a struggle that doesn't seem to belong to them.
It would be even more difficult to make demands on "Cuban white" persons because of lack of racial awareness when faced by a matter that demands a public discourse capable of transforming social awareness, where only solidarity and human understanding could involve them in an antiracist programme.
It is also true that there has been a lack of agreed upon antiracist activism, with a more forceful demand, not fearing being accused of the stigma of counterrevolutionaries, when the racial question is brought up;because the foundation of the Cuban nation has been built with a decisive part of the Afro-descendant population. From the enslaved persons who became emancipated and gave their life for independence; to "that half" of the non-white population that today continues struggling every day for their rights, though at times they do not know them as they should, but make an effort to create a better nation, more equitable and inclusive.
The challenges for Cuban society in the current socio-political context are greater because the revolution's assistance policies reduce their possibilities, vertiginously increasing the vulnerability of those sectors. There is an urgent need to transform that painful past, which also has African slavery as an aftereffect, a matter that demands new ideological focuses.


text:
Q: How does postgres order the results when ORDER BY is not provided Let's say I have two tables:
user (user_name varchar(50), project_name varchar(50))
project (project_name varchar(50), project_cost(integer))

I have a query that's returns me results which are "de-facto desired" :
select u.user_name, p.project_name
from user u, project p
where u.project_name = p.project_name

Postgres says that order of rows is not predictable when ORDER BY is not given. But yet in my local test, postgres returns rows in a same order for repeated tests.
Could you please help me understand what Postgres really does when order by is not provided in the query?
I don't have access to all the possible places where the real table and schema a live, so I really need to know what really happens in order to keep existing ordering intact.

A: If no order by clause is given, postgres (and any other reasonable database, for that sake), should return the rows in the order it was able to produce them (be it from an internal cache, an index, or directly from the table).
Since the same algorithm is used on the same data, it isn't surprising you're getting the same rows in the same order. However, this does not mean you should rely on this ordering. If you do something to change the data's layout on the disk (e.g., back it up and restore it, or even rebuild the tables' indexes), you're likely to get a different ordering.

A: To know what really DBMS does one should look at the PLAN. The output order will depend upon it too. However there are two things to remember: first, if the plan includes 'full (heap) table scan' then the order is undefined (as DBMS may freely reorder heap data); second, the plan may change significantly if you change your SQL statement or update DB stats. This is why you should not rely on output order's stability in a long run.

A: Probably in the order of the clustered index if the table has one. However this is not something that should be trusted, as the documentation say.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange