My African American friends are always very excited when a black politician wins an election. I can't imagine they would accept having even fewer black voices than they do now just so that every district can have the same "local weather patterns". That's actually pretty insulting now that I think about it to suggest "proximity to major land features" is more important that having representation for every community.
I don't really follow your argument in the last paragraph. Could you simplify it a bit?
> I don't really follow your argument in the last paragraph. Could you simplify it a bit?
I'm not a great writer:) Political parties are private organizations; we shouldn't draw districts with the intention of either assigning half of the districts to each of them or assigning half of each district to each of them.
As for race, the way you fix historical wrongs is by fixing them, not through trying to tweak the system until everyone who has equal resources will get a fair shot regardless of race. Groups historically discriminated against by law don't have equal resources.
I'm also black, from the south side of Chicago, and don't care about "representation" in and of itself. I'm not insulting me.
Look more closely into how gerrymandering happens and you'll see it's not necessarily a good idea for all e.g. black voters in a certain area to be lumped into the same districts, since it might neutralize an "excess majority" that could otherwise change the results on another district.
I don't really follow your argument in the last paragraph. Could you simplify it a bit?