AH challenge:more liberal america
- Thread starter Straha
- Start date
- Status
The subject of racial attitudes came up in a thread on the other board. Somewhat ignored among all the arguing was an encouraging fact that someone brought up: racism is lessening among the youth of America. I can't remember the exact figures, but there was a substantial divide between old and young about such things as interracial dating, etc. Best of all, the number of young people who are positive about such things has increased quite a bit over the past 20 years. Hopefully, by the time that whites in America are a distinct minority, most of the people who hold strong racist attitudes will have died off; quite a distinct possibility, as most of those with strong racist attitudes are in the older age groups....
Michael E Johnson said:
I have a question that has sort of always puzzled me. Now, don't take offense to this, and I know you probably will, but I dont mean any disrespect or anything by it. Okay, here I go.
Okay. It's 1963. Let's say, I'm black. The governor of my state, let's say Alabama, is right now standing in the doorstep of the university, personally blocking the doorway of the school in order to not allow a black student to enter. Now, the question is, with all these angry white Alabamans surrounding me, yelling nasty things at me, obviously not wanting me there, why do I want to go there??? And for that matter, why would I want to move into a white neighborhood in 1963 when I am not wanted by much of the populace???
Now, I know the white neighborhoods probably had better living conditions and all, but rather than moving into the white neighborhoods where, at the time, I am not wanted, why wouldn't I just achieve the equal rights which I deserve and then work real hard to build up the living standards of my own neighborhood???
OK, I won't take offence and I'll try to answer calmly.
Why shouldn't I go to university? And if I'm going to uni them why shouldn't I go to the best one I can? And who is some pig-ignorant redneck who probably didn't go to university himself to tell me where I can and can't go. That in itself would make me dig my heels in - if I'm right and someone else is wrong then I am not going to give in. After all, I'm a citizen, my parents/siblings pay taxes why shouldn't I enjoy the same opportunities as everyone else.
And the same applies to where I live. I'm educated, intelligent, well spoken, have a good job. Why shouldn't I live in a nice area now. Do you think a governor like the one you describe is going to worry about sewers, gutters or any of the basic infrastructure in a black area? No, coz the african-americans are never going to vote for a dumb peice of shit like that. So I'm going to move to a nice area now. And why should I have to wait for the same basic services whites take for granted? I want them now - After all I pay the same taxes.
Giving in to ignorance and prejudice is moral cowardice. If I'm going to be able to look at myself in the mirror I HAVE to stand up and say this is wrong. Because if I don't how can I expect anyone else to?
Why shouldn't I go to university? And if I'm going to uni them why shouldn't I go to the best one I can? And who is some pig-ignorant redneck who probably didn't go to university himself to tell me where I can and can't go. That in itself would make me dig my heels in - if I'm right and someone else is wrong then I am not going to give in. After all, I'm a citizen, my parents/siblings pay taxes why shouldn't I enjoy the same opportunities as everyone else.
And the same applies to where I live. I'm educated, intelligent, well spoken, have a good job. Why shouldn't I live in a nice area now. Do you think a governor like the one you describe is going to worry about sewers, gutters or any of the basic infrastructure in a black area? No, coz the african-americans are never going to vote for a dumb peice of shit like that. So I'm going to move to a nice area now. And why should I have to wait for the same basic services whites take for granted? I want them now - After all I pay the same taxes.
Giving in to ignorance and prejudice is moral cowardice. If I'm going to be able to look at myself in the mirror I HAVE to stand up and say this is wrong. Because if I don't how can I expect anyone else to?
Okay, I guess I understand, to an extent. It's just not in my nature, whether you call it moral cowardice or not, to go where I am not wanted by a vocal majority. I'd rather build up the standards of living in my own neighborhood, rather than move to another one where I'm not wanted. But I do see your point.
BTW, the governor I described, George Corley Wallace, was not a "pig-ignorant redneck" nor a "dumb piece of shit." He did block the doorway to the University of Alabama in 196 and only gave up after being confronted by the Army. He was educated at the University of Alabama and reelected Governor in 1982 by one of the widest margins in Alabama history - thanks to the overwhelming support of the black population.
BTW, the governor I described, George Corley Wallace, was not a "pig-ignorant redneck" nor a "dumb piece of shit." He did block the doorway to the University of Alabama in 196 and only gave up after being confronted by the Army. He was educated at the University of Alabama and reelected Governor in 1982 by one of the widest margins in Alabama history - thanks to the overwhelming support of the black population.
You said "Now, the question is, with all these angry white Alabamans surrounding me, yelling nasty things at me, obviously not wanting me there, why do I want to go there??? " I assumed at least some of these people did not have a degree.
Excluding someone on the basis of race meets my definition of pig ignorant redneck. The fact he ended up attarcting the black vote in 1982 just goes to show the fickleness of politicians - either that or he had an epiphany to equal that of St Paul's.
Excluding someone on the basis of race meets my definition of pig ignorant redneck. The fact he ended up attarcting the black vote in 1982 just goes to show the fickleness of politicians - either that or he had an epiphany to equal that of St Paul's.
" either that or he had an epiphany to equal that of St Paul's."
Wombat, he actually did; it came after he was nearly killed (and was crippled). After that, he was MUCH more sensitive to the concerns of blacks and was widely supported by those he previously oppressed.
Wombat, he actually did; it came after he was nearly killed (and was crippled). After that, he was MUCH more sensitive to the concerns of blacks and was widely supported by those he previously oppressed.
Michael E Johnson
Banned
---Okay, I guess I understand, to an extent. It's just not in my nature, whether you call it moral cowardice or not, to go where I am not wanted by a vocal majority. I'd rather build up the standards of living in my own neighborhood, rather than move to another one where I'm not wanted. But I do see your point.----
This attitude you see displayed here is the reason that racism predominated in this country in the past and continues today.Millions of whites comfortable with their bigotry and blaming African -Americans for making an "issue" about it by trying to change things-truly pathetic.But then again pandering to that attitude was how Barry Goldwater ,Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and both George Bush's have turned Dixie into GOPland-so at least its politically useful-now if only theyd own up to it they wouldnt be hypocrites.
This attitude you see displayed here is the reason that racism predominated in this country in the past and continues today.Millions of whites comfortable with their bigotry and blaming African -Americans for making an "issue" about it by trying to change things-truly pathetic.But then again pandering to that attitude was how Barry Goldwater ,Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and both George Bush's have turned Dixie into GOPland-so at least its politically useful-now if only theyd own up to it they wouldnt be hypocrites.
Michael E Johnson
Banned
--How is it racism to flee from people who make no secret of their hatred and violent hostility towards you?---
This really has to be one of the most cynical ,Orwellian things I have ever heard on this board or anywhere.Let the record show that it was WHITE people who ran from neighborhoods where blacks and other minorites moved in because of THEIR hatred and hostility towards non-whites NOT the other way around.It should also be noted that despite the neighborhood that you describe not every neighborhoord that blacks moved into became a crime -ridden ghetto-although thats got to be one of the oldest racist arguments.
This really has to be one of the most cynical ,Orwellian things I have ever heard on this board or anywhere.Let the record show that it was WHITE people who ran from neighborhoods where blacks and other minorites moved in because of THEIR hatred and hostility towards non-whites NOT the other way around.It should also be noted that despite the neighborhood that you describe not every neighborhoord that blacks moved into became a crime -ridden ghetto-although thats got to be one of the oldest racist arguments.
Michael E Johnson said:
HAHA, that's a laugh. Barry Goldwater was in no way, shape, or form a racist. He did not argue for segregation. He was an ultra-conservative who was known for his firm-advocacy of states' rights. His support from the South was merely an extension of that advocacy. He did not believe that segregation was right, but he believed it was the states' job to eliminate, not the federal government.
Richard Nixon was also not a racist. He may have slowed the pace of integration, but only to stabilize what was then a nation in crisis. He followed through with integration just the same, a policy followed by his Republican successors, Reagan among them. Is it just me, or was Nixon not reelected by one the widest margins in the history of the election process? I believe he lost only one state... As for his abhorence to busing, busing was a ridiculously stupid attempt to "diversify" public schools. All that nut Garrity achieved was breaking the city of Boston. The population of Boston is still but half of what it was in the 1960s. R
Michael E Johnson
Banned
----HAHA, that's a laugh. Barry Goldwater was in no way, shape, or form a racist. He did not argue for segregation. He was an ultra-conservative who was known for his firm-advocacy of states' rights. His support from the South was merely an extension of that advocacy. He did not believe that segregation was right, but he believed it was the states' job to eliminate, not the federal government----
No this is a laugh.Anyone with even a passing knowledge of American history knows that by 1964 when Goldwater ran "states rights" was code in the South for maintaining the racist Jim Crow structure. There is no way in hell that the Southern states would have eliminated segregation on their own and they had to be dragged kicking and screaming by the federal government. Goldwater,Nixon and the GOP pandered to this fear and its the main reason that the GOP has carried the white South every since. And to the rest of the apologists and denialists here it's also why despite having a large number of social conservatives-African-Americans support the Democrats year after year. Yeah I know it sucks-you cant honestly blame it on Jesse Jackson ,Al Sharpton and the NAACP fooling black voters-but I know that wont stop you from trying
No this is a laugh.Anyone with even a passing knowledge of American history knows that by 1964 when Goldwater ran "states rights" was code in the South for maintaining the racist Jim Crow structure. There is no way in hell that the Southern states would have eliminated segregation on their own and they had to be dragged kicking and screaming by the federal government. Goldwater,Nixon and the GOP pandered to this fear and its the main reason that the GOP has carried the white South every since. And to the rest of the apologists and denialists here it's also why despite having a large number of social conservatives-African-Americans support the Democrats year after year. Yeah I know it sucks-you cant honestly blame it on Jesse Jackson ,Al Sharpton and the NAACP fooling black voters-but I know that wont stop you from trying
The fact that you label Barry Goldwater a racist as you do shows nothing more than the effectiveness of that scumbag, Lyndon Johnson's ad campaign. Everyone gives Goldwater such shit now for just about everything, but how often do you hear of Johnson hunting deer from a jeep with a machine gun (which he did do), or giving an interview while getting a colonoscopy (which he did). Barry Goldwater was not a racist. He was simply one of the last in a long string of men to try (and to fail) at defending states' rights.
You know, you may call me an "apologist" or "denialist," which I suspect is simply a thinly veiled way of calling me a racist, but you do know, however, that you are even more biased than I am??
You know, you may call me an "apologist" or "denialist," which I suspect is simply a thinly veiled way of calling me a racist, but you do know, however, that you are even more biased than I am??
Michael E Johnson
Banned
---Barry Goldwater was not a racist. He was simply one of the last in a long string of men to try (and to fail) at defending states' rights. ---
You know I never had dinner with Barry,although I'm sure that he had lots of African-American freinds ,so I dont know myself if he was personally racist. What I do know however is that he and the GOP chose sides on the race issue in the United States. Instead of standing up for black civil rights after they had been trampled for 100 years,he and the GOP( and Strom Thurmond before them) took sides with the white South,under the code of "states rights", to try and keep things they way they were with as little change as possible. So maybe he wasnt personally racist ( ) but he pandered to racists and dealt with racists at the expense of people who just wanted a chance to live their lives with the same opportunites and rewards as everyone else.For that he and the GOP have my utter contempt-as does anyone who tries to justify and minimize what they did then and continue to do.
You know I never had dinner with Barry,although I'm sure that he had lots of African-American freinds
,so I dont know myself if he was personally racist. What I do know however is that he and the GOP chose sides on the race issue in the United States. Instead of standing up for black civil rights after they had been trampled for 100 years,he and the GOP( and Strom Thurmond before them) took sides with the white South,under the code of "states rights", to try and keep things they way they were with as little change as possible. So maybe he wasnt personally racist ( ) but he pandered to racists and dealt with racists at the expense of people who just wanted a chance to live their lives with the same opportunites and rewards as everyone else.For that he and the GOP have my utter contempt-as does anyone who tries to justify and minimize what they did then and continue to do.Michael E Johnson said:
What party did Abraham Lincoln, the man who was the single greatest factor in the abolition of slavery, belong to.......?
The Republican Party.
NapoleonXIV
Banned
Michael E Johnson said:
Cynical or Orwellian it also seems a question you apparently cannot answer. I maintain that the majority of white people move from their homes out of fear, hatred and/or hostility to your neighbors alone is not enough.
As proof of this I submit your own observation that not every neighborhood that blacks move into becomes a crime ridden ghetto. The majority of such neighborhoods, in fact, do not. They are not noticed because they do not become black neighborhoods, rather reflecting accurately the nationwide racial ratios that exist. (Please note; I am NOT saying that all black neighborhoods are or become crime ridden, again,the majority are not but we do not notice them, good news, truly, is no news) In most cases, the majority of the whites remain, fear subsides with contact, hatred and hostility usually wouldn't.
If whites do flee because of fear, than it is a fear that is not justified by the facts. Why? I submit we might better make an effort to find a reason for this rather than simply ascribing all evil in the world to white racism.
Last edited:
NapoleonXIV said:
It's not racist. How could it be? If the whites were racist simply for this, wouldn't they not let the blacks into their neighborhoods to begin with? I know they tried to stop it, but if they were truly racist, wouldn't they never give up? Or, to be crude, wouldn't they drive the blacks out? Just leaving is not racist. It is an attempt to avoid hostile confrontation.
Grey Wolf
Donor
Personally I would address the Goldwater questions simply on this basis
1. If states rights was allowed to be supreme, would segregation have ended ?
2. If not, then support for states rights is de facto support for racism
3. If it is obvious that 1 would have not have occurred and that 2 is therefore true, surely anybody standing on a policy of states rights KNOWS that they are also standing on a policy of segregation ?
4. Since segregation is clearly wrong (unless someone actually wants to argue otherwise) then it needed to be got rid of, especially in the atmosphere of the 1960s which could frequently turn violent, and where MLK's leadership was often the only thing preventing the whole movement turning violent
5. If its wrong, and states rights won't stop it, and it needs to be dealt with somewhat pressingly, then only the federal government can handle this
Grey Wolf
1. If states rights was allowed to be supreme, would segregation have ended ?
2. If not, then support for states rights is de facto support for racism
3. If it is obvious that 1 would have not have occurred and that 2 is therefore true, surely anybody standing on a policy of states rights KNOWS that they are also standing on a policy of segregation ?
4. Since segregation is clearly wrong (unless someone actually wants to argue otherwise) then it needed to be got rid of, especially in the atmosphere of the 1960s which could frequently turn violent, and where MLK's leadership was often the only thing preventing the whole movement turning violent
5. If its wrong, and states rights won't stop it, and it needs to be dealt with somewhat pressingly, then only the federal government can handle this
Grey Wolf
Michael E Johnson
Banned
---What party did Abraham Lincoln, the man who was the single greatest factor in the abolition of slavery, belong to.......?
The Republican Party.---
And the Democratic party supported slavery ,the Confederacy and segregation- so what? The Republican and Democratic parties of the last 40 years and today arent the same as they were in the 1860's.Starting with Barry Goldwater and when Strom Thurmond becamed Republican they switched places and roles. Which is why the Republicans win the white South and Democrats win the black vote.
---My negro college professor told how his mother wept the first time she voted Democrat. ----
You know the same answer as above applies here. However I have to say that if you seriously refer to African-American people as "negro" (to their face especially) in 2004 you have a problem. If its cynical an attempt to express disdain-its fully returned
The Republican Party.---
And the Democratic party supported slavery ,the Confederacy and segregation- so what? The Republican and Democratic parties of the last 40 years and today arent the same as they were in the 1860's.Starting with Barry Goldwater and when Strom Thurmond becamed Republican they switched places and roles. Which is why the Republicans win the white South and Democrats win the black vote.
---My negro college professor told how his mother wept the first time she voted Democrat. ----
You know the same answer as above applies here. However I have to say that if you seriously refer to African-American people as "negro" (to their face especially) in 2004 you have a problem. If its cynical an attempt to express disdain-its fully returned
Segregation would have fallen without the federal government intervening, just as slavery would have fallen without the federal government intervening. It may have taken a decade or two, but it would have happened. Segregation, like slavery, was becoming increasingly infeasible. Whether the whites of the South were racist or not (they, obviously, were), segregation simply takes up too much time and effort. In the modern United States, even the whites of the South, like the whites of South Africa (which is an excellent example of segregation collapsing under its own weight), would see that it would be much more politically and economically useful to remove segregation, albeit somewhat later and slower.
- Status