Subject:
|
Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 19:16:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1101 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > You haven't seen a demonstration of how this is detrimental?!? Did you miss
> > the reasons for the civil rights movement? Ensuing riots in reaction to
> > racism? I pointed out earlier that you get that kind of thing from
> > disenfranchisement of vast segments from society. You get it even now -
> > make the forces against it weaker and you'll get it more. Idunno - I find
> > that terribly detrimental.
>
> Oh, me too. I just don't see it as following from allowing (not requiring)
> businesses (with no barriers to entry) to choose who to serve. Jim Crow laws
> REQUIRED businesses to discriminate.
A random thought just jumped into my head...
Where would the civil rights movement be had the segregationist states
NOT used the National Guard to attempt to quell the demonstations?
Recently (actually on my way to the April Baylug meeting), I read a
rather interesting article in the Unitarian Universalist Association's
magazine. The association recently discovered a copy of the eulogy MLK
gave to a UU minister who had been murdered while in Selma to join with
the marchers. The article pointed out that his death was the real
catalyst for the voting rights bill. A quote from
http://www.cucparamus.org/Sermons/james.htm
> Jim Reeb died at 7pm on Thursday night. President Johnson sent a
> private jet to take Jim’s ashes and his family home. He also sent
> Lee White to represent him at Jim’s memorial service held at All
> Souls church. White made it clear that Jim’s death had influenced
> the President to "lay the voting rights bill before a special
> session of Congress the following Monday evening." (p. 224)
One wonders if the opposition to the civil rights movement had remained
more local how many whites of conscience would have joined the movement.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
| (...) Oh, me too. I just don't see it as following from allowing (not requiring) businesses (with no barriers to entry) to choose who to serve. Jim Crow laws REQUIRED businesses to discriminate. ++Lar (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
271 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
