Poor analogy.
Malcom's criticism was not based on Constitutional limits, it was based on a distrust of the government being able to deliver what they promised.
Ron Paul Voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act
- Thread starter The Pap Smear
- Start date
Poor analogy.
Malcom's criticism was not based on Constitutional limits, it was based on a distrust of the government being able to deliver what they promised.
I dont think what he said is racist. I think he has certainly said racists things in the pasts.
but
1> The civil war was not faught to free Black people. The civil war was fought to preserve the union. Black people were begging for equal rights a hundred years after tge war was fought.
2>Im not conviced the civil rights Act, movement and integration was really the best means to bring equality for Blacks, when we are still second class citizens in the United States over 40 years after the act.
but
1> The civil war was not faught to free Black people. The civil war was fought to preserve the union. Black people were begging for equal rights a hundred years after tge war was fought.
2>Im not conviced the civil rights Act, movement and integration was really the best means to bring equality for Blacks, when we are still second class citizens in the United States over 40 years after the act.
But Paul's argument is essentially that it should have been a states rights issue and the states that were FORCED to comply are states that would probably have NEVER abandoned Jim Crow if it didn't affect their federal dollars (it wasn't the national guard that shook them, it was the highway money and other fed dollars).
Slavery would have eventually ended because it would have no longer been economically feasible after the industrial revolution, but blacks voting and having human rights was NEVER a given.
"But Paul's argument is essentially that it should have been a states rights issue and the states that were FORCED to comply are states that would probably have NEVER abandoned Jim Crow if it didn't affect their federal dollars (it wasn't the national guard that shook them, it was the highway money and other fed dollars)."
You are right, and that sounds consistant with Libertarian views (his view).
I dont think that is necessarily a racist opinion within itself.
The funny thing is the Civil Rights bill of 1875 made it illegal for states for segregate
It's not racist to make that statement, but if you lived in a segregated state at the time, that really wouldn't have mattered. Libertarian views just don't work well in the REAL world because a lot of the shit is WAY too pie in the sky and assumes that all things being equal, all things will be equal and that is NEVER the case and MOST Libertarians know that shit and are OK with it because they feel their views will be the views that win out. If you are a black Libertarian living in California, you may be OK (although I seriously doubt it would work even there), but if you are black Libertarian living in Mississippi, that shit may not work out as well for you. People buy into Libertarian views based on their assumption that they will come out on top once everything is thrown into chaos, most will not because a COORPORATION is protected by the 14th Amendment just like a person and Libertarians don't take issue with that idea.
That's already been tried before. It was such an utter failure that these fellows called "founding fathers" got together to dismantle this thing called the Articles of Confederation and replace them with this thing called a Constitution.
The Pap Smear
Banned
How the Fuck are we still second class citizens?
