Minister of Truth
Practically Perfect
Dixie, Truman desegregated all federal departments including the DOD.
Segregation now, segregation forever!
- Thread starter Dixie - In Memoriam
- Start date
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Look you goofy bitch, I don't know what kind of reading comprehension problem you have, but go back and read my posts again without your prejudiced glasses on, okay?
I think you will find, my argument is quite the opposite, in fact, that is more to my point! Go back and read my damn words, you pathetic moron! Read paragraph after paragraph, where I specifically said, it wasn't until after WWII that America became socially conscious regarding Civil Rights. Truman served after WWII... Brown v. BOE... and everything else that followed in the history books.
MY POINT has been, that up until then, America was a segregate society, it was accepted that this was how things were, and it was like that from sea to shining sea. For some on your side to pretend that "segregation" was solely a mid-60's issue raised by Southerners is patently ignorant. We WERE segregated! Those who "supported segregation" were supporting what had been the custom and way for nearly 100 years across America. They weren't trying to force desegregated black people to become segregated! Yet, you would think that were the case, to hear some folks tell it.
I've never had any problem condemning segregation, and that includes those who fought to keep it, but this is 2010... when are we going to move past the misconceptions and lies about it? When are we going to come out of denial and admit that segregation was a problem across ALL of America, not just the South, that was just the final 'battleground' for something that had been around since the Civil War?
It's IRONIC! I am constantly ridiculed and called a sheet wearing racist, but on this thread, it seems that I am the only one who realizes the magnitude of Civil Rights! I am the only one who can appreciate the DECADES of discrimination in every corner of our society, and not try to lay the blame off on "racist southern rednecks" as if no one else bore responsibility! SEGREGATION EXISTED EVERYWHERE IN AMERICA!
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
I asked you to show me his domestic platform on Civil Rights, why are you still arguing that he desegregated the military? Federal Departments? What? He told federal workers they had to live in the same neighborhoods and attend the same schools? Ohhhh.... He cut the number of restroom facilities and water fountains in federal buildings by half, saving millions of dollars!! Got it! Well, let's just put a statue of Truman up there with Abe Lincoln and MLK Jr.!
This debate is not about what TRUMAN did in 1950-something... it is about the 90 years previous to that, when America accepted and condoned a complete system of racial segregation.
Minister of Truth
Practically Perfect
I was just defending Truman, whom I am not a fan of, but who is pretty clean on the civil rights issue.
Dixie, you claimed no one prior to 1963 opposed segregation and that it was assumed everyone supported. That is not true, as I have shown.
There were people advocating an end to segregation as soon as it began. You might weasel out and say they had no political power. But Truman obviously did and that was well before 63.
There were people advocating an end to segregation as soon as it began. You might weasel out and say they had no political power. But Truman obviously did and that was well before 63.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Okay, so your point is, I said "100 years" and it's actually more like "83 years!" Wow, you really got me on that one, what a dumbass I was! That completely destroys my argument that we lived in a segregate society from the time of the Civil War until the mid 60s, because Truman took measures to desegregate the military in 1948, which is well before the 1960s, so my point has been totally refuted! I stand corrected and beg your forgiveness for my error!
MORON!
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Weasel out? Yeah, you're right... it would be mighty 'weasely' to point out, no political power means no political change. We often see those with no political power dramatically effect social and political change in America.. what was I thinking?
As for proponents of desegregation? Aside from people like Fredrick Douglass, there weren't many. Even Abe Lincoln said, "I would never suggest the negro should live equally among the whites." From the time of the Civil War until after WWII, the overwhelming majority of people in America, were supportive of the segregation policies. No one in political power, or seeking political power, was advocating desegregation. This went on for decades, Congress after Congress, Supreme Court after Supreme Court, President after President!
Now granted, I have learned in this thread of the great Civil Rights pioneer, Harry Truman, but let's step back from Harry and take an objective look at just a few years before... FDR... Why didn't he propose Civil Rights legislation? We know his wife would have probably done so, but why didn't FDR do it? The answer is obvious, he wasn't politically stupid! This takes us back to the initial point I made in this thread, we as humans have a propensity to take the easy way out, when it comes to confrontation and controversy. I am sure FDR was not a racist, but he avoided the confrontation and controversy on Civil Rights because it was easier to go along with the status quot. Politically speaking, it was essential that FDR not take a position against segregation or for desegregation, and this had been the case for decades before in America.
Minister of Truth
Practically Perfect
Yes, Dixie, Truman was the first Dem to be supportive on blacks in any way, shape, or form. I doubt anyone will argue that point.
I do take issue with your might makes right approach to everything. You only respect power, and not all of those good people that RS alluded to, who opposed segregation for all of those years.
I do take issue with your might makes right approach to everything. You only respect power, and not all of those good people that RS alluded to, who opposed segregation for all of those years.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Where did I ever say "might makes right?" Is that what you interpreted? Because I would like to state emphatically, that I have never said it was "right" to segregate people by race. Let's make sure that is understood right here and now, and no further misunderstanding takes place on that!
The point I have made, the one you now "doubt anyone will argue", is that no one in political power supported or condoned desegregation prior to the end of WWII. That is the only point I've been trying to make, that it was an accepted practice, not whether it was "right" that it was accepted, just that it WAS accepted!
I have never claimed that NO ONE in America was speaking out against segregation, although that seems to be what Stringy and you wish to ascribe to my commentary. The point is, no one in political power was speaking out, and they weren't likely to, since the majority of the voters did not support desegregation.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
No one DID oppose it! You think because you have an obscure instance of Truman lifting segregation for the mlitary, it means there was unanimous American political support for desegregation, and that is just NOT the case! You are trying to prop up a lie and a myth! Truman may have initiated policies which didn't discriminate by race, he may have been a personal advocate of desegregation, but he didn't propose or suggest the Civil Rights Act, that came some years later under another president.
I do think it's wrong to "blame" Thurmond for supporting something the vast majority of Americans supported and the Supreme Court had upheld. It would have been a radical position to have supported anything else at the time. Thurmond supported the status quot, and what had been the status quot for 83 years before.
No one is arguing that there was unanimous opposition to segregation, dumbass. Your claim, that no one opposed it, is wrong.
Thurmond chose to be a champion for segregation. He sought to inspire others to action against the coming changes. It was not just a few years in the 60's, but for much of his career. He definitely deserves blame for that. It's a shame he never accepted it.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
No one in political power or running for any high-level political office, supported, condoned, or advocated desegregation, prior to WWII. If you have ANY example, please post it! I have consistently admitted, that yes... there were some obscure activists who supported desegregation, I have NEVER claimed there were not such activists in America, or that they didn't exist well before WWII. That is the absurd argument you are trying to cajole my comments into, and I won't stand for it! You can keep insisting on a point that I have not contradicted, you can keep arguing against a point I have never made, and you can keep pretending I have not made a valid point, I really don't give a fuck what you do! You've not presented a damn thing to refute what I've said, and you can't, which is why you persist with this silly juvenile game of trying to make my argument into something absurd which you can contradict! I'm done playing silly games!
He did renounce his segregationist views! Along with people like Robert Byrd and George Wallace! Thurmond supported what was politically popular to support at the time, because that is what populist politicians do! It should be relatively obvious that Thurmond didn't hate black people, he fathered a black child... apparently he found some arousing attraction there!
It's easy for us to sit here and cast judgment on Thurmond in today's light, as if today's understanding of segregation was in place in 1948 America! We cringe at some of the statements made back then, and we judge those people who made them, as if the comments were made today, and it's not only unfair, but intellectually dishonest. Those who advocated segregation, were simply advocating what had been the policy for the 83 years before!
As I said earlier, it's like the abortion debate today... Let's say, in 20 years, the SCOTUS rules to overthrow Roe v. Wade, and the practice of abortion on demand ends in America as a result. Can we dig up the past of every person who ever advocated for "womens rights" and destroy them personally because of their past views? For decades and decades, until all the "pro-choicers" are dead and gone, can we turn them into heartless monsters who just wanted to kill unborn babies? Hell, maybe we can put them on trial for war crimes... genocide... 40 million murders! THAT is the logic you are applying to those who supported segregation, and it's just plain WRONG!
Minister of Truth
Practically Perfect
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
I never said the end of WWII was the 60s. Are you on crack?
Dixie you have been owned over and over again, and yes, your argument keeps shifting.
Uh, okay, I never said "noone", I merely said noone in power, oopps, I mean, before the 1960, ooops I mean desegregation not equality, ooops, I mean before WWII, ugh make that Truman!
Uh, okay, I never said "noone", I merely said noone in power, oopps, I mean, before the 1960, ooops I mean desegregation not equality, ooops, I mean before WWII, ugh make that Truman!
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Go back and read from the first post, you will find I have been consistent in my point. The challenge still stands... Show me any political leader who was openly advocating public desegregation prior to 1964! Just one example? So far, the closest example you can present is Harry Truman's desegregation of the military in 1948... before that, NOTHING!
I think I adequately explained why you find nothing, it is because American social consciousness regarding segregation didn't start happening until black veterans returned home from WWII.
Perhaps the reason you think my position is shifting and changing, is because I have to continuously correct the misconceptions of my position, so it does appear to "shift" from what pinheads argue I have said, and what I have actually said. Maybe if dishonest fuck like yourself, would stop trying to change my words around and make me say something I never said, it wouldn't seem like my position has changed. I assure you, I have the exact same position as I did when I posted this, and my argument and basis for it, stands unchallenged at this point.
zappasguitar
Well-known member
Oh but you ARE changing what you said to twist out of admitting you were wrong.
Here is a quote FROM YOU in the very first post in this thread:
"For a century, every president, every Congress, and every Judge they appointed, upheld and maintained a system of complete and total segregation in America!"
"Complete and total" = including the military.
Truman's desegregation of the military in 1948 proves that segregation wasn't COMPLETE AND TOTAL as you stated in post number one.
Now, by all means twist out of your latest verbal snafu.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
You can read what you want to into my comments, you haven't given us any examples of public legislation to desegregate anything yet. No presidents or Congressional leaders advocating it, nothing... save for an instance of Truman desegregating the military in 1948, you have nothing. There is no verbal snafu, just as there is no record of Congress supporting desegregation for nearly a century. You can try to hide from that or live in denial of it if you like, I can't change the mind of a bigot, and I won't try.
I gave you the 14th Amendment! You did not like that one....