Issue: Personal Liberty: racial segregation & the repeal of civilil rights?

[ctindale]

Help me out

I have been a supporter of Ron Paul for 4-5 years I really like his policies on almost everything until I tried to rebut an accusation of racism in another forum.

There are good arguments about quota abolishment for employers and universities, but are there good arguments for pinning "whites only" notices to the doors of diners, or even "blacks only" notices.? yes discimination happens anyway government cant stop it but it is ok to ban Blacks or Jews from Microsoft?

Under this system do we go back segregated buses and trains?

Would it be the right of a county or some pther form of collective ban people from entering their area?

The world is a very different place than 1964 , folks arent going to go ok your right lets wind back civil rights, if you did there would be outright civil war.

Lets put aside all the arguments of the civil rights act for a minute.

Are Paul supporters aware that White Nationalists are mobilising behind Ron Paul ? are they are aware that when they join meet up groups to discuss how to support Ron Paul that a good percentage of them are going to be members of the KKK?

Have a read of the 52 page thread at the Stormfront forum, the White Nationalist forum of the KKK.

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php/ron-paul-one-388512.html

I like allot of Ron Pauls ideas although I am pretty sure that mobilising the KKK is not the best direction for America.

If you think its a one off google this "David Duke" "ron Paul" and you will find Paul utilizes White Supremist web sites to express his view fiarly often.

I serious embrace almost everything the Ron Paul has to say except this .

http://fitnessfortheoccasion.wordpress.com/2007/06/15/ron-paul-vs-the-civil-rights-act/

Reader Craig Tindale brings a very interesting bit of Ron Paul literature to light. Ron Paul takes issue with the Civil Rights Act (emphasis mine):


Mr. Speaker, I rise to explain my objection to H.Res. 676. I certainly join my colleagues in urging Americans to celebrate the progress this country has made in race relations. However, contrary to the claims of the supporters of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the sponsors of H.Res. 676, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not improve race relations or enhance freedom. Instead, the forced integration dictated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 increased racial tensions while diminishing individual liberty.

As the editor notes:

Last week, Congress hailed the 40th anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The heroic Ron Paul was the only member of Congress to vote No. Here is his statement. ~ Ed.

When Ron Paul and his supporters say they are for individual liberty, are they including the ability to discriminate based on group identities such as race? Would President Ron Paul work to undermine or roll back the Civil Rights Act?

 

[ctindale]

apologies for the spelling lol its late where I am

 

[torchbearer]

local governments couldn't enforce segregation. and states that would consider doing such things would suffer economically because their thinking class will move to another state.

 

[beermotor]

We need to get the Campaign to read that guy's blog; he makes cogent arguments that Ron Paul would do very well to address in a national forum.

 

[angelatc]

Talking about race doesn't make him a racist.

Politics make strange bedfellows.

If the workforce was sufficiently restricted, ie: not letting Mexicans flood in unabated, economic forces would drive the standard of living in the black community to levels never seen.

Time and sensibilities change. Seperate drinking fountains aren't coming back, and I think it's silly to claim that they might. If anything, clinging to outdated notions that the blacks "need" help is insulting and contributes to lingering negative stereotypes.

 

[ARealConservative]

Ron Paul follows in Barry Goldwaters shoes in not favoring the most recent "civil rights act". This is because the legislation went to far in that it allowed government to interfer in the private sector too much. It was a huge expansion on government power and even so is ill-equipped to deal with sins of the heart.

Where the KKK is off base though, is in that Ron Paul is not running on a platform to reverse that 1964 legislation, but hey - if they want to vote for our guy - let 'em.

 

[GoRonPaul]

So often the best intentions turn counter productive when coersion is involved... The comments on that blog are great.

Why shouldn't an idiot racist be allowed to discriminate and doom himself? I'll take all the talented minorities he turns away and crush him in the marketplace... Racism gets punished by the free-market...

 

[Quantumystic]

Again, I think Dr. Paul's position more thoroughly articulated would explain that the Dr.'s point is the (un)Constitutionality of the FEDERAL government assuming and exercising these kinds of powers.

It's a question of the mechanism/venue, not the issue.

 

[Marceline88]

Why in the world would we go back to segregation? And what does discrimination have to do with individual liberty? We are at liberty to hold our own opinions, but we can not discriminate against our fellow Americans, that would infringe on their liberties.

So what if a group of mentally disturbed people who gather and converse on an internet forum based around racial supremacy, that's their right to have a debate on who they like as president. I honestly don't care what ignorant racists think and I certainly don't believe that Dr. Paul would care for or seek out their collective endorsement.

The freedom message is powerful enough that it is reaching many different subgroups in the population. Ron Paul's message is also about the rule of law and if you think there are enough of these wacko racial purists to actually get our lawmakers to reinstate segregation and legalized discrimination, I have to ask what state do you live in???? Because I certainly will not live nor travel and spend my money there. This is modern day America, do you seriously think the idea of racial segregation is a popular will of the people???? It's just absurd.

 

[ctindale]

I dont think he is a racist either but he might support the right to be racist . You might not think that seperate drinking fountains are coming back but their are parts of the country that would love to bring them back........and toilets, buses, schools.

I just want him to state whether or not he plans to repeal the 1964 Civil Right Act.

As much as I like him on a dozen issues if you repeal that ACT it will create a bush fire and probably ruin his chances of implementing other good ideas.

and if he is against collectivism, and racism is a sin of the heart, then why does he publish articles on David Dukes site. (David Duke was a previous Grand Wizard of the KKK).

Isnt utilizing a collectivist group like the White Nationalist movement against his principles because it represents a collectivist group that covet

 

[Marceline88]

Wait a minute, wait a minute.... Ron Paul did not PUBLISH AN ARTICLE on David Duke's site. The editor of the site published an article on Ron Paul. Don't try to draw an inference of affiliation with such collectivist idiots as the KKK just because members are discussing him publicly. You are dead wrong.

 

[legion]

believe it or not, the civil rights act hasn't killed segregation. i currently live in a town in arkansas where there is a whites only diner and a blacks only bar. they just call them private clubs and charge some inconsequential membership fee. i guess its the only way the old fucks around here can feel superior because god knows they haven't done anything with their lives. thats really all racism is about. if you are a loser, you're probably also a racist or an ultra-nationalist. the rest of us don't have time.

 

[ThePieSwindler]

Wait how does Ron Paul's vote against a resolution to celebrate the Civil Rights act mean he wants to repeal the civil rights act? The author of that blog seems to infer that.

 

[legion]

Wait how does Ron Paul's vote against a resolution to celebrate the Civil Rights act mean he wants to repeal the civil rights act? The author of that blog seems to infer that.

Ron Paul does want to repeal the civil rights act, but supports its reenactment of it at the state level.

It's part of that whole 10th amendment thing.

 

[ctindale]

http://www.davidduke.com/general/i-...ermines-our-liberty-and-sovereignty_2266.html

sorry I post the wrong link Ron Paul regularly publishs articles on the David Duke site

I think we need to look at both the strengths and weakness's of RP carefully.

In my mind I want to understand where he stands on this so that I can defend him in other forums and blogs.

If we cant articulate good arguments and where he stand here we wont be able to handle the blow back when these views become more widely known.

Repealing the 1964 act is going to be one huge issue when it becomes more widely known. It may be used by the other candidates to prick the bubble.

So working out how to defend this weakness (if it is one is just as important as printing bumper stickers)

 

[Carl]

I dont think he is a racist either but he might support the right to be racist . You might not think that seperate drinking fountains are coming back but their are parts of the country that would love to bring them back........and toilets, buses, schools..........

Please name the parts of the country that would bring them back.

I think that your argument is a good representation of bigoted stereotyping and ignorance but hey, you have a right to believe as you choose.


.

 

[coplinger]

I'm from South Carolina & I don't think it would be too far fetched to imagine many aspects of the pre-civil rights South coming back in the smaller communities here if there were no laws preventing this. Many South Carolinians are still extremely backwards in their thinking.

Under Ron Paul's system, though, wouldn't you still have rights as an individual not to be discriminated against on the basis of your race, sex, religion, etc? I can't see how this could be unconstitutional.

 

[lucky]

Ok

I have seen this argument before somewhere else and it is going to get worse. I was listening to Larry Elder talk about this last year. Larry Elder is a black Conservative talk show host on radios all across the country and very popular.

He also had the same views as stated because the reenactment was giving a special privelege to a class of people over others. He was also against quotas and any laws that gave any special rights over others. His argument was that it created resentment and a backlash against the people it was supposed to help. It also created a disincentive to that class of people to succeed on their own merits over others.

For one example was the minority quotas that are imposed on Schools. Universities, Colleges, etc. There was a huge failing rate when they were compared to the ones that got into the same school on their merits alone. The idea is that the ones that most deserve to go to the school will succeed and benefit more. When some that should by merit are bypassed for a quota to someone with inferior grades then that helps no one.

I remember being horrified when Larry Elder was saying that the right to be exclusive to certain races should be legal. He then proceeded to cite examples and I started to see things more his way. He seemed to feel that as an example a restaraunt started to say whites only and that they excluded other races, then the market forces would determine if that restaraunt would survive or not.

In some areas a whites only business may survive for awhile but what happens when the clientele starts to drift away or age? The demographics of the region starts becoming more minority? Then all of a sudden the business will wither and die. It is all about individual rights for sure. I personally would hate to see a racist business in my area but if they did then so what? I would not go and give them my business.

Also any local governments or states try to enact laws that allow segegrated areas would be very limited and minorities would move away to more sane areas. Then the tax base would suffer and the ones that live in that area would pay a lot more for their racist policies. As we should not enforce our Democartic ideas by the gun at the head we should not enforce laws by the threat of being imprisoned.

 

[ARealConservative]

http://www.davidduke.com/general/i-...ermines-our-liberty-and-sovereignty_2266.html

sorry I post the wrong link Ron Paul regularly publishs articles on the David Duke site

No he doesn't. The guy is 70 - he isn't going on the internet publishing articles on David Duke's site. Even the link your posted shows the source they got the article from.

you are either extremely ignorant, or dishonest.

 

[Gee]

Presidents cannot repeal legislation.

I dont think he is a racist either but he might support the right to be racist . You might not think that seperate drinking fountains are coming back but their are parts of the country that would love to bring them back........and toilets, buses, schools.

Uh... I don't think so. Aside from the serious economic reasons not to segregate, anyone who did this would catch horrible amounts of flak from the media.

Do people actually think the government HELPED racism in America? Remember it was the government that enforced slavery, and instituted public segregation in the first place. Much of the civil rights progress in this country was getting rid of legistlation which required segregation in schools and the like.

If anything helps ease the relationship between cultures and races its voluntary association, not the government forcing one race on another. Common sense tells us that could just have the opposite effect.

Besides, voluntary segregation is already rampant. Harlem, China Town, etc. People should have the right to live and work how they want, and if that means they don't want to associate with certain races or cultures, who cares?