Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Because, well-intentioned as its origin and original purpose were, the 1964 Civil Rights Act grew into the most deadly monster mankind has ever known. Between the act and the flood of court cases that soon followed, the vast majority of the white population was silenced, demoralized, and paralyzed within 10 years. The price for failure to march in lock-step was too high to risk. But nobody saw it leading to the nightmare we live today.
It was the embryo that grew into Political Correctness and put freedom of thought into a death spiral. Eastern Europe may, indeed, be our savior.......for those remaining who even want to be saved.
Well, this is how I see the 1964 Civil Rights Act. It's one of the reasons I'm freer and better off in 2021 than I would have been in 1961. As a Black man, my life would have been much worse without it.
I've looked at some of the things that go on in parts of Eastern Europe. There are some things we really don't want to copy. Some things we could learn from them, but not as much as you would think.
I understand the post. And he’s right. For example eastern Euro countries don’t tolerate illegal immigration and destruction of their own country and race. The west does. Why are western whites suicidal. Why are they afraid of defending their race from injustices? Or even talking about it?
I’m a first generation American. Parents and grandparents came from an eastern Euro country. Perhaps that was a mistake seeing the way things have been going in the U.S. in recent decades.
This is what I gather. I'm not White. My people have been in America as far back as the very beginning (albeit not by choice). I feel that based on my own family history, and American history, I'm suppose to be part of the western world. I'm Black and I don't get why I should be worried.
Well, this is how I see the 1964 Civil Rights Act. It's one of the reasons I'm freer and better off in 2021 than I would have been in 1961.
What do you mean by better off? Have things improved for blacks since 1961? In what way? Every way? Have there been any downsides? What would the world look like if not for the Civil Rights Act?
What do you mean by better off? Have things improved for blacks since 1961? In what way? Every way? Have there been any downsides? What would the world look like if not for the Civil Rights Act?
Well, I'll put it this way. I'm far more free today than I would have been back in 1961. Freedom and my prosperity are important to me. Whatever downsides there have been, well, I look at it like this. I would rather live in 2021 than 1961. I was born into a solid, two parent home in 1986. Born into a middle class home. I'm college educated. So is my father. I can't think of any reason to want to live in the pre-Civil Rights Act days.
Do you think black people are happier today than they were in 1961?
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner
I'm college educated. I can't think of any reason to want to live in the pre-Civil Rights Act days.
There is certainly more economic opportunity for black people today than there was in 1961. And I'm sure someone who is well-to-do and educated doesn't want his "opportunity" limited by segregation/racism.
But let me explain it like this. If you were to go back to the first feminists. They tended to be educated women who wanted to pursue careers, and felt held back by a system that prevented their advancement. Not much has changed since then. Feminists are largely middle-class women who are trying to pursue their economic interests. The first-wave was mostly aiming at removing obstacles. The later waves are seeking special-privileges.
I don't begrudge them, but why are they so obsessed with their economic-advancement? They have all this money, and careers, and partnerships, etc, but has it made them happy?
The average black person is richer today than he was in 1961, although the wealth-gap is actually worse today than it was then. But it seems to me that the state of black society has fallen apart.
Now, let's pretend we could go back to 1960 and prevent all Civil Rights legislation. What would the state of the black community be today? Worse? What would you be doing?
Edit: I would love for you to tell me what you think about this quote...
"When all the privileges of birth and fortune are abolished, when all professions are accessible to all, and a man’s own energies may place him at the top of any one of them, an easy and unbounded career seems open to his ambition, and he will readily persuade himself that he is born to no common destinies. But this is an erroneous notion, which is corrected by daily experience. The same equality which allows every citizen to conceive these lofty hopes, renders all the citizens less able to realize them: it circumscribes their powers on every side, whilst it gives freer scope to their desires. Not only are they themselves powerless, but they are met at every step by immense obstacles, which they did not at first perceive. They have swept away the privileges of some of their fellow-creatures which stood in their way, but they have opened the door to universal competition." - Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Do you think black people are happier today than they were in 1961?
Not much happier, but I think alot of Blacks would rather live today than in 2021. The way I see it, Black people are less afraid to express their discontent today than in 1961.
Quote:
There is certainly more economic opportunity for black people today than there was in 1961. And I'm sure someone who is well-to-do and educated doesn't want his "opportunity" limited by segregation/racism.
But let me explain it like this. If you were to go back to the first feminists. They tended to be educated women who wanted to pursue careers, and felt held back by a system that prevented their advancement. Not much has changed since then. Feminists are largely middle-class women who are trying to pursue their economic interests. The first-wave was mostly aiming at removing obstacles. The later waves are seeking special-privileges.
I don't begrudge them, but why are they so obsessed with their economic-advancement? They have all this money, and careers, and partnerships, etc, but has it made them happy?
The average black person is richer today than he was in 1961, although the wealth-gap is actually worse today than it was then. But it seems to me that the state of black society has fallen apart.
Now, let's pretend we could go back to 1960 and prevent all Civil Rights legislation. What would the state of the black community be today? Worse? What would you be doing?
Edit: I would love for you to tell me what you think about this quote...
"When all the privileges of birth and fortune are abolished, when all professions are accessible to all, and a man’s own energies may place him at the top of any one of them, an easy and unbounded career seems open to his ambition, and he will readily persuade himself that he is born to no common destinies. But this is an erroneous notion, which is corrected by daily experience. The same equality which allows every citizen to conceive these lofty hopes, renders all the citizens less able to realize them: it circumscribes their powers on every side, whilst it gives freer scope to their desires. Not only are they themselves powerless, but they are met at every step by immense obstacles, which they did not at first perceive. They have swept away the privileges of some of their fellow-creatures which stood in their way, but they have opened the door to universal competition." - Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
This is what I think. Third wave feminism is simply a bad thing. However, this is the thing. When you're educated, when you have obtained a certain skill level, you expect more from yourself. You expect more from life. You expect the same treatment that anyone else would get. You expect to be able to get what anyone else gets, based on your willingness to work for it.
As for the wealth gap, this is what I see. Blacks started off with far less than anyone else. Wealth includes having things passed down. Black Americans are less likely to have alot to pass down to the next generation. If we were to go back to 1961, Blacks would poorer relative to today. Black Americans would be limited in where they could go and what they could do. Black American neighborhoods had higher rates of violent crime than other places back in 1961, and it's this way today. Today, however, the Black middle class doesn't have to live around underclass people. I think it's better today than in 1960. A larger Black middle class today than back in 1960. Why would I want to live in a society of Jim Crow? Why would I want to give up the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
This is what I think of the quote. I get from De Tocqueville "if you're born at a low position, you should just accept it for what it is". I disagree. If a person wants to do something, has the potential, and is willing to work for it, I don't get the point in making it harder for said person to pursue such talents.
When you're educated, when you have obtained a certain skill level, you expect more from yourself. You expect more from life. You expect the same treatment that anyone else would get. You expect to be able to get what anyone else gets, based on your willingness to work for it.
It's not about education, it's about ambition. Ambitious people tend to be more educated, and they resent anything that holds them back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner
As for the wealth gap, this is what I see. Blacks started off with far less than anyone else. Wealth includes having things passed down. Black Americans are less likely to have alot to pass down to the next generation. If we were to go back to 1961, Blacks would poorer relative to today.
What sucks about being poor, isn't that you don't have things, but that other people do. It is this inequality that breeds a culture of opportunism, which invariably becomes criminal. All of our ancestors were poor, but they were good people. Money has corrupted everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner
This is what I think of the quote. I get from De Tocqueville "if you're born at a low position, you should just accept it for what it is".
Look at it like this.... If you have a caste system, like in India. Then you are limited in terms of what jobs you can have, and who you can marry. That sounds awful, right? We should be free to pursue any opportunity, and to marry whomever we want. Right?
What he is trying to explain, is that when you're restricted in terms of what you can do, and who you can marry, then you are competing against fewer people in fewer ways. If you can't be rich, then there is no pressure to become rich. But if you can, then you are a failure if you don't.
When blacks and whites lived separately, you weren't competing with white people, and white people weren't competing with you. But once you remove those barriers, you open the door to universal competition. Now we're all competing with everyone.
In the case of India, if you're a member of a caste which can only be a farm laborer, and neither the men nor the women can marry a member of another caste, then you'll be a farm laborer, and you'll have a wife, and kids, a house, etc. You'll be everything you can be, and you'll be respected by your community.
But if you abolish the caste system, and now everyone is competing against everyone, then if you're still a farm laborer, you might not have a wife, or children, or a house, etc. And even worse, because you could potentially have anything, you'll never be happy with what you have.
The quote comes from the chapter of his book titled, "Causes Of The Restless Spirit Of Americans In The Midst Of Their Prosperity". This is my favorite part...
"In certain remote corners of the Old World you may still sometimes stumble upon a small district which seems to have been forgotten amidst the general tumult, and to have remained stationary whilst everything around it was in motion. The inhabitants are for the most part extremely ignorant and poor; they take no part in the business of the country, and they are frequently oppressed by the government; yet their countenances are generally placid, and their spirits light. In America I saw the freest and most enlightened men, placed in the happiest circumstances which the world affords: it seemed to me as if a cloud habitually hung upon their brow, and I thought them serious and almost sad even in their pleasures. The chief reason of this contrast is that the former do not think of the ills they endure – the latter are forever brooding over advantages they do not possess. It is strange to see with what feverish ardor the Americans pursue their own welfare; and to watch the vague dread that constantly torments them lest they should not have chosen the shortest path which may lead to it."
Last edited by Redshadowz; 05-20-2021 at 08:19 PM..
It's not about education, it's about ambition. Ambitious people tend to be more educated, and they resent anything that holds them back.
It is about both. Not all ambitious people have college degrees. However, you were talking about the suffragists. Suffragists tended to be educated, and expected more out of life.
Ambitions people also tend to expect more out of life. When you're ambitious, you have a higher likelihood of not accepting "No" for an answer.
Quote:
What sucks about being poor, isn't that you don't have things, but that other people do. It is this inequality that breeds a culture of opportunism, which invariably becomes criminal. All of our ancestors were poor, but they were good people. Money has corrupted everything.
What sucks about being poor is how hard it is to get out of poverty. What sucks is being set up to stay in poverty. Desperation does breed crime. However, if more people could get out of poverty and had hope of doing so, this would stop alot of problems.
Quote:
Look at it like this.... If you have a caste system, like in India. Then you are limited in terms of what jobs you can have, and who you can marry. That sounds awful, right? We should be free to pursue any opportunity, and to marry whomever we want. Right?
Here is the thing. We don't live in India. Most people don't want to live in a caste system. Being limited in what you can do according to what caste your in, that isn't freedom. It doesn't get you out of poverty. What matters most is being able to better your life. You should have the opportunity to better your life. Having freedom helps.
Quote:
What he is trying to explain, is that when you're restricted in terms of what you can do, and who you can marry, then you are competing against fewer people in fewer ways. If you can't be rich, then there is no pressure to become rich. But if you can, then you are a failure if you don't.
When you're restricted, you have less opportunity to pursue your happiness. If you have the ability to do something, why shouldn't you be able to have that opportunity to pursue it? If you have the ability to compete, why shouldn't you be able to compete? If you can do something, and you have the freedom and opportunity to pursue, you have that much more of a chance of realizing those goals. I'd rather deal with the pressure of having to succeed than to deal with the restrictions of not being able to pursue and realize my goals.
Quote:
When blacks and whites lived separately, you weren't competing with white people, and white people weren't competing with you. But once you remove those barriers, you open the door to universal competition. Now we're all competing with everyone.
Blacks were not living separately because they wanted to. The rest of society restricted Black people because Blacks were despised and not wanted around, other than for transactional purposes. Blacks were still competing with White people, just in separate spaces. Opening the door to everyone now meant high-achieving Black people could now go and aspire to anything. You want to become an architect? Your chances are much higher today than in 1950. The competition has increased, but so has the likelihood of realizing your goals.
Quote:
In the case of India, if you're a member of a caste which can only be a farm laborer, and neither the men nor the women can marry a member of another caste, then you'll be a farm laborer, and you'll have a wife, and kids, a house, etc. You'll be everything you can be, and you'll be respected by your community.
What if you don't want to be a farm laborer? What if you're sick of living hand to mouth? What if there is something you would rather do? I don't think you'd be happy. I prefer to chase my own happiness. I'm glad we don't have the caste system.
Quote:
But if you abolish the caste system, and now everyone is competing against everyone, then if you're still a farm laborer, you might not have a wife, or children, or a house, etc. And even worse, because you could potentially have anything, you'll never be happy with what you have.
It certainly creates more competition. It also creates more opportunities and more avenues to achieve. Because you could have anything, YOU get to dictate your own pace. YOU decide, not the caste your were born in.
Quote:
The quote comes from the chapter of his book titled, "Causes Of The Restless Spirit Of Americans In The Midst Of Their Prosperity". This is my favorite part...
"In certain remote corners of the Old World you may still sometimes stumble upon a small district which seems to have been forgotten amidst the general tumult, and to have remained stationary whilst everything around it was in motion. The inhabitants are for the most part extremely ignorant and poor; they take no part in the business of the country, and they are frequently oppressed by the government; yet their countenances are generally placid, and their spirits light. In America I saw the freest and most enlightened men, placed in the happiest circumstances which the world affords: it seemed to me as if a cloud habitually hung upon their brow, and I thought them serious and almost sad even in their pleasures. The chief reason of this contrast is that the former do not think of the ills they endure – the latter are forever brooding over advantages they do not possess. It is strange to see with what feverish ardor the Americans pursue their own welfare; and to watch the vague dread that constantly torments them lest they should not have chosen the shortest path which may lead to it."
This quote still doesn't change my mind. I value freedom and the ability of pursuit. Sure, I have more competition, but I'm also someone who doesn't take any crap from anyone.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
