# No, the free market will not protect civil rights (or 'why the Civil Rights Act is still needed) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 10, 2014, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982 "2014-02-10T16:30:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Falchion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a88e57/32.png) [@Falchion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Falchion)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/101 "2014-02-10T21:15:57Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Actually, I never realized until now that 1983 was part of the 1871 Act and not the 1964 Act. > > As to the latter, sure you can, assuming you can. See _McCord v. Alabama_, 364 Fed.Appx. 590, for example. From what I see, McCord’s case gets dismissed on sovereign immunity grounds. Which is kinda the point, _who_ do you bring a 1983 suit against for a restrictive covenant? ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/102 "2014-02-10T21:18:45Z")
> [@Karrius](#): > > Can you please specify which “use of force” is being celebrated here, just so it’s entirely clear? I don’t want to read into your words. The federal government’s use of force in destroying property rights. > [@Voyager](#): > > Four people of the wrong type enter a lunch counter and sit down. They are dressed as well or better as the customers of the right type, and they show that they have more than enough money to pay for their food. > The owner, being a racist, refuses to serve them. He calls the police. What should the police do? > > Trespassing? Hardly - sitting at an open lunch counter is hardly trespassing. That’s where you went wrong, bud. > [@](#): > > Throw them out? Then the state is actively racist. How so? If the owner of the lunch counter were in the establishment of the 4 people, and they had him ejected by the state, how would that be racist? Can the state simultaneously be pro and anti black? Pro and anti white? > [@](#): > > The state can’t be neutral. It must either enforce discrimination, as it did back then, or enforce the rights of all, which it mostly does now. Which do you choose? The state could enforce property rights. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/103 "2014-02-10T21:20:40Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > So, when it comes to which you support more, human rights or property rights, your answer would be…? what the hell is a human right? Are you talking of the “rights” that ebb and flow with the caprices of the majority? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/104 "2014-02-10T21:21:29Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Is this really the only justification for the property-right eroding portions of the CRA nowadays? It seems laughably inadequate nearly to the point of satire. If there were big problems with black folks driving through a town or even several towns in say, Oklahoma, a racially enlightened entreprenuer could profit off of this unsatisfied demand for food, gas, and shelter. If there is only a small problem, well there’s only a small problem. Back in the day, black drivers had a [_Negro Motorist Green Book_](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Negro_Motorist_Green_Book) to tell them where such entrepreneurs as you describe would welcome them. Nevertheless, there was a **big** problem. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/105 "2014-02-10T21:24:40Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Back in the day, black drivers had a [_Negro Motorist Green Book_](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Negro_Motorist_Green_Book) to tell them where such entrepreneurs as you describe would welcome them. Nevertheless, there was a **big** problem. With black motorists finding respite, or the state failing to punish those that aggressed against black people? Don’t be so mysterious. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/106 "2014-02-10T21:28:20Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > You group these things together like they are one and the same. You either don’t understand the difference between a lynching and turning black people away from a restaurant, or you are a demagogue. Either way i’m about done with you. You don’t see anyone else suggesting these things are the same. And I haven’t suggested they’re the same, Mr. Puts-words-in-my-mouth. They’re not identical, but they are closely linked historically. Yes, lynching is worse than denying someone service. But acting like the two have nothing to do with each other, which you are implying, shows a poor understanding of history. > [@](#): > > No i just thought you made an innacurate statement out of either sloppiness or ignorance, so i jumped on that part of your statement. Except that I didn’t make an inaccurate statement. > [@](#): > > I don’t think the presence of sundown towns between point a and point c to be any larger a problem than the presence of a desert between point a and point c. As long as the sundown towns were not committing violence on the passers-by. And i mean the definition of “violence” commonplace in American society. Got it. You’re OK, apparently, with a scenario, which existed in many parts of US history, in which it was significantly more difficult for black people to get by in day-to-day life because of the ‘small potatoes’ (as you call them) decisions of racist white people. As long as they weren’t lynching them, it’s OK with you. > [@](#): > > It’s a bit disturbing when you capitalize federal government as you celebrate its use of force. It’s a bit disturbing that you read my capitalization and italics as anything but a sense of emphasis. It’s a bit disturbing when you belittle and ignore the repression of rights of non-state actors in US history. > [@](#): > > Aside from that, the actions of state governments are the actions of governments nonetheless. So you agree that action from the Federal government was required to protect individual rights from state government oppression? > [@](#): > > You realize a boycott is a market mechanism, correct? Of course – boycotts have historically been used (sometimes) as a means of oppression. The CRA does not prevent boycotts, of course, nor should it. But I’m glad you agree that the free market is often used as a tool of oppression. > [@](#): > > The South after the CRA does not fit those axioms. Government intrusion into property rights is a non-market force. The South _never_ fit these axioms, by and large. The economic actors were never rational (for the most part) in the South. > [@](#): > > The government prior to the CRA wasn’t even protecting property rights or enforcing laws against violence, so you’re right, it wasn’t a free market. If the government (even the federal government) would have stepped in and stopped the violence, and left property rights intact, I would have had no problem with that. The CRA went too far. So you would have had no problem with continuing sundown towns, I take it. As long as there’s no violence. You really don’t seem to know much about what real life in America was like for black people before the 60s. > [@](#): > > Well I disagree that it helps prevent racism, but the fact that it exists isn’t a big deal, yeah. It prevents discrimination, and prosecutes discriminators. This is a fact – cases are still brought to trial on Civil Rights violations. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/107 "2014-02-10T21:30:54Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > With black motorists finding respite, or the state failing to punish those that aggressed against black people? Don’t be so mysterious. With black motorists finding services. It’s a big problem when black motorists are habitually stranded between towns because no hotel would take them, no gas station would serve them, etc. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/108 "2014-02-10T21:37:10Z")
> [@Karrius](#): > > Reminding people that you think people who burn down mosques are pro freedom of religion, I don not think that people who burn down mosques are pro freedom of religion, nor have I ever said that I do. ---
**Author:** ![Karrius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/71c47a/32.png) [@Karrius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Karrius)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/109 "2014-02-10T21:38:59Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > I don not think that people who burn down mosques are pro freedom of religion, nor have I ever said that I do. I’m glad you’ve come to an agreement that the tea party is anti freedom of religion, and that liberals are pro-freedom of religion. This would have been much easier had you simply apologized in the original thread, rather than abandoned it when presented with evidence like you have a persistent habit of doing. Now, will you stop derailing this thread and tell me just what kind of evidence you want that the sundown towns would exist once more, if the evidence I gave was not good enough? What WOULD convince you? ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/110 "2014-02-10T21:44:39Z")
> [@Karrius](#): > > I’m glad you’ve come to an agreement that the tea party is anti freedom of religion, and that liberals are pro-freedom of religion. I’ve come to no such agreement, nor said anything which gives any indication that I have. You’re wrong yet again. > [@](#): > > This would have been much easier had you simply apologized in the original thread, I’ve no clue what you’re talking about. Since you’re the one who keeps making false statements about me, shouldn’t you be the one who apologizes to me? > [@Karrius](#): > > In case it wasn’t clear, the 91% was meant as evidence that “sundown towns” would be making a return - some places refuse to let the ‘wrong kind’ of people live in them already. I have posted proof of this. I don’t recall you posting proof of any such thing. The only outside link that you posted was in post #21, to [this](http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_25072132/discrimination-prevalent-metro-denver-housing-market-study-says), which makes no mention of any place refusing to let any person live anywhere. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/111 "2014-02-10T21:47:57Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > what the hell is a human right? Are you talking of the “rights” that ebb and flow with the caprices of the majority? What the hell is a property right? Are you talking of the “rights” that ebb and flow with the caprices of the majority? ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/112 "2014-02-10T22:18:57Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > I’m a fairly strong libertarian when it comes to the free market but this is one of the areas where history shows that the free market is not enough by itself to protect rights. The private bus companies in the South–prior to the CRA–treated their black customers quite poorly even though they made up most of their riders. > > The free market would work if there was no societal pressure on those that would go against public opinion. E.g. in the 50’s a restaurant might have made money by opening its doors to blacks but the owner would have (likely) been subjected to death threats. The CRA was required to counter those societal pressures. So - what is the reason CRA is required now? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/113 "2014-02-10T22:26:58Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > So - what is the reason CRA is required now? Here is one reason – based on our history, many state and local governments cannot be trusted to protect the rights of black people and other minorities in their jurisdictions. Therefore, the Federal government must be able to investigate and prosecute violations, in case the state or local authorities refuse to. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/114 "2014-02-10T22:32:26Z")
So this libertarian backlash to the CRA, is basically the anti-vaxer argument. _We don’t need vaccines, no one gets those diseases any more!_ ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/115 "2014-02-10T22:34:36Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > You realize a boycott is a market mechanism, correct? Did the bus boycott achieve its aims solely through market pressure? No, a Federal lawsuit was still required. > [@WillFarnaby](#): > > The South after the CRA does not fit those axioms. Government intrusion into property rights is a non-market force. > The government prior to the CRA wasn’t even protecting property rights or enforcing laws against violence, so you’re right, it wasn’t a free market. If the government (even the federal government) would have stepped in and stopped the violence, and left property rights intact, I would have had no problem with that. The CRA went too far. The Southern State governments weren’t protecting property rights. It required the Federal CRA to trump the states. I wish it hadn’t been needed because, like you, I’d prefer the market work it out. It just wasn’t going to happen in any reasonable time. ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/116 "2014-02-10T22:39:42Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > So - what is the reason CRA is required now? I answered that [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17092381&postcount=74). Short answer is: _It’s not like the CRA is a major burden on the market and even now it helps prevent some racism._ ---
**Author:** ![Farin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e79b87/32.png) [@Farin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Farin)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/117 "2014-02-10T22:49:51Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > What’s your evidence for that? Having lived across the border from Idaho in the no-less-special-in-the-racism-department city of Spokane, WA. I could write a whole series of anecdotes on the subject, but I’m sure you aren’t interested. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2014, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/118 "2014-02-10T23:18:28Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > So this libertarian backlash to the CRA, is basically the anti-vaxer argument. _We don’t need vaccines, no one gets those diseases any more!_ More _We don’t need mandatory treatment to control the outbreak of certain diseases, no one gets those diseases any more!_ And the only reason we’re debating the mandatory treatment is because another outbreak of the disease is in the news . . . every six to twelve months. It’s very much like those, stupid, stupid law lists. Nobody does the bad thing that those laws were passed to stop anymore, but if they started to the bad thing again . . . we’d, almost certainly, pass the exact same law to stop them from doing it. So maybe we’re better off leaving those laws on the books, even if no one is currently breaking those laws, just in case folks do start breaking them in the future? CMC ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/119 "2014-02-11T01:00:01Z")
> [@Karrius](#): > > Reminding people that you think people who burn down mosques are pro freedom of religion, while people who think others should be allowed to worship as they choose are not, is likely not very productive in a thread about civil rights legislation. You keep posting this random accusation in various threads, but the closest I have found to evidence for this claim is that **ITR champion** did not happen to have posted a condemnation of an act that may have been a hypothetical you provided or it may have simply been something that he did not see. This sort of baseless taunt is regarded as stalking and serves no purpose outside The BBQ Pit. Knock it off. [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982/120 "2014-02-11T01:10:10Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > So this libertarian backlash to the CRA, is basically the anti-vaxer argument. _We don’t need vaccines, no one gets those diseases any more!_ Sort of. I think the argument is that the CRA worked. . .that racism of the virulence you saw in the 1950s and 60s is gone, due in part to the CRA. So that, while there’s still racism and racists around, you’re not going to find wide spread support for segregation laws anymore, or for businesses that don’t serve blacks, or whatever. There may be that guy in Enid, Oklahoma, but he’s not the norm anymore, not even in Enid. The argument would be that the CRA wasn’t an end in itself, but more of a means to an end…that of ending racial discrimination in the US, and that that’s been largely successful. To pursue your vaccine analogy, we don’t vaccinate for smallpox anymore, because smallpox is almost extinct. So, the vaccinations are now unnecessary. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-the-free-market-will-not-protect-civil-rights-or-why-the-civil-rights-act-is-still-needed/680982.md?page=7)