The Diversity Myth

The only problem with the Civil Rights Act was that it FORCED the integration of the races.

First, segregation is not necessarily a bad thing. People naturally tend to segregate themselves to their own kind. That’s just the nature of things. Now, I agree, government enforced segregation is evil. However, the official segregation of the races was diminishing at its natural pace prior to 1964. As time went on, society experienced more and more interaction between the races. Minorities were making inroads into American society at a natural pace. The Civil Rights Act, by forcing integration, fomented resentment and hostility and exacerbated tensions between the races. Today, racial preferences are still fomenting resentment and hostility between the races.

When the Civil Rights Act was being proposed, those that opposed the Act were labeled racists. Even today, those that opposed the Act are still labeled racist.

One of the reasons that the Civil Rights Act was opposed was that the opponents saw the Act as instilling a system of quotas to be enforced. Those who promoted the Civil Rights Act denied that there would be any quotas, in fact, Senator Hubert Humphrey addressed the House of Representatives and gave his personal “guarantee” that there would never be a system of quotas with regards to the Civil Rights Act.

Well, lo and behold, today we have quotas. Of course they are not called quotas, they are called “goals”.

Were the Civil Rights Act and “related legislation” beneficial? Well, the only way a judgement can be made is to make some before and after comparisons. Let’s see…

Crime rate UP
Prison population UP
Illegitimacy rate UP
Related Government expenditures UP
Education DOWN

Now, I realize that all of those are not directly related to the Civil Rights Act, but all have a kinship with liberalism.

Speaking of education, and this lends a good before and after example.

Prior to the Supreme Court case of Brown vs. the Board of Education, virtually every high-school graduate, black or white, rich or poor, from the valedictorian to the one at the bottom of the class could read.

Today, it is commomplace to hear of high-school graduates that can’t read or are functionally illiterate. Which is better, the before or the after?

No, freedom means that the populace should not be subjected to a government that enacts programs such as “Citizenship USA”, for the sole purpose of changing the political demographics of regions of America in order to gain legislative seats sympathetic to a particular political party.

It’s humorous how the left always likes to label conservatives as “fascist”, when fascism is a tenet of liberalism.

Looking for fascism? Look no further than “minimum wage laws”. A tenet of fascism and a pet of liberalism.

“qualified minorities” being the operative phrase.

Today, universities give preferences to minorities regardless of being qualified or not.

Is that a good thing?

I’m sure that some liberals have made changes for the better, but then, there have been some that have made things for the worse, such as Dr. Benjamin Spock. (Boy, he really caused some damage)

Anyway, on liberalism’s balance sheet, I see the liabilities to far outweigh the assets.

There, how’s that for backing down from absolutes?

Then I am sure that you remember Vice President Gore’s pet project of “Citizenship USA”.

Did that not change the demographics of Orange County enough to change a House seat?

Bolding mine

Not that old chestnut again. Do you have a cite? I do. The Office of the Inspector General:

>>The OIG report confirms that this program was in fact a backlog reduction effort in response to lengthy naturalization processing times. Naturalization processing times exceed three years in some jurisdictions, and such delays are not acceptable.<<

I’ll go with the OIG on this one, unless of course you have a Cite that proves otherwise.

The demographics of Orange County did not change. The voting habits of previously underrepresented people did.

And this crack-

***"One thing I have always found amusing is the resistance by these new Spanish-speaking immigrants to any attempt to declare English as the official language for doing state business. Their “reasoning” is that they consider the English language to be an imposition of European culture upon them. To which I say, “HEY MORON, WHERE DO YOU THINK SPAIN IS!!!” ***

A lot of our latino neighbors are from Mexico, actually. Descended from Mexican indians, not Spanish invaders. So I can’t see how European geography enters into their thinking on this issue.

Furthermore, there is a huge distinction there. Every Spanish person I know will kick your ass if you call them Mexican or Latino, because they aren’t.

One more thing- the Spanish language spoken in Spain is not the same Spanish language spoken in Mexico. Just in case you were wondering.

To the extent that “qualified” isn’t a completely subjective criteria, this simply isn’t true; no university has an “open admissions, as long as you’re black” policy. On the other hand, I would say that George W. Bush wasn’t “qualified” to attend Yale – so long as you’re a legacy whose family contributes very large amounts of money, Yale (along with almost every other school) does have open admissions. How is the favoritism shown to him better than favoritism shown to minorities?

Anyway, the OP is, to put it politely, boring. I doubt I’ll be back.

Razorsharp: If you’re standing by your assertion that the colonial immigrants to the original 13 colonies were all Christian, then you’ve truly left the realm of Logic & Truth far behind. Unless, of course, you’re going to start telling me that the Jewish immigrants were Christians.

Assuming that you’re talking about Bob Dornan, perhaps it would help for you to look at a copy of “Politics in America”, which is availible at every library, or, if that’s not availible, the “Almanace of America Politics”. Dornan only ONCE in his political career won re-election with 60% of the vote. The district he represented was always the Democratic-leaning one in Orange County, and, in fact, had elected Democrats before Dornan’s arrival in that district (he carpetbagged in from coastal LA) in 1984.

originally posted by Razorsharp:

What a load of bull.

I love Mississippi with all my heart. BUT I am painfully aware of our bitter and dark past. The monster of segregation twisted many lives (both black and white) by giving free license to those who hate. Torture, harassment, rape, murder … the list is endless. Today, the scars of the old “segregated” system are evident, even as we citizens struggle to get along.

I am here to tell you that the ruling class of my beloved state would still be dragging their feet about “diminishing” segregation if it hadn’t been for the Civil Rights Act.

wait, Liberals want to put people in jail now? I didn’t know they were tough on crime!
BTW, how can this possibly be true with Dubya as president? Unless you are calling him part of the Vast Liberal Commie Conspiracy (or VLCC for those in the know).

Allright, Razorsharp, I’m back.

Again, you’re overgeneralizing. The diferences may not make difference to you in 2003, but it did to them in 1776. Also, you’re forgeting millions of Africans. But, they don’t count, right?

You didn’t address the point that George Washington’s letters were written to Jews. Who are, as Monty correctly pointed out, aren’t Christian. And, again, the millions of African animists. But, again, they don’t count, right?

Demand what? Equality? A fair opportunity? I’m assuming that you’re criticising welfare, here, which is used and, occasionally, abused by minorities and Europeans equally. If you’re arguing that minorities abuse welfare disproportionately, you need a cite.

Okay, I will. As you said, they were men of their times. This means they owned slaves and genreally considered minorities and women to be inferior. Did they found a great country? Yes, absolutely. Were they products of their times, to be studied honestly and without blinders? Yes. If you want to blindly follow a group of people becuase of the state they created without examining their other thoughts, that’s your perogative. Personally, I think that our country is much better now than in 1789. Don’t you?

Actually, it banned the segregation of the races. If you wish they still had seperate schools, lynchings, and Jim Crow Laws, I guess you’re SOL. Of course, you don’t want those things because…

You’re just flat wrong here. Segregatoin is necessarily a bad thing.

Remember, “To bigotry gives no sanction, to persecution no assistance—but generously affording to All liberty of conscience, and immunities of citizenship: - deeming every one, of whatever nation, tongue or language equal parts of the great Governmental Machine…” How can everyone be deemed an equal part of the great Governmental Machine if they are labeled different and seperate? How can persecution be given no assistance when peple trying to register blacks to vote were systemically lynched at the will, and sometimes participation of, local law enforcement? The Civil Rights Act was opposed because it forced southern policemen and politicians to follow the law and provide equal protection. There were no quotas involved.

It’s funny. You claim to support assimilation into some idea of a grand American culture, then defend segregation as not necessarily a bad thing. Do you really want assimilation?

This “natural pace” hypothesis of yours is simply fascinating Razorsharp. Tell me your intuition of how race relations would have proceeded in the US from 1960s to the present without the onerous burden of the Civil Rights Act? Pretend the Civil Rights Act never happened and tell us how you think things would have sorted themselves out to date, with respect to segregation of the races.

Am I the only one wondering what a “neo-commmunist” is and exactly how Razorsharp ends up talking to one? :confused:

<< However, the official segregation of the races was diminishing at its natural pace prior to 1964. As time went on, society experienced more and more interaction between the races. Minorities were making inroads into American society at a natural pace. The Civil Rights Act, by forcing integration, fomented resentment and hostility and exacerbated tensions between the races. Today, racial preferences are still fomenting resentment and hostility between the races.m>>

This is such incredible bullshit that I am appalled that any human being could say it. Segregation was diminishing at a natural pace??? Yeah, and at that “natural pace”, somewhere around the year 2050, we would possibly have allowed integrated drinking fountains, or movie theaters.

“Natural pace” would have meant that you, Razorback, would never have been faced with the dreadful situation of having to work side-by-side with people of different racial, religious, or ethnic backgrounds… or to accept them as customers.

Here’s where the mask slips away – your lament for a lost golden age of America is a cry for an all-white, all Anglo-Saxon (oh, wait, I forgot, you were willing to allow some Western Europeans, although probably not Italians, right? You forgot about the “No Irish need apply” signs?), all Protestant, society where everyone speaks only English (none of them damn German accents allowed) and votes only for the candidates that you approve. Such a dream-land never existed, certainly not in America, and not even in Europe.

Bah.

Dexter, let’s be fair, here.

In earlier posts, Razorsharp has recognized the legitimacy of Jews, Catholics, Italians, Poles, Germans, and many others. He’s just imagining a society in which people assimilated into an American culture by learning English and largely abandoning their ancestral traditions.

I think Razorsharp’s arguements are fairly proposterous, but let’s not put words in his (or her) mouth. Let’s attack them on what they are, not what they hint at.

Well, it almost did. Try Germany 1938.

Also, this is the Straight Dope Great Debates forum. We’re supposed to use facts and reason. Please watch the language. Try the pit for more colorful language. Thanks.

PS - Razorsharp, still waiting for your reply.

Yeah, right.:rolleyes: If the darkies would just tiptoe away and return to the Stephen Fetchett role, everything would be just fine – like it used to be – right?

It wasn’t the Civil Rights Act that formented resentment and hostility. These feelings already existed on both sides. Where did you study U.S. history?

Most people on welfare are white. Further, the amount of money used to support the welfare program is far less that what is spent on corporate welfare.

This was particularly funny to me:

You use a library??? So you have taken advantage of at least one socialistic institution. Your tagline is not terribly literate anyway.

When I hear an American say that things were better the way they used to be, you can bet that they are talking about how it was better for white males. Thank goodness that not all white males fall for that idea.

You’re not a “redneck,” Razor. Rednecks are just white guys who work hard and know how to have fun doing simple things like telling a good story. They aren’t, as a whole, arrogant or mean-spirited.

I can at least offer a solution to the problems you have with diversity, Razor. Encourage inter-cultural marriage. :smiley:

Although I’m sort of against the whole concept of online discussions, mainly because the ones involved very rarely are interested in facts and more interested in making their contenders look stupid, I’ll give it a shot.

*From Razorsharp[/]
**

**

I hate to go digging around in the closet, but weren’t there some people here around the time Europeans got here? Gee, they must’ve moved to the arctic when they saw our ships at the horizon. Or something. My point is that there were indeed people around and I’m amazed you, Razorsharp, don’t take their side, the Europeans were hardly very keen on this whole assimilation business. As a conservative, I mean. Things should stay the way they’ve always been, right? :rolleyes:

Ok, so I’m silly. But it’s easy to be a conservative when you can choose your favourite parts of history.

Fixes bad quote thingie

I can do better than “a cite”, I’ll give you multiple cites.

http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/08/01/gore.immigration.ap/ “The report (OIG) said there is no evidence that the 1996 presidential election motivated the crash program, but at least one official in Gore’s government-reinvention office told investigators he felt pressure to have the backlog erased in time for the new citizens to vote in November.”

http://migration.ucdavis.edu/mn/archive_mn/nov_1996-01mn.html “Republicans uncovered documents that showed that a member of Gore’s staff complained on March 28, 1996 that INS headquarters was hindering efforts to produce “a million new voters by election day.” One memo discussed ways to “lower the standards for citizenship.” The INS eventually granted its district managers in some cities the authority to waive some INS rules and regulations to speed up naturalizations. Citizenship USA used community-based groups to recruit permanent residents for naturalization.”

http://larsplace.com/rants/ins.htm “The vice president put the heat on to naturalize a million aliens considered likely to vote for the Democrats in 1996 - RESULT - Thousands of criminals are now citizens and your neighbors.”

…"Mr. Farbrother sent a lengthy e-mail directly to the vice president lamenting that district directors weren’t being given enough discretion to produce one million new citizens by the registration cutoff day. “Unless we blast INS headquarters loose from their grip on front-line managers, we are going to have way too many people still waiting for citizenship in November,” he wrote. He added: “I can’t make Doris Meissner delegate broad authority to her field managers. Can you?” Mr. Gore answered: “Will explore it. Thanks.”

By the end of March, Ms. Meissner had seen the light and delegated authority. By April 4, 1996, Ms. Kamarck was able to report to the president that everything was in place to naturalize over one million aliens in time for them to vote in the 1996 election."

…“In the end, the White House got its one million voters and re-election. The U.S. got 75,000 new citizens who had arrest records when they applied; an additional 115,000 citizens whose fingerprints were unclassifiable and were never resubmitted; and a final 61,000 who were given citizenship without even having their fingerprints submitted so that no check was possible. Those numbers were developed by the accounting firm of Peat Marwick as a result of an audit of the 1996 Citizenship USA program.”
And let’s not “Motor Votor”

“How many ineligible voters actually took advantage of the Motor Voter law by registering to vote? In Florida, according to the Florida Secretary of State’s numbers, between 1994 and 1998 (the most recent data available), the number of registered Hispanic voters skyrocketed by an astonishing 557%, from 99,000 to 655,000 while the number of White and Black registered voters increased by a reasonable 15 %.
The number of registered Hispanic voters has grown even more dramatically in south Florida. For example, in Dade County, from 1994 to 1998 the number of Hispanic voters grew by 1996%, a nearly 20-fold increase! And in now-famous Palm Beach County, the four year increase was completely off the charts, a 7,220% jump! http://www.usbc.org/media/voting.htm