So... how about that Tea Party?

[Kasz216]

Final-Fan said:

Kasz216 said:

Final-Fan said:
Well it's true that segregation would have a much harder time with the Feds keeping state, county, and municipal governments in line.  But regarding segregation needing reinforcement, you can say the same thing about racism I believe, but that hasn't stopped people from being racist.  Segregation is just much easier to see, and to stop.  If people hadn't been stopping them, lots of people and places wouldn't have stopped. 

McDonald's gets government funding? 

The big difference is racism gets social support.  It's all around us and you don't even really see it.
One wayt o put it is... it's easy to be racist... it's hard to act racist when your around a lot of black people and get to know them.
Here is a fun fact... Roger Kelly, former leader of the Klu Klux Klan ended up leaving the Klan partially because he became friends with a Black Man, an Author who wrote a book about the Klu Klux Klan.
"Klandestine Relations"  I believe the book is called.

Racism generally can be defeated, so long as people are aware of it and meet people of other cultures.  You just get issues like the afforementioned France in another thread, where the government puts off the vibe that there isn't really racism... and that's where things get worse.
So long as you have an open government fostering good will and publishing information about racial issues it should take care of itself.
How long it would of took though, is another story.  Civil Rights Legislation probably quickened things up with the expense of larger racism existed now then if it would of happened "organically."
Which some you could say "They should of did it that way" but that's easy to say in 2010.  Harder to say back then.
Which is really the big trouble with racially based laws to even things out by force.  It makes the "solution" farther away... but improves things now.
On the one hand you can look to the future, on the otherhand, it's hard to deny improving things for people currently around.

So what you're saying is that segregation helps racists stay racist, and encourages racism.  I can certainly believe that.  And desegregation helps discourage racism. 

But I'm not sure why people would be more racist now than if desegregation hadn't been forced outside of government or gov't-supported institutions.  Just because people will resist forced change generally, and this resistance ossified?  Or the "affirmative action effect"?  Or what? 
If it's too complicated to explain to a layman in a reasonably-sized post, just say so.  I'm a big boy, I can take it. 

Generally it's a little bit of both... change just like affirmitive action, change mandated from the government can often be seen as being caused by the government.  It could even be rationalized by looking at most people activly not trying to be racist as being brainwashed by the government, and all that nonsense.  It lets groups stay more insular, vs a change by the people, which can't be denied as clearly just a movement by the people.

Forced desegregation in private buisnesses basically aloud people to say "they would of never alowed this if they weren't forced too, and if they think differently now it's because they were brainwashed."  In general that appears to be the platform of a lot of racist people.  Most people would be with them if it wasn't for the government.

Theoretically if they would of only would of stopped desegregation in state instutitions, racism would of lowered, and buisnesses would of desegregated themselves and racists would have been generally "defeated".

It would of just started to swing heavily as soon as the profit of including black people surpassed the negative economic loss of boycotting from white people.  It's like when black atheletes started breaking into white only sports.

The question is though... when would this of happened.  Which is a very real question.  It likely would of happened later, but when it did had a much more condensed timeframe to getting equal rights. 

I think it would of happened by now, but in honesty I can't be certain.  In some areas though, racism does seem MUCH more codified in culture.  When, during say the time of the Civil War... despite the fact that the North and South disagreed on whether slavery should be allowed... their generally beliefs on the state of the black man were about the same.

They just felt differently on how to handle this race of men that were "inferoir but still men."

Even an "eased" seregation would of worked better... but it's hard to argue for "eased" or moderation when you can make things drastically better for people in the short term.

It's like Africa... there are a lot of convincing arguements that the Aid we provide these nations is actually doing more harm then good, proping up dictators, making people reliant on aid and making their populations grow far greater then they should.

Still, it'd be awfully hard to cut funding because of how much worse life would be for those currently living.