Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Maybe it is time we reflect back on Jim Crow

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
SargeUNN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:09 AM
Original message
Maybe it is time we reflect back on Jim Crow
I grew up in Jim Crow Mississippi so the horrors of it are still fresh in my memory. I think we have forgotten how that time was given it's power and what price was paid for this stupidity. I now live in Arizona where the same horror is starting to show up and looking at our nation with the Muslim debate. So I feel it is time I speak out and hopefully those who don't see how stuff like the debate on the community center, the false preacher burning a faith's holy book takes a constitutional right and moves things into a criminal act that hurts our world. Maybe we are just too far removed from Jim Crow to see how such stupidity endangers our society and that is not abnormal if it is forgotten. If one is far enough removed from the horrible results they don't know.

I can remember at the age of 6 playing Dixie Youth Baseball, how we had 3 games a day when we played. If you had the second or third game you would be encouraged by the adults to go pick up rocks and throw at the black children outside the fence because they had the gall to stand on the grounds not owned by the league and watch. If you hit enough of them or bloodied one real good you were praised.

I remember seeing black bodies hanging from a tree where the KKK had hung them for the horrible crime of being black, of playing with the black maid's grandson and his friends but when we went for ice cream they had to sit in a small room on seats that was just 2 boards with their ice cream costing the same as mine but served about 1/3 the amount that melted fast because of the hot Mississippi heat.

I remember a black man beaten badly in front of the police but got no protections because the law was powerless to help. I remember Fred Daimer having his house burned down because he allowed black people to register to vote so his house was burned one night and he died in the fire. I remember the civil rights workers in Philadelphia Ms. being murdered because they were registering black voters.

I remember how I spoke out for my black friends and was called a ni---- lover which got me beat up more than once. I remember a black girl that was nice to me and who I wanted to go out with and wanted to go out with me but we would have been killed or at least badly injured. I remember teenagers riding through the black section of town with the Confederate Battle Flag on top of the car as they would go up on the sidewalk or grass as if they were going to run down one of the blacks, but the blacks better not respond because they would either be killed or arrested on some trumped up charge.
I could go on and on, but the point is how these acts could happen and be fine. It all came because religious leaders, politicians, and other "respected" civic leaders exercised their freedom of speech to promote violence against these black people. If 2 little girls died in a Birmingham Church so what, the blacks should have not be so outspoken to want equal rights.

Both sides of that time had their rights to speak, although the blacks got fire hosed, beaten, dogs released on them but the whites didn't. The violence that came about wasn't the responsiblity of the ones who fed the flames because it was their right, however they didn't feel they should be responsible for the results.

Sure freedom of speech should be assured but if that speech creates lawlessness then the speakers should be and must be held accountable, because they incited the denial of others right as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
burnsei sensei Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
1. The informal authority of racism
is powerful in this country.
If you want to see Jim Crow, he's not far behind you or any of us.
And that includes our Muslim minority.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
2. The guy's got the right to burn the book. Get over it.
Repressing his constitutional rights is just as bad as Jim Crow laws.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ehrnst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. Not according to the fire marshal in Gainesville. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. You're splitting hairs. He doesn't have a burn permit.
The hate speech and the destruction of korans is fully protected under the 1st amendment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SargeUNN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. you don't get it
and the sad part is you won't try. I feel sorry for you and I will not respond to you again because you are too closed minded. Hopefully one day you will understand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. I understand everything you're saying, Sarge.
You're just dead wrong.

I don't expect you to understand. Or admit your error even if you do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ehrnst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #6
11. Fine, let him do it in his church. He's the one that insisted on doing it in a prohibited space.
He doesn't have the right to violate local laws.

Free speech is always subject to conditions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
COLGATE4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #6
18. You're absolutely right. But the legal, correct answer
just isn't emotionally satisfying. The whole thrust of the 1st Amendment is to protect speech we DON"T like - the other kind obviously doesn't require protection. The pseudo-legal arguments adduced against this are just camouflage for the writer basically saying "I don't like it and I don't want it", nothing more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. OP's against the pastor having a right to burn the book.
This OP is an almost direct repost of a comment he made in a thread yesterday where he made it clear that he was against that right. Not that he was simply objecting to the act on moral grounds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #2
10. sure, just like the KKK has a right to march.
same thing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #10
13. Yup.
Rather basic civics here, people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. doesnt make them any less of douche bags though.
Edited on Fri Sep-10-10 11:28 AM by mkultra
and i certainly have the right to call them that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. That's irrelevant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #17
20. nah, its all relevant.
Edited on Fri Sep-10-10 11:50 AM by mkultra
Its all about rights. Just because you have the right to do something doesn't exonerate you of being a douche for doing it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. It's irrelevant because that's not a subject of debate.
Nobody's disagreeing that the guy's a douche.

Well, maybe a couple of people I can name, but none of them are participating in this discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #21
28. well, i agree but i dont
While i simply interjected another topic into the debate, i did so only because i feel that pointing out his douchebaggery IS relevant to the Zeitgeist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ehrnst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #10
15. If they obtain a permit, then they have a right. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stranger81 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #2
22. Is there any indefensible position you won't defend?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. Do you disagree with the 1st amendment too?
I'm not going to apologize for having the moral high ground.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
3. This is why hate speech no longer is protected speech
the burning of those holy books IS hate speech in my view.

But to some absolutists it is. They really don't know what that can do.

And speaking off, the nooze is asking the Presnit 'bout these issues. Press, so damn fucking predictable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ehrnst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #3
8. Burning down a church is a different crime than burning down a warehouse.
And is investigated as a hate crime.

Book burning is always connected with hate, fear and ignorance.

Especially in a diverse, secular nation where the law views all ethnic and religious groups as equal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoNothing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #3
26. What country do you live in?
Hate speech is still protected by the First Amendment in the United States.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. No, not all of it
refer you to 2003 SCOTUS decision...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoNothing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. That's about targeted threats
Not "hate speech" in general. The act in the court case could be banned because it was a targeted threat, NOT because it was hate speech.

Likewise, you also can't reproduce copyrighted hate speech without permission. But not because hate speech is illegal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. This is a targeted threat
Hate speech and hate crimes are narrow by definition. But this is a targeted threat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoNothing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. No it wasn't, that's silly
What was the threat, exactly? Who, exactly, was targeted?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. He was quite clear
perhaps you should listen more closely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
4. 4 girls died, not just 2.
I'm not being snarky...it does matter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SargeUNN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #4
14. true thanks for the correction
I was recalling from my memory of the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
m00nbeam Donating Member (125 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
7. While Jim Crow may not be with us overtly
I think the remnants of Jim Crow remain with us in how racial minorities are often treated in this country. Very good post. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kweli4Real Donating Member (792 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
24. Great Post ...
"Sure freedom of speech should be assured but if that speech creates lawlessness then the speakers should be and must be held accountable, because they incited the denial of others right as well."

No truer words have ever been posted! However simply refuse to recognize the long standing "shouting fire in a crowded theater" limitations on "free speech" rights, which are based on exactly what you indicate ... NO ONE, IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR RIGHTS, HAS THE RIGHT TO INFRINGE ON THE RIGHTS ON OTHERS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
25. Beautiful, heartfelt post but I think you still are calling for offense being a crime
You are stepping down an insanely dangerous path a little more rashly than I'm able to see as the long term best interest of maintaining a free society.

I certainly share your feelings on the plausible ramifications of these stupid, knuckle dragging, hateful, and bigoted actions fully but my fear of the slip slide logic that the burning of an ordinary book not in an effort to annihilate the text from the world in a literal sense but to make a symbolic statement rises to any logically accepted level of incitement under our system of law or ethics.

It is no different than making a defiant statement of burning any other article in this longstanding method of protest.

Free speech in this model becomes a hostage to the determination to throw a tantrum and I'd fight it with the same determination or more than any terrorist.

A free society comes with risks and I warn you that this line of thinking is well within eyeshot of denying for example the civil rights movement as it may tend to offend certain folks to have marches and speeches around their parts and might react rather poorly.

There is no there there. There is no justification or reasonable explanation for much of any concern about burning a book beyond fire code.

Burning a cross in someone's yard isn't criminal because it is a cross but because it is in their yard and a direct and present act of intimidation to a particular victim. If the Klan had used a square, an ankh, a fish, star or whatever instead of the cross that would be a hate crime too.

The entire concept of our law is twisting in folks mind in an effort to avoid the downside of free expression and sell what many have been disenfranchised from and others sacrificed and died to establish and preserve because there is always the chance that someone will handle offense poorly and lash out.

The path to Hell is paved with good intentions man. Conflict aversion cannot be the number one goal of existence. What will be next? What else of our birthright will we exchange for the hope that no one will be too upset? Where the hell is the end of the line?

The price of peace at any cost is too high for me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
classysassy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-10 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
31. Hate ,one of the two things
that will destroy America,the second greed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC