TOPICS:

HenryTMensch
New York, NY
December 2004
FEB 14, 2005 08:50 PM
Yes. I was agreeing with you. I figured you knew, otherwise you wouldn't have made the point in the first place.
The northeast is pretty terrible for race relations. We have some of the most segregated cities in the country here, but segregated by "choice" (which in reality means by institutional racism and fucked up zoning and uneven law enforcement / infrastructural investment and upkeep). The "white flight" to the suburbs so prevalent throughout the country but in particular in the northeast was directly related to school desegregation (/bussing) in the 60s and 70s. Some of the most persistent resistance to meaningful school desegregation is in the mid-atlantic and northeast. So, yes, racism is a big problem in the northeast.
Yes, I grew up in the Northeast. Greenwich, to be exact.
Yes. I was backing you up, not trying to educate you. I remember you saying something earlier about being from CT.
It's often been said that the insidious subtle racism of the northeast/midwest is far more difficult to counter because all sorts of racist attitudes and policies are cloaked in "facially neutral" practices.
"Facially neutral practices" aren't peculiar to the Northeast or Midwest. All racist policies throughout the US have been cloaked in facially neutral terms for decades, because it hasn't been possible for facially discriminatory laws/ordinances/etc. to survive judicial review for a long time. I think what you mean is that the racism in those areas is better disguised.
I didn't say that they were peculiar to the northeast. Seeing as how I've taken civil rights law, as I mentioned, none of this is news to me.
You should, however, add a few northern civil rights Crusaders in the Courts -- e.g.
Jack Greenberg -- to the list of folks who ended Jim Crow in the south. There are dozens of non-southern Americans who played vital roles in the great civil rights litigation campaigns.
Full disclosure: I took civil rights law from Greenberg. ![]()
[Edited on Feb 14, 2005 by HenryTMensch]
I know who he is. I've read Crusaders in the Courts, used his text, and spoken to him a couple times over the last year for an article I'm working on about litigation campaigns.
Northerners played a role, but my point is that the lion's share of the work was done by (for example) the thousands of Southerners who marched on Selma and had hoses turned on them, by the people who walked instead of rode the Montgomery buses, by the college students who demanded that lunch counters at Woolworth's and McCrory's serve them. See generally, Righteous Lives, The Second Battle of New Orleans, Beaches, Blood and Ballots, Civil Rights Childhood, and the Autobiography of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr-- to name a few books on the subject.
I mentioned it because you said:
And on a historical note: The people responsible for ending Jim Crow in the Southern States were Southerners. Black and white Southerners. Not some great Yankee savior. AP Tureaud. Thurgood Marshall. Martin Luther King, Jr. J. Skelly Wright. All of them were Southerners, and their modern-day counterparts still live in the South today.
(emphasis added)
and that certianly left me with the impression that non-southerners were not getting their due. Since my father was one of those non-southern crusaders in the courts (he worked for Greenberg at the LDF), I felt a particular compulsion to point that out. ![]()
There are apparently some people here who seem to think that but for the grace of enlightened Northerners, the South would still be segregated. And while that might make them feel superior, or might help them to ignore the problems in their own backyards, it's not even remotely true.
The only person I've seen on this thread say anything like this is xgenehawk who didn't make much sense and wasn't representative of the opinions here. But maybe you are talking about people on SG in general and not on this thread in particular.
[Edited on Feb 14, 2005 by HenryTMensch]
FEB 14, 2005 09:16 PM
HenryTMensch said:
The only person I've seen on this thread say anything like this is xgenehawk who didn't make much sense and wasn't representative of the opinions here. But maybe you are talking about people on SG in general and not on this thread in particular.
[Edited on Feb 14, 2005 by HenryTMensch]
Gee, thanks for pointing me out. Ok, somebody stated the question " what if we had let the South secede and do nothing ".
I responded: "most likely slavery and segregation would still be the norm ", and then somebody else mentioned that the Southerners were against slavery after all.
and slavery would have been abolished anyway without the North intervention.
I then mentioned that South Africa apartheid system lasted until the early 90's , why wouldn't the South do the same if they had seceded successfully.
To make my point, I was responding to a hypothetical question posed by a member. Then I got dragged into the discussion whether The North or the South contributed more to the the Civil Right Movement. After that I haven't make any comments to this thread as I'm not qualified to answer that question. The only point I was trying to make is that the North abolished slavery not the other way around
[Edited on Feb 14, 2005 by xgenehawk]
FEB 14, 2005 09:17 PM
xgenehawk said:
HenryTMensch said:
The only person I've seen on this thread say anything like this is xgenehawk who didn't make much sense and wasn't representative of the opinions here. But maybe you are talking about people on SG in general and not on this thread in particular.
[Edited on Feb 14, 2005 by HenryTMensch]
Gee, thanks for pointing me out. Ok, somebody stated the question " what if we had let the South secede and do nothing ".
I responded: "most likely slavery and segregation would still be the norm ", and then somebody else mentioned that the Southerners were against slavery after all.
and slavery would have been abolished anyway without the North intervention.
I then mentioned that South Africa apartheid system lasted until the early 90's , why wouldn't the South do the same if they had seceded successfully.
To make my point, I was responding to a hypothetical question posed by a member. Then I got dragged into the discussion whether The North or the South contributed more to the the Civil Right Movement. After that I haven't make any comments to this thread as I'm not qualified to answer that question. The only point I was trying to make is that the North abolished slavery not the other way around.

HenryTMensch
New York, NY
December 2004
FEB 14, 2005 09:45 PM
xgenehawk said:
HenryTMensch said:
The only person I've seen on this thread say anything like this is xgenehawk who didn't make much sense and wasn't representative of the opinions here. But maybe you are talking about people on SG in general and not on this thread in particular.
[Edited on Feb 14, 2005 by HenryTMensch]
Gee, thanks for pointing me out. Ok, somebody stated the question " what if we had let the South secede and do nothing ".
I responded: "most likely slavery and segregation would still be the norm ", and then somebody else mentioned that the Southerners were against slavery after all.
and slavery would have been abolished anyway without the North intervention.
I then mentioned that South Africa apartheid system lasted until the early 90's , why wouldn't the South do the same if they had seceded successfully.
To make my point, I was responding to a hypothetical question posed by a member. Then I got dragged into the discussion whether The North or the South contributed more to the the Civil Right Movement. After that I haven't make any comments to this thread as I'm not qualified to answer that question. The only point I was trying to make is that the North abolished slavery not the other way around
[Edited on Feb 14, 2005 by xgenehawk]
Thanks for that totally inaccurate summary of the thread so far, but I've already read the unabridged version.
FEB 14, 2005 10:21 PM
I must say that I am both amazed and impressed that this thread has remained so civil. Generaly these red button threads degenerate into frustrated name calling around the second page.
Maybe you yankees aren't completely without class after all.

deadandburied
I'm lost
March 2004
FEB 14, 2005 11:22 PM
xgenehawk said:
Lemonnier said:
Riiiight. Even though slavery was rapidly becoming economically infeasible in the nineteenth century, it would have somehow survived until the 21st. Sure.
I'm not sure about that. After all they all went to war to keep slavery. Case in point, the apartheid system of South Africa lasted until the early 90's, what makes you think that without interference from the North, slavery or segregation in the South wouldn't have lasted as long as apartheid.
I guess I shouldn't generalize the South, as I met some students from the South in college, but they always seem to be the last ones to embrace new ideas.
[Edited on Feb 13, 2005 by xgenehawk]
Yep you wont see any of those new fangled ipods down here in the south. Hell, we just now got computers here, because we were kind of afraid of new ideas. We like using good ole typewriters and slide rules.
Do you actually think that most of the south fought because of slavery? The rich plantation owners maybe, but they didnt make up most of the confederate army. It has more to do with protecting the land they grew up in and loved. When Gen. Robert E. Lee declined to lead the Union Army he said that while he believed in preserving the Union he could not lead an army against his own state.
FEB 15, 2005 01:24 AM
I just wanted to clarify that I in no way was suggesting that there was more bigotry in Texas or in the south than in other parts of the country. From what I have seen the amount of bigotry doesn't seem to change much from region to region. What changes are who it is directed at and how it surfaces. In addition I believe how racist a place seems will vary depending on who you are. Which might explain why my friend, a gay latino, felt that Houston was full of bigotry and bones_708 does not. I had a similar experience with a Hmong friend when I lived in MInneapolis. He felt that Minnesotans were horribly racist while the majority of my non-immigrant minority friends found it to be a fairly tolerant place. Or my friends from Minneapolis, an interracial couple who can't beleive the hostility and looks they get it St. Louis because they are used to Minneapolis where interracial couples are quite common.
FEB 15, 2005 06:11 AM
buddylee said:
Do you actually think that most of the south fought because of slavery? The rich plantation owners maybe, but they didnt make up most of the confederate army. It has more to do with protecting the land they grew up in and loved. When Gen. Robert E. Lee declined to lead the Union Army he said that while he believed in preserving the Union he could not lead an army against his own state.
dude, if you read my follow up post after , I stated:
xgenehawk said:
I'm not saying this is the primary reason that the Civil War was started. Of course they were economic, political and ideological differences which caused the war but the isssue of slaves was part of the decision for the South to secede. It was in fact their mistake to secede as it helped speed up the abolition of slavery as Lincoln had not mentioned he would free the slaves only after they have seceded .
FEB 15, 2005 06:45 AM
If anyone doesn't believe that slavery can survive into the 21st century, they should probably read this.
I know it's not comparable, but it's food for thought nevertheless.
FEB 15, 2005 09:16 AM
Because I know you don't click links...
"Fuck the South. Fuck 'em. We should have let them go when they wanted to leave. But no, we had to kill half a million people so they'd stay part of our special Union. Fighting for the right to keep slaves - yeah, those are states we want to keep.
And now what do we get? We're the fucking Arrogant Northeast Liberal Elite? How about this for arrogant: the South is the Real America? The Authentic America. Really?
Cause we fucking founded this country, assholes. Those Founding Fathers you keep going on and on about? All that bullshit about what you think they meant by the Second Amendment giving you the right to keep your assault weapons in the glove compartment because you didn't bother to read the first half of the fucking sentence? Who do you think those wig-wearing lacy-shirt sporting revolutionaries were? They were fucking blue-staters, dickhead. Boston? Philadelphia? New York? Hello? Think there might be a reason all the fucking monuments are up here in our backyard?
No, No. Get the fuck out. We're not letting you visit the Liberty Bell and fucking Plymouth Rock anymore until you get over your real American selves and start respecting those other nine amendments. Who do you think those fucking stripes on the flag are for? Nine are for fucking blue states. And it would be 10 if those Vermonters had gotten their fucking Subarus together and broken off from New York a little earlier. Get it? We started this shit, so don't get all uppity about how real you are you Johnny-come-lately "Oooooh I've been a state for almost a hundred years" dickheads. Fuck off.
Arrogant? You wanna talk about us Northeasterners being fucking arrogant? What's more American than arrogance? Hmmm? Maybe horsies? I don't think so. Arrogance is the fucking cornerstone of what it means to be American. And I wouldn't be so fucking arrogant if I wasn't paying for your fucking bridges, bitch.
All those Federal taxes you love to hate? It all comes from us and goes to you, so shut up and enjoy your fucking Tennessee Valley Authority electricity and your fancy highways that we paid for. And the next time Florida gets hit by a hurricane you can come crying to us if you want to, but you're the ones who built on a fucking swamp. "Let the Spanish keep it, its a shithole," we said, but you had to have your fucking orange juice.
The next dickwad who says, "Its your money, not the government's money" is gonna get their ass kicked. Nine of the ten states that get the most federal fucking dollars and pay the least... can you guess? Go on, guess. Thats right, motherfucker, they're red states. And eight of the ten states that receive the least and pay the most? Its too easy, asshole, theyre blue states. Its not your money, assholes, its fucking our money. What was that Real American Value you were spouting a minute ago? Self reliance? Try this for self reliance: buy your own fucking stop signs, assholes.
Lets talk about those values for a fucking minute. You and your Southern values can bite my ass because the blue states got the values over you fucking Real Americans every day of the goddamn week. Which state do you think has the lowest divorce rate you marriage-hyping dickwads? Well? Can you guess? Its fucking Massachusetts, the fucking center of the gay marriage universe. Yes, thats right, the state you love to tie around the neck of anyone to the left of Strom Thurmond has the lowest divorce rate in the fucking nation. Think thats just some aberration? How about this: 9 of the 10 lowest divorce rates are fucking blue states, asshole, and most are in the Northeast, where our values suck so bad. And where are the highest divorce rates? Care to fucking guess? 10 of the top 10 are fucking red-ass we're-so-fucking-moral states. And while Nevada is the worst, the Bible Belt is doing its fucking part.
But two guys making out is going to fucking ruin marriage for you? Yeah? Seems like you're ruining it pretty well on your own, you little bastards. Oh, but that's ok because you go to church, right? I mean you do, right? Cause we fucking get to hear about it every goddamn year at election time. Yes, we're fascinated by how you get up every Sunday morning and sing, and then you're fucking towers of moral superiority. Yeah, that's a workable formula. Maybe us fucking Northerners don't talk about religion as much as you because we're not so busy sinning, hmmm? Ever think of that, you self-righteous assholes? No, you're too busy erecting giant stone tablets of the Ten Commandments in buildings paid for by the fucking Northeast Liberal Elite. And who has the highest murder rates in the nation? It ain't us up here in the North, assholes.
Well this gravy train is fucking over. Take your liberal-bashing, federal-tax-leaching, confederate-flag-waving, holier-than-thou, hypocritical bullshit and shove it up your ass.
And no, you can't have your fucking convention in New York next time. Fuck off. "
And as an excellent follow-up that actually poses interesting ideological shifts, check out
Urban Archipelago






St_Expedite
New Orleans, LA
January 2004
FEB 14, 2005 07:52 PM