Jim Crow did just as much to destroy state's rights. Jim Crow proved that state's rights could be harmful to US citizens.
Yes, but if a State gets too abausive its citizens can just move to another state (wihch many blacks did after the Civil War and during the Jim Crow era.) When the Fed gets too abusive you're stuck and out of luck.
I remember Williams arguing this nonsense on Rush's radio show and it was either John Podoretz or Rich Lowry arguing that since the Civil War, freedom has expanded since blacks and women got the right to vote. Williams was caught off gaurd. The problem with him is that he has is own little box in which he can't free himself sometimes.
The Jim Crow laws lasted two years, while the Northern States racist anti-black laws stayed on their books for around a century, from before the civil war to the 1960's.
The hypocrisy on the issue sets my BS meter into the red.
That's a very good point. The South wreaked vengeance for the Civil War for 90 years with Jim Crow.
Jim Crow as justification for the War between the states?
Jim Crow proved that state's rights could be harmful to US citizens.
Jim Crow laws by governments were harmful, not states rights.
Jim Crow came after the Civil War.
The damage had been done already. And if a individual state can abridge the rights of a citizen, it has extended beyind Jim Crow.
Look at the anti-gun legislation and "gay" marriages.