Posted on 10/27/2005 10:55:50 AM PDT by Shade2
One of the reasons why segregation lasted so long was because people who otherwise objected to it did not want to associate with Communist front groups like the ACLU and the Highlander Folk School.
My father was involved in the civil rights movement in Biloxi in the late 1950s and he was frequently accosted by Communist recruiters at various meetings. It was an open secret that certain leaders in the civil rights movement like Paul Robeson, Harry Belafonte and Bayard Rustin were ardent Stalinists.
Remember this. Rosa Parks intentionally disobeyed an unjust law and in doing so advance the cause of freedom and equality under the law.
Yes, it was a planned event. This does not belittle the event in anyway. Instead it shows the courage of people who knew the potential consequences of their actions and stood firm on the side of right anyway.
I don't think it's correct to say that Government created racism. But racists certainly used Government to promote their evil intentions.
Sowell's insight here is wonderful. We lose track of history and of the driving forces behind it when we listen only to the media. Both the state legislature and the courts were used to promote injustice. The saga continues in other areas today.
Socialists want the Government to run everything, with the idea that that is going to remove injustice. It will only empower injustice. Free market economic forces would have prevented the discrimination on the buses.
Paul Robeson was prominently featured as a key leader of the civil rights movement, even though he was a card-carrying member of the American Communist Party, openly praised Stalin in speech after speech, and went on a singing tour of the Soviet Union in 1949 where he gave long anti-American tirades to the foreign press.
No well-meaning American would want to show up to a rally that featured such a vile individual, let alone join an organization he belonged to.
Martin Luther King was the first civil rights leader to realize that persuading white churchgoers to support the movement on Christian grounds would be far more effective than pursuing the support of Communist revolution that many civil rights leaders advocated from 1930-1960.
Remember this. Rosa Parks intentionally disobeyed an unjust law and in doing so advance the cause of freedom and equality under the law.
Yes, it was a planned event. This does not belittle the event in anyway. Instead it shows the courage of people who knew the potential consequences of their actions and stood firm on the side of right anyway.
how does that relate to Lawrence v. Texas? sounds like a similar situation, in which a crime was set-up to get the case into courts because they believed they were on the side of what was right.
I meant to communicate that not all people who were involved with , or worked toward Civil Rights were Communists. I am sure that there were communists who saw a weakness in our society that they could exploit (being unequal laws and such), but not all of the leaders of civil rights groups were Communists.
"...and the whole thing was a staged event by the organization from the beginning. "
Not that It matters now,
I saw an program on PBS about Civil Rights Era and yes it was staged and Parks was a member of the NAACP. IIRC.
She wasn't just a simple citizen as proclaimed.
It does appear that Lawrence V Texas was staged as well. I feel the courts ruled incorrectly in this matter.
However, I find the suggestion that these cases are similar unfounded. Lawrence v Texas was an attempt to justify sexual acts. Rosa Parks and the civil rights movement was an attempt to eliminate skin color (a benign and unalterable (except in the case of Jacko) physical condition that in no way impacts on a persons worth of ability) as a guiding facet of law.
Granted the civil rights movement has been hi-jacked by bigots and racist and fools of all stripe and color, but the cause of equality fought for by Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr is worthy of conservative support.
You aren't suggesting that the elimination of Jim Crow laws was a bad thing, are you?
/major pi$$ed off sarc
Yeah and then the Federal Government wouldn't of moved in to help the blacks by formulating policies that have helped to destroy the black family.
Things could of gotten better for the blacks in this country with out the "Civil Rights" movement. I hate the "Civil Rights" movement because they tend to expect "Civil Rights" to trump individual rights. I feel it is wrong. The communist were not really interested in helping blacks, but rather trying to cause desertion here. Yep its easy to laugh about the commies now, bet millions are in Russia and China now... oh wait they cant laugh their dead.
"I disagree that Civil rights groups of the 1960s were based in Communism."
True.
The cause was just but not all their supporters were.
Communists inflitrated the Civil Rights cause for their own their own benefit
Or simply put:
1950, communists within a cause.
2000, communists without a cause
The only way for Parks to have staged the bus incident would have been to have deliberately sat in the first row. But in the row she actually sat in she had no idea whether she would be asked to move or not.
You aren't suggesting that the elimination of Jim Crow laws was a bad thing, are you?
only from the standpoint that they should never have been there to begin with, and that they should not have been replaced with affirmative action.
but i fear that in 50 years, barring revolution, lawrence v texas will stand next to parks a huge stride in "anti-discrimination."
All of this is no secret, but will likely provoke insults and accusations of being a Stormfront invader from those who prefer squeaky clean symbols and their history as concocted by the New York Times. Here's a relevant fragment of an editorial from the same newspaper:
She was a dignified surrogate tapped by local black leaders who wanted a squeaky-clean stand-in to test a hated segregationist rule. With her arrest, Parks filled this need, but also she launched changes that continue to swirl today.
Sowell is a national treasure. Great article. Thank you for posting.
Semantics.
For it to be a set up it has to be coordinated. it wasn't.
As I pointed out, she had no way of knowing herself whether she would have an uneventful bus ride or not.
She was not personally sent to create an incident, rather the SCLC was reviewing incidents to try and find one which they could use.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.