Tag Archives: Neo-Confederates

Hip Hughes: Keith Hughes- Jim Crow and America’s Racism Explained

Attachment-1-1762

Source: Hip Hughes

Source: Hip Hughes: Keith Hughes- Jim Crow and America’s Racism Explained

If you’re familiar with apartheid in South Africa where the Dutch South African Government, tried to separate the Dutch and other European-South Africans from the native South African population like the Zulu’s and other native Africans in South Africa, then I believe you at least have a vert good idea about what Jim Crow was and what Jim Crow laws are. The forced separating of the races simply because they’re of different race. Which as a non-constitutional lawyer and even a non-lawyer in any sense, looks on it’s face at least to me as unconstitutional. Under the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

I blogged the last two weeks which now feels like months at this point because I was basically blogging about one man and his presidency in Woodrow Wilson. ( Not to get to personal ) And I blogged about the plusses and the minuses of the Woodrow Wilson Administration. Jim Crow is part of the minuses. I mean, how stupid and ignorant can you possibly be as a human being as someone who doesn’t have any at least known mental defects that you would not only believe that the races should be separated because of their race, but that should be put into law by force. That people should have to be serrated simply because they have different complexions, hair, facial features, etc. But that is exactly what Jim Crow was which was both ignorant and stupid.

The reason why we got Jim Crow was because the Confederate States lost the Civil War. It’s really that simple and was a response and reaction to losing the Civil War. The South now knowing they can no longer actually own other human beings with slavery being wiped out and responded by saying that if they can no longer treat Africans as animals literally like farmers who own horses and cattle, that they would instead treat Africans as second-class citizens in America. And deny them their constitutional rights that all Americans are entitled to simply because they’re American citizens . That is exactly what Jim Crow was and there really isn’t nice way of putting this without being truthful and honest.

 

 

Advertisements

Learn Out Loud: American Presidents Series- President Woodrow Wilson Biography

Source: Learn Out Loud: American Presidents Series- President Woodrow Wilson Biography

As I’ve blogged before I have mixed feelings about President Woodrow Wilson. Similar to how I feel about President Richard Nixon and President Ronald Reagan, President Lyndon Johnson as well.

One one side you have this brilliant foreign policy leader and President who literally is the father of the liberal internationalist doctrine. That was the American foreign policy with each President making their own amendments to that doctrine especially President George W. Bush who was a Neoconservative, that was about defending liberal democracy at home and abroad. Working with our allies to defend, protect, and promote liberal democracy and prosperity around the world. Work with friendly developing countries to promote and defend democracy and prosperity in those countries through foreign aide. President Wilson’s liberal internationalist doctrine, was the foreign policy doctrine of the Democratic Party all the way though President Barack Obama’s presidency.

And then on the economic front you have a pretty Progressive President in Woodrow Wilson. He expanded the regulatory state that was created by President Theodore Roosevelt with the creation of the Federal Reserve and creation of the national progressive income tax. He supported tariffs on foreign goods. He supported workers rights and even organized labor. He was in favor of creating public Unemployment Insurance that President Teddy Roosevelt first proposed as President, but like President Roosevelt President Wilson failed to get Unemployment Insurance through Congress.

But then you had this other side of Woodrow Wilson who along with being the father of America’s liberal internationalist foreign policy doctrine, President Wilson was also one of the father’s of Jim Crow laws and segregation among the races both in the public and private sectors. President Wilson had given life to the Southern Dixiecrat segregationist Neo-Confederate Governor’s in the South who didn’t see African-Americans has American citizens and perhaps even as human beings. And wanted them segregated from European-Americans through force. Who were in bed politically with the Ku Klux Klan and wouldn’t prosecute from for their terrorism against African and Jewish-Americans, As well as other racial and ethnic minorities in America.

You get Jim Crow and the segregationist policies out of the Woodrow Wilson Presidency and had he been successful in getting the League of Nations passed in Congress through the Senate and we’re talking about one of our greatest American president’s instead of being in the 20s of wherever he’s ranked but certainly in the middle of the pack. But you can’t get Jim Crow out of the Wilson Presidency, just like you can’t get Watergate out of the Richard Nixon Presidency. Because of the lasting horrible legacy of Jim Crow that went all the way through the 1960s in America. That alone could make a good argument for President Wilson not being a mediocre President, but one of our worst ever.

The Film Archives: Nicholas Patler- Jim Crow and The Wilson Administration: A Tragic Enduring Legacy

Source: The Film Archives: Nicholas Patler- Jim Crow and The Wilson Administration: A Tragic, Enduring Legacy

Woodrow Wilson is a mix bag to me, because he is the father of American liberal internationalism. This idea that America should always be strong and fight authoritarianism around the world ( even if we promote it at home ) and work with our allies around the world to defend liberal democracy and fight against authoritarianism. Whether its communism, or religious theocracy, monarchy, nationalism, whatever the authoritarian philosophy might be. Which has been the governing foreign policy inside the Democratic Party going all the way though the Barack Obama Administration. George McGovern’s 1972 presidential campaign might be the only exception to this. So on this score I give President Woodrow Wilson very high marks.

President Woodrow Wilson was also an economic Progressive. He believed in things like a public safety net things like Unemployment Insurance for people who are unemployed. That every America ( at least European-Americans ) should have an opportunity to succeed in America. He believed in a regulatory state not to run private industry, but to protect employees and consumers from predators in the economy. Perhaps not as progressive as Theodore Roosevelt ( but most American politicians weren’t back then ) but an economic Progressive. Even though he was very regressive when it came to race relations and promoted segregation and separating African-Americans from European-Americans.

But if you want to know why we had segregation and Jim Crow laws in the 1920s and going all the way up to the mid-1960s, look no further than President Woodrow Wilson and his administration of the 19 teens. Where President Wilson even segregated the races in the Federal Government. And not allowing African-Americans to get good Federal jobs simply because of their race. Which gave life to Dixiecrats and Dixiecrat governors in the South, as well as local government’s own there to pass their own segregation laws.

Southern predominately Anglo-Saxon European-Americans, knew they lost the Civil War and that slavery would no longer be tolerated. But there’s that old saying that the Confederates lost the Civil War but won the battles and the reconstruction. Jim Crow laws were Confederates chance at revenge. Acknowledging that slavery was history but that since Africans would no longer be slaves for anyone in America, that instead they would be treated like second-class citizens in America and in some cases not even be treated like American citizens at all. Be treated like criminals, terrorists, and even animals, by Southern racists. And Jim Crow laws and segregation, is obviously a huge part of the negative legacy of President Woodrow Wilson. Just like Watergate is a big part of President Richard Nixon’s negative legacy.

 

 

HBO: Real Time With Bill Maher- New Rule: Liberal States Rights

Attachment-1-1066

Source: Real Time With Bill Maher

Source: This piece was originally posted at The Daily Review

Bill Maher is right about at least one thing that people on the Right including Conservatives, but people who are much further right than that and people who I call Neo-Confederates who believe that the wrong side won the American Civil War, who are Southern Nationalists, back in the day argued for what they call states rights. Which essentially means that the Southeast or Bible Belt knows what’s best for them and dem damn Yankees in Washington need to but the hell out and mind their own damn business.

Back in the day the Democratic Party controlled most of the power in the country. The thing was those the Democratic Party wasn’t really a progressive or conservative party.

They had a Far-Left people who would be called Socialists today the Henry Wallace wing of the party.

They had a progressive Center-Left with that Robert Kennedy represented.

They had a Center-Right that people like Lloyd Bentsen represented, who served in the Congress for a long time and was Mike Dukakis’s vice presidential nominee in 1988.

But the Democratic Party also had a Far-Right. Neo-Confederarate Southern Nationalists, who again believe the wrong side won the American Civil War and that if European-Americans especially Anglo-Protestants can’t treat African-Americans like slaves, they should at least be able to treat them like second-class citizens under law and not have to give them full-citizenship. Which is why we had a civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s.

I’m a what I at least call a liberal-federalist and as a true Liberal I’m not comfortable with large centralized authorities and establishments. One of the basic liberal values is decentralization of authority and spreading the power out and not comfortable with top-down management styles including from government. And that the basic role of the Federal Government is to protect the country from foreign invaders, as well as terrorists and criminals who operate in multiple states. As well as enforcing the U.S. Constitution.

That the states should be able to manage their own affairs as long as they are within the Constitution. Which means not having different laws, access and justice for different Americans. Which is why we have Federal civil rights laws. And most importantly that the power be with the people themselves so they can manage their own affairs as long as they aren’t hurting innocent people.

So if California wants strict environmental laws even if those laws give them high energy prices, those laws are their business. If Texas wants private school choice and use taxpayer dollars to subsidize secular private schools, thats their business. Just as long as California, Texas, and every other state in the union are within the Constitution. That they don’t pass laws that benefit one race, ethnicity, gender, or religion, over another. Or try to create their own military, currency, foreign policy, etc, anything else that would succeed their authority that should be handled by the Federal Government.

What Bill Maher was getting at with his impression of a Dixiecrat from back in the day, (Dixiecrat-right wing Southern Democrat) was sort of what I was talking about earlier that the Federal Government dem damn Yankees (as right wing Southerners would call people up North) should stay the hell out of the business of the Bible Belt states and let those states run their own affairs as they see fit. Even if that means having separate and unequal laws and access for European and African-Americans.

Now go up fifty years with the Republican Party which is now has a large faction for former Dixiecrats now Dixie Republicans and now has most of the governmental power in the country with the White House, complete control of Congress, 34 governorships and as solid majority of state legislatures. The Tea Party Nationalist wing of the Republican Party is no longer talking so much about federalism and states rights.

The Far-Right of the Republican Party with all of this power with controlling both the House, Senate, Justice Department, Supreme Court, now believe they can force every state and locality in the nation to govern like them. And force their political and cultural values on the rest of the country. States rights and federalism now to the Dixie wing of the Republican Party, means you can govern yourselves anyway you want, just as long as they approve of what you’re doing.

If California wants strict environmental laws, the Trump Administration will challenge those laws in court and saying California doesn’t have the authority to do this and environmental laws are for the Federal Government to decide. If Colorado wants legalize marijuana which they passed a few years ago, the Trump Administration will challenge that law in court and argue that marijuana is a Federal issue and not for the states to decide.

Sort of like someone arguing on the Right who is a Religious-Conservtaive who says they believe in individual freedom. But what they really believe in is that people should have the freedom to live the way that Religious Conservatives approve of. But not necessarily have the freedom to make their own decisions. Or someone on the Far-Left who claims to be Pro-Choice. But what they really believe in is that people should have the right to make choices that the Far-Left approves of.

Federalism or states rights, is exactly that. What good is freedom if you can’t make your own decisions? Just because the Federal Government doesn’t believe in environmental laws, private school choice, marijuana legalization, and I could go down the line and if I didn’t have a life maybe I would, but you get the idea, but just because the Feds might not believe in these things why should they be able to force their values on every other state in the nation.

The whole point of a Federal Republic is that when you have large diverse country which is what America certainly is what might work in one part of the country, might not be approved of or work in another part of the country. Which is why you have a Federal Government there to handle the national issues and leave the states and localities to deal with their state and local issues. Again, as long as all three levels of government are within their authority under the U.S. Constitution. Instead of Big Uncle Sammy getting to decide what everyone should think, how everyone should live, how everyone should govern, as if they’re some big over-paternalistic Communist or something.

HBO: Real Time With Bill Maher- New Rule: States Rights