Seattle - the other civil rights hotbed...

Online now: juice
Post Reply
maurvir Meat popsicle
User avatar
Now lets homeowners remove unenforceable, racist clauses in their deeds.

Quote:
Starting in the 1920s, covenants in force throughout the region allowed only white people to own property in most neighborhoods in Seattle. The covenants were outlawed in the 1960s, but now a new state law allows property owners to strike them from a property deed.

TOS
User avatar
fun fact: attempts to change policies like these were the brick wall that halted the civil rights movement in the 60s/70s and triggered the white backlash that continues to this day
juice Inadvertently correct
User avatar
TOS posted:
fun fact: attempts to change policies like these were the brick wall that halted the civil rights movement in the 60s/70s and triggered the white backlash that continues to this day

source?
TOS
User avatar
juice posted:
TOS posted:
fun fact: attempts to change policies like these were the brick wall that halted the civil rights movement in the 60s/70s and triggered the white backlash that continues to this day

source?


here you go

actually if i remember my history correctly, mitt romney's dad george was basically the last leading republican to try holding the line on civil rights ... here is a short piece on the conflict between george romney and richard nixon on the issue

keep in mind it was nixon who skillfully pioneered the techniques of giving the angry whites a place to put their votes without openly saying he was opposing civil rights
juice Inadvertently correct
User avatar
Is this in combination with the increasing militancy of the movement (Black Panther) and the white reaction to it?

It was easy to be aligned with the nonviolent nature of MLK et al when television news showed black people getting firehosed for daring to ask for equality under the law. When elements of the movement began to be engaged in firefights with the police it was much easier to be reactionary.
TOS
User avatar
juice posted:
Is this in combination with the increasing militancy of the movement (Black Panther) and the white reaction to it?

It was easy to be aligned with the nonviolent nature of MLK et al when television news showed black people getting firehosed for daring to ask for equality under the law. When elements of the movement began to be engaged in firefights with the police it was much easier to be reactionary.


well, sort of

nowadays mlk is a more or less beloved figure, but back then he experienced massive pushback everywhere he went and everything he did

i seem to recall him being seriously shaken by the hatred he encountered while trying to integrate housing in cicero (outside chicago) ... he said it was far worse than anything he had experienced in the south

government and resident groups used many techniques to exclude black people from certain areas, especially the suburbs ... there's lots of talk about "white flight" from the urban areas but much less talk about the fact they were fleeing to racially "pure" areas

yes the panthers played a role, though a small one ... mostly it was just the combination of activism and culture that was forcing people to confront the issue of race and the vast majority simply weren't up to it (and, it might be argued, still aren't)

the black panthers were actually quite mild, were in no way in favour of "taking over" america ... actually they should have been white america's dream come true, because they believed in self-determination, self-improvement, self-government; they hated lbj's welfare programs, and their use of weapons was entirely about self-defense, using rhetoric that's hilariously similar to the arguments used by pro-gun whites nowadays -- indeed gun control became a big deal in response to the black panthers, because the image of black people refusing to be america's uncouth individual anymore freaked the hell out of white america

those gun control laws were later tackled by right-wing whites led by the nra who saw them as an assault on personal freedom, yet those same whites have always had a gargantuan blind spot when it comes to guns and black people

in truth every single form of black activism, peaceful or not, from mlk to the panthers to black lives matter, has been condemned as "racist" by mainstream america
juice Inadvertently correct
User avatar
TOS posted:
juice posted:
Is this in combination with the increasing militancy of the movement (Black Panther) and the white reaction to it?

It was easy to be aligned with the nonviolent nature of MLK et al when television news showed black people getting firehosed for daring to ask for equality under the law. When elements of the movement began to be engaged in firefights with the police it was much easier to be reactionary.


well, sort of

nowadays mlk is a more or less beloved figure, but back then he experienced massive pushback everywhere he went and everything he did

i seem to recall him being seriously shaken by the hatred he encountered while trying to integrate housing in cicero (outside chicago) ... he said it was far worse than anything he had experienced in the south

government and resident groups used many techniques to exclude black people from certain areas, especially the suburbs ... there's lots of talk about "white flight" from the urban areas but much less talk about the fact they were fleeing to racially "pure" areas

yes the panthers played a role, though a small one ... mostly it was just the combination of activism and culture that was forcing people to confront the issue of race and the vast majority simply weren't up to it (and, it might be argued, still aren't)

the black panthers were actually quite mild, were in no way in favour of "taking over" america ... actually they should have been white america's dream come true, because they believed in self-determination, self-improvement, self-government; they hated lbj's welfare programs, and their use of weapons was entirely about self-defense, using rhetoric that's hilariously similar to the arguments used by pro-gun whites nowadays -- indeed gun control became a big deal in response to the black panthers, because the image of black people refusing to be america's uncouth individual anymore freaked the hell out of white america

those gun control laws were later tackled by right-wing whites led by the nra who saw them as an assault on personal freedom, yet those same whites have always had a gargantuan blind spot when it comes to guns and black people

in truth every single form of black activism, peaceful or not, from mlk to the panthers to black lives matter, has been condemned as "racist" by mainstream america

I have a friend who once told me that Obama did more to racially divide the country than any president in history.

He was serious when he said it.

With that in mind, it is absolutely understandable for me to see how MLK would have been reviled.
TOS
User avatar
juice posted:
TOS posted:
juice posted:
Is this in combination with the increasing militancy of the movement (Black Panther) and the white reaction to it?

It was easy to be aligned with the nonviolent nature of MLK et al when television news showed black people getting firehosed for daring to ask for equality under the law. When elements of the movement began to be engaged in firefights with the police it was much easier to be reactionary.


well, sort of

nowadays mlk is a more or less beloved figure, but back then he experienced massive pushback everywhere he went and everything he did

i seem to recall him being seriously shaken by the hatred he encountered while trying to integrate housing in cicero (outside chicago) ... he said it was far worse than anything he had experienced in the south

government and resident groups used many techniques to exclude black people from certain areas, especially the suburbs ... there's lots of talk about "white flight" from the urban areas but much less talk about the fact they were fleeing to racially "pure" areas

yes the panthers played a role, though a small one ... mostly it was just the combination of activism and culture that was forcing people to confront the issue of race and the vast majority simply weren't up to it (and, it might be argued, still aren't)

the black panthers were actually quite mild, were in no way in favour of "taking over" america ... actually they should have been white america's dream come true, because they believed in self-determination, self-improvement, self-government; they hated lbj's welfare programs, and their use of weapons was entirely about self-defense, using rhetoric that's hilariously similar to the arguments used by pro-gun whites nowadays -- indeed gun control became a big deal in response to the black panthers, because the image of black people refusing to be america's uncouth individual anymore freaked the hell out of white america

those gun control laws were later tackled by right-wing whites led by the nra who saw them as an assault on personal freedom, yet those same whites have always had a gargantuan blind spot when it comes to guns and black people

in truth every single form of black activism, peaceful or not, from mlk to the panthers to black lives matter, has been condemned as "racist" by mainstream america

I have a friend who once told me that Obama did more to racially divide the country than any president in history.

He was serious when he said it.

With that in mind, it is absolutely understandable for me to see how MLK would have been reviled.


that's a really common viewpoint, i hear it said all the time on social media
maurvir Meat popsicle
User avatar
Yes, but that view point is often held by racists. He was the ultimate "uppity negro" in the eyes of a lot of white folks who didn't like the idea of a black man in the white house. I have no doubt his election is part of what fueled Trump's successful campaign.
TOS
User avatar
i think i read somewhere that trump got the same proportion of whites as romney did in 2012
TOS
User avatar
wait ... 2012 .... end of the world ...

that's it

THE WORLD ENDED IN 2012 LIKE THE MAYANS PREDICTED AND WE'RE ALL IN HELL
DukeofNuke FREE RADICAL
User avatar
maurvir posted:
Yes, but that view point is often held by racists. He was the ultimate "uppity negro" in the eyes of a lot of white folks who didn't like the idea of a black man in the white house. I have no doubt his election is part of what fueled Trump's successful campaign.

Yes.Obama dived the nation, but the only thing he did was win the election.
Guess thst’s all it took ...
TOS posted:
wait ... 2012 .... end of the world ...

that's it

THE WORLD ENDED IN 2012 LIKE THE MAYANS PREDICTED AND WE'RE ALL IN HELL

is that why we have The Good Place on tv?
obvs Eating chickens is for the bourgeoisie
User avatar
TOS posted:
wait ... 2012 .... end of the world ...

that's it

THE WORLD ENDED IN 2012 LIKE THE MAYANS PREDICTED AND WE'RE ALL IN HELL
Well if the shoe fits...
maurvir Meat popsicle
User avatar
TOS posted:
wait ... 2012 .... end of the world ...

that's it

THE WORLD ENDED IN 2012 LIKE THE MAYANS PREDICTED AND WE'RE ALL IN HELL


Image
Subsequent topic  /  Preceding topic
Post Reply

Seattle - the other civil rights hotbed...