Republican Party Depends On Racist Tactics, Editorial Says

Crezth said:
How so?
Click to expand...

The ninth amendment. I would argue that a state government telling you "You aren't allowed to serve blacks" is a violation of your liberty.

WindFish said:
So you would have let segregation continue?
Click to expand...

I would have overturned all of the state laws mandating discrimination, and I would have forced the state governments not to discriminate.

I would not have forced private businesses to integrate, although I would personally boycott any business that did not and would encourage others to do so.
 
GhostWriter16 said:
I would not have forced private businesses to integrate, although I would personally boycott any business that did not and would encourage others to do so.
Click to expand...
You could simply pull the corporate charter of any business that discriminated. Then the individual owners would not enjoy the state granted privilige of limited liability. You could also pull the state charter of any business that did business with a business that discriminated.
 
JollyRoger said:
You could simnply pull the corporate charter of any business that discriminated. Thenthe individual owners would not enjoy the state granted privlige of limited liability. You could also pull the state charter of any business that did business with a business that discriminated.
Click to expand...

I don't believe in limited liability anyway;)
 
GhostWriter16 said:
I would have overturned all of the state laws mandating discrimination, and I would have forced the state governments not to discriminate.

I would not have forced private businesses to integrate, although I would personally boycott any business that did not and would encourage others to do so.
Click to expand...

Thats a watering down of the Civil Rights act since the problem was that private businesses were banning people of colour.

The 101st Airbone division made state institutions impossible to segregate
 
JollyRoger said:
So if you are a billionaire that holds one share of a big corporation and the big corporation gets sued, your billions should be at risk in the lawsuit?
Click to expand...

No.

I was thinking that whoever was responsible should be able to have their personal assets targeted as well. I'm talking about whoever made the choices.
 
GhostWriter16 said:
No.

I was thinking that whoever was responsible should be able to have their personal assets targeted as well. I'm talking about whoever made the choices.
Click to expand...
The shareholder delegated the choice. Why should the shareholder not be liable for poor delegation?
 
It certainly is a notion that is popular with racists.

In a far better world, we wouldn't have to worry about affluent black doctors being denied reservations in swanky New Orleans hotels.
 
Racists created Jim Crow, that was state mandated discrimination

"civil rights" are state mandated discrimination

how do you like guilt by association now?

opposing state mandated discrimination aint racism
 
being racist is though
 
Berzerker said:
Racists created Jim Crow, that was state mandated discrimination

"civil rights" are state mandated discrimination

how do you like guilt by association now?

opposing state mandated discrimination aint racism
Click to expand...

Civil rights are in fact not state mandated discrimination. :crazyeye:
 
That's true that they aren't. What they mandate is non-discrimination.

I personally don't think that should be mandated by law, although its not the kind of thing I'm putting a ton of energy into fighting (I'm not a Libertarian because it protects bigots. I have more important issues to worry about.)
 
Cutlass said:
Civil rights are in fact not state mandated discrimination. :crazyeye:
Click to expand...

the SCOTUS has apparently agreed to hear a case involving state mandated discrimination

a woman claims she was denied admission to a school because of her race, it could have been a job too
 
Berzerker said:
the SCOTUS has apparently agreed to hear a case involving state mandated discrimination

a woman claims she was denied admission to a school because of her race, it could have been a job too
Click to expand...

Fisher v. Texas. University of Texas auto-accepts the top 10% of student from all high-schools thought Texas, and considers race as a "plus" factor. Fisher's argument is stupid, though I wouldn't put it past the court at this point.
 
Berzerker said:
the SCOTUS has apparently agreed to hear a case involving state mandated discrimination

a woman claims she was denied admission to a school because of her race, it could have been a job too
Click to expand...


Blacks are 12% of the population of the state of Texas and 4.5% of the student body of that university. Really sounds like the state is discriminating against white people really bad there. :rolleyes:
 
Just think of how many whites are being deprived of an education because state universities now have to accept blacks.
 
Ms. Fisher would have been auto-admitted if she had finished in the top 10% of her high school class. Another marginal white trying to blame her own failures on someone else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

NinjaCow64
Republican Bidens and the Failure of the Democratic Party
21 22 23
Replies
450
Views
13K
Crezth
Crezth
stfoskey12
Strategic Party Affiliation
2 3 4
Replies
73
Views
3K
Core Imposter
C
Zardnaar
NZ Election
Replies
3
Views
524
Zardnaar
Zardnaar
Zardnaar
Proportional List MP Quits OK Boomer!!
Replies
3
Views
534
Kyriakos
Kyriakos
Birdjaguar
2024 Election: 2023 Edition
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
4K
MrRandomGuy
M
Top Bottom