-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
The Spectacle Blog
After his comments about Yazoo City’s White Citizens Council, Haley Barbour is probably done as a serious presidential contender. (Jennifer Rubin wonders if being on the cover of the Weekly Standard is to Republican presidential candidates as the Madden Curse is to professional football players.) While it’s far from the whole story, there’s more where that came from on the racial front and the baggage of being a lobbyist was going to be difficult enough to overcome all by itself.
But it’s worth noting that there is an element of truth to Barbour’s comments. There were many people in the South who weren’t sympathetic to integration — and were in fact sympathetic to white racism — who nevertheless made the success of the civil-rights movement possible by abjuring violence and extremism, marginalizing the Klan, and ultimately accepting the changes in the law and culture after they came to pass. Walter Russell Mead wrote about this in the Wall Street Journal shortly after the retirement of Jesse Helms:
Even as the passions of the civil-rights movement were at their height, Messrs. Helms and Thurmond (whose father was Ben Tillman’s lawyer) shunned violence. Without ever losing their credentials as hard-core defenders of Southern values, they hired African-American staffers and gave African-Americans the same level of constituency service they gave whites. Even their opposition to affirmative action is based on their claim that these principles violate what ought to be a color-blind stance on the part of the government.
That is something no white Southern politician, and especially one representing Mr. Helms’ core supporters of farmers and small-town whites, would have ever said before Jesse Helms came along. It is something they all say now.
Mr. Helms could have followed the Tillman path and led the white South into violent resistance; he also could have failed to carry his supporters with him into grudging acceptance of the new racial order. He disciplined and tamed the segregationist South even as he represented it to a hostile nation. We are all better off because he managed this difficult high-wire act.
John O’Sullivan made a similar argument in a column for the Chicago Sun-Times, unfortunately no longer online, when Trent Lott got himself in trouble at Strom Thurmond’s 100th birthday party. This isn’t to argue, as Barbour seemed (perhaps inadvertently) to suggest, that those who grudgingly accepted racial equality are somehow the real heroes of the civil-rights movement. But perhaps the country would be better off if we recognized their role in the New South instead of trying to recreate the divisions of the Old one.
View all comments (19) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/12/27/haley-barbour-civil-rights-and
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The (Real) Great Divide
- The Continuing Crisis
- A President Loses His Power
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
PattyMor| 12.27.10 @ 6:33PM
It may very well be that Barbour is misusing the state's jet. But have you noticed the "long knives" out for any Republican with a whiff of hope of running for Prez. Its been relentless for Sarah. Then Eric Holder has time to investigate the hotel room rates for N.J.'s Chris Christie. Now its Barbour. See the pattern? And, the Dems used gov'ment resources for the Christie witchhunt. Can't even be bothered to use their own money.
Michael L. Hauschild| 12.27.10 @ 8:36PM
Well III, I guess that makes a bigger opening for the much celebrated Danials/ Johnson ticket.
W. James Antle III | 12.27.10 @ 9:38PM
Not if Daniels and Johnson both have the Weekly Standard curse!
312| 12.28.10 @ 12:20AM
My response to this post:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mret0XCrP0o
312| 12.28.10 @ 12:21AM
(sigh) sorry, meant this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pc0mxOXbWIU
312| 12.28.10 @ 12:21AM
(sigh) sorry, meant this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pc0mxOXbWIU
Interloper| 12.28.10 @ 12:48AM
Your argument is incoherent, as is that of the person you cite. You both are saying that these segregationists were in fact supportive of civil rights reforms because there is no evidence of them personally engaging in violence or publicly fomenting it. Neither Helms nor Thurmond was remotely in favor of integration. Nor did either ever explicitly repudiate segregation.
They did not personally confront black folks with handguns like Lester Maddox did, or sic dogs on them like Bull Connor. But, they did not need to. They had plenty of supporters who engaged in violence for them. That was the relationship between the White Citizens Councils and the Ku Klux Klan. The latter hid pathology behind a veneer of respectability. The former were not embarrassed to be uncouth, including being publicly violent. But, both groups had exactly the same objective - continued subjugation of people of color.
Nor does the 'employed black people' ploy get you very far. Slaveowners 'employed' black people, obviously. The African-Americans hired by segregationist politicians often worked against equal rights. Their role was to act as apologists, something one still sees today.
Furthermore, there is no proof that Southern Republican politicians treat black constituents equally to white constituents. The claim is a bromide repeated by conservatives.
Last, but not lease, the profound disparities between people of color and white people in the South, particularly in places like South Carolina and Mississippi, prove that the civil rights movement's goals are far from achieved.
If this is best you can do, a trip back to the drawing board is needed.
W. James Antle III | 12.28.10 @ 1:34AM
You both are saying that these segregationists were in fact supportive of civil rights reforms because there is no evidence of them personally engaging in violence or publicly fomenting it.
No, that is not what we are saying at all. What we are saying is that there were political leaders in the South who opposed the civil rights reforms, but accepted them when they lost. Had they reacted differently, organized violent resistance may have continued longer, to a greater degree, and in a more systematic way.
Neither Helms nor Thurmond was remotely in favor of integration.
I did not say that they were. Neither did Mead.
Nor did either ever explicitly repudiate segregation.
While public apologies for their past stances might have been nice, they didn't have to "explictly reject segregation." They in fact went along with the new integrated order. And Thurmond began voting for civil rights legislation, like the Voting Rights extensions.
Nor does the 'employed black people' ploy get you very far. Slaveowners 'employed' black people, obviously.
There's a fairly large difference between being a slave and being a senator's legislative director, don't you think? Furthermore, no Southern legislators hired blacks staffers during segregation. Thurmond didn't hire Tom Moss until 1971, long after the biggest legislative victories of the civil-rights movement.
The African-Americans hired by segregationist politicians often worked against equal rights. Their role was to act as apologists, something one still sees today.
"Apologists," i.e., black people who disagree with Anonymous Smearing Commenter Guy. So you mean James Meredith, the first black student at the University of Mississippi, who enrolled to force the federal government's hand on behalf of equal rights for blacks but later went to work for Jesse Helms?
Furthermore, there is no proof that Southern Republican politicians treat black constituents equally to white constituents. The claim is a bromide repeated by conservatives.
Tell that to the African-Americans who publicly praised Strom Thurmond's constituent services in South Carolina -- after Thurmond was dead and they were no longer in a position to benefit. You offer no proof for your own bromide, er, I mean assertion.
W. James Antle III | 12.28.10 @ 1:45AM
One last thing: the point isn't to deny the racism of Southern segregationist politicians or the continued existence of that racism's legacy today. Nor is to say that the people who accepted the civil rights laws after they lost politically were heroic defenders of civil rights. Many changed only because the law, esp. the law regarding voting rights, changed.
But there were differences in degree, kind, and intensity of racism, as well as many people who changed for reasons that were both principled and pragmatic. Those people were very important to the outcome of the movement for legal equality without regard to race. But those who wish to pretend it remains "Mississippi Burning" in the South in 2010 refuse to see this, despite their usual embrace of situational morality.
Richard Baker| 12.28.10 @ 4:30AM
Mr. Antle:
They refuse to see because that would eliminate their paying gigs. Can't have that, now can we? What ever would the race hustlers such as Jackson, Sharpton, and the rest do?
Interloper| 12.28.10 @ 5:07AM
Certainly, racism is a spectrum. But, the people you are arguing for are not even in the middle of the spectrum. They were ardent segregationists. In Mississippi, these men set up the state Sovereignty Commission and used it to conduct a decades long campaign against integration. It was they who funded defenses of violent racists on the rare occasions white men went to trial for violence against blacks. So, to claim they were much different from the Klan is silly.
As for Yazoo City, it had both a White Citizens Council and the Ku Klux Klan. (Proven by documents from that era, including the WCC newsletter.) The two groups got into a dispute about who would control anti-integration efforts there. The WCC won that dispute. It is that situation Haley Barbour tried to pass off as the WCC being responsible businessmen who did not oppose desegregation. What they did instead of lynch people or bomb their homes was drive them out of town with threats, firings from their jobs or refusal to act in the chain of commerce with them if they had businesses. The names of leading blacks in favor of integration were printed in the newspaper and circulars at the behest of the WCC to facilitate the destruction of their lives. In the alternative reality in which you and Barbour dwell, that may be things being "not so bad," but for the people who suffered such fates it was plenty bad enough.
W. James Antle III | 12.28.10 @ 2:29PM
While they wouldn't be today, they actually were in the middle of the spectrum of racism in the context of that time and place. Of course things were bad for blacks and they would have remained bad if the Citizens Councils could have had their way. But the fact that relative moderates prevailed over the extremists even among the segregationists themselves was an important part of things getting better.
Where Barbour erred is in treating people who moderated the opposition to racial equality and then later reluctantly accepted racial equality as if they were somehow on par with those who fought for racial equality. But when it came to uprooting Jim Crow, the people who moderated the segregationist element and the people who came to reluctantly accept the new order played their own important role in those social changes.
Interloper| 12.29.10 @ 8:35AM
Rather than explain why you are not right about the White Citizens Councils being only middling racists, I am going to suggest you read this article about Yazoo City's power structure by a sociologist who was there.
http://hnn.us/articles/134957.html
I will also take the time to point out that 'Mississippi Burning' case killer Edgar Ray Killen, a businessman and minister, would be considered a moderate racist in your flawed judgment.
W. James Antle III | 12.29.10 @ 10:22PM
Rather than explain why you are not right about the White Citizens Councils being only middling racists,
For the record, I am saying that Helms and Thurmond were moderate racists in the context of that time, not every single person who ever belonged to a Southern White Citizens Council. Read this, for example:
http://hnn.us/articles/1166.html
So no, that's not Edgar Ray Killen. And what I am saying is manifestly not the same thing as what Barbour was saying.
Clint| 12.28.10 @ 6:05AM
Barack Obama was a 20 year member of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ. Its minister, and Obama's spiritual adviser, was the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. In 1982, the church launched Trumpet Newsmagazine, with Wright's daughters serving as publisher and executive editor. Every year, the magazine makes awards in various categories. It gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to a man it said "truly epitomized greatness." That man is Louis Farrakhan.
Michael L. Hauschild| 12.28.10 @ 9:26AM
I had the pleasure of spending parts of a campaign day with Barbour. The black contingent of our group was completely at ease with the man by the way. We ended the day with a seminar, of which he was the speaker. He is the singularly most eloquent, cutting edge, hilarious person I have ever listened to. His “take” on the hypocrisy and behavior of the Democratic power structure of the south could headline any standup comedy act in existence. I have no idea about his presidential aspirations but I will bet dollars to donuts he could do a very memorable routine about someone hang gliding while stoned.
bobmontgomery| 12.28.10 @ 11:06AM
Just wondering how many, on both sides of the aisle, who take Haley to task, lived in Yazoo City in 1970, had ever heard of Yazoo City before this ado about nothing, know where Yazoo City is in Mississippi, or finally care one whit about anybody who was ever born, raised or lived in Yazoo City.
Interloper| 12.31.10 @ 6:26AM
A person does not have to be born or have lived in Yazoo City, Mississippi or even the South to be concerned about a history of dishonesty and deceit by a potential presidential candidate. But, since you profess to care so much about people who were right there with Haley Barbour, here's the account of from one of them:
http://bit.ly/i0VITe
The White Citizens Council was literally causing black people's deaths. There is no way to describe that as moderate racism.