| Author |
Message |
    
Chrishayden
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Chrishayden
Post Number: 1598
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, November 07, 2005 - 03:01 pm: | 
|
Watch Uncle Thomas twist himself into a pretzel
Rosa Parks and history
By Thomas Sowell
Oct 27, 2005
The death of Rosa Parks has reminded us of her place in history, as the black woman whose refusal to give up her seat on a bus to a white man, in accordance with the Jim Crow laws of Alabama, became the spark that ignited the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s.
Most people do not know the rest of the story, however. Why was there racially segregated seating on public transportation in the first place? "Racism" some will say -- and there was certainly plenty of racism in the South, going back for centuries. But racially segregated seating on streetcars and buses in the South did not go back for centuries.
Far from existing from time immemorial, as many have assumed, racially segregated seating in public transportation began in the South in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
Those who see government as the solution to social problems may be surprised to learn that it was government which created this problem. Many, if not most, municipal transit systems were privately owned in the 19th century and the private owners of these systems had no incentive to segregate the races.
These owners may have been racists themselves but they were in business to make a profit -- and you don't make a profit by alienating a lot of your customers. There was not enough market demand for Jim Crow seating on municipal transit to bring it about.
It was politics that segregated the races because the incentives of the political process are different from the incentives of the economic process. Both blacks and whites spent money to ride the buses but, after the disenfranchisement of black voters in the late 19th and early 20th century, only whites counted in the political process.
It was not necessary for an overwhelming majority of the white voters to demand racial segregation. If some did and the others didn't care, that was sufficient politically, because what blacks wanted did not count politically after they lost the vote.
The incentives of the economic system and the incentives of the political system were not only different, they clashed. Private owners of streetcar, bus, and railroad companies in the South lobbied against the Jim Crow laws while these laws were being written, challenged them in the courts after the laws were passed, and then dragged their feet in enforcing those laws after they were upheld by the courts.
These tactics delayed the enforcement of Jim Crow seating laws for years in some places. Then company employees began to be arrested for not enforcing such laws and at least one president of a streetcar company was threatened with jail if he didn't comply.
None of this resistance was based on a desire for civil rights for blacks. It was based on a fear of losing money if racial segregation caused black customers to use public transportation less often than they would have in the absence of this affront.
Just as it was not necessary for an overwhelming majority of whites to demand racial segregation through the political system to bring it about, so it was not necessary for an overwhelming majority of blacks to stop riding the streetcars, buses and trains in order to provide incentives for the owners of these transportation systems to feel the loss of money if some blacks used public transportation less than they would have otherwise.
People who decry the fact that businesses are in business "just to make money" seldom understand the implications of what they are saying. You make money by doing what other people want, not what you want.
Black people's money was just as good as white people's money, even though that was not the case when it came to votes.
Initially, segregation meant that whites could not sit in the black section of a bus any more than blacks could sit in the white section. But whites who were forced to stand when there were still empty seats in the black section objected. That's when the rule was imposed that blacks had to give up their seats to whites.
Legal sophistries by judges "interpreted" the 14th Amendment's requirement of equal treatment out of existence. Judicial activism can go in any direction.
That's when Rosa Parks came in, after more than half a century of political chicanery and judicial fraud.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Find this story at: http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/thomassowell/2005/10
|
Troy
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Troy
Post Number: 291
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, November 13, 2005 - 01:00 pm: |
|
Chris, you already know I have a great deal of respect for Sowell despite his unpopularity within the Black community (those of us you even know who he is).
I like reading his perspective on and admire his willingness to say things that any semi-conscious person knows would expose him to criticism from others in our Black community.
Chris what do you think about the article?
|
Chrishayden
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Chrishayden
Post Number: 1619
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: 
Votes: 4 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 15, 2005 - 02:04 pm: |
|
Troy:
I would rather sit in a pile of toxic waste than be one minute in Sowell's presence. He is an economist that never talks about economics. He has never won one prize, written one book or article that was well recieved by the economic community.
He is in the Say What Makes Racist White Folks Feel Good Bidness. If he had something else to recommend him, I could accept the offal he proffers as the view of a talented but cantankerous man.
Do I really have to tell you what I think of this article?
What CAN I think of a man who would fix his mouth to say that segregated seating was not the result of racism?
This piece of human garbage feels himself constrained to say something nice about the sister because he knows if she and others handn't done what she did he would be a janitor at an all black high school somewhere--for that I at least have to give him some credit.
But then, to bootlick his paymasters he has to blame it all on government. Why doesn't he just say it was the liberals and commies?
Troy, you are a man of accomplishment. You have your own business. You like excellence. I cannot understand your regard for this mountebank.
Please explain it. What has he done in his life that you would do and you would advise young blacks to do? |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 3013
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 15, 2005 - 02:47 pm: |
|
Blah, blah, blah. Thomas Sowell says things that shake Chrishhayden up because in the narrow confines of Chris' rigid little mind, anybody who thinks differently than him is wrong. Believing this is what keeps Chris going. To break out of his partisan thought mode would negate his very existence. |
Chrishayden
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Chrishayden
Post Number: 1627
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 15, 2005 - 02:54 pm: |
|
Cynique:
You got to take the lithium every day for it to do you some good.
Listen to your doctors. They know best. |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 3017
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 15, 2005 - 03:53 pm: |
|
And you need to get a brain transplant so you can become an independent thinker, Haydenchris. |
Steve_s
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Steve_s
Post Number: 186
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: 
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, November 25, 2005 - 09:19 am: |
|
Cynique,
I'm going on memory here, but more than 2 years before Rosa Parks and the Montgomery bus boycott, a woman named Martha White challenged segregated seating on a Baton Rouge bus, which led to the successful Baton Rouge bus boycott. Weren't these 2 boycotts situated on opposite ends of the historic decision in Brown v. Board of Education? In other words, I think the first boycott occurred during the Jim Crow era, and the latter happened after the JC laws had been declared null and void. In any case, I believe that Dr. King had traveled to Baton Rouge to study that boycott.
The way I remember it (check this, because I could be mistaken) is that in Baton Rouge there were designated seats for black and white passengers, so for instance, when the black seats were filled to capacity, black passengers were forced to stand in the aisles, even though there were vacant seats available. This actually happened frequently because something like 80 percent of the paying customers were black.
So as I remember, the boycott had a limited goal -- not to kick start the civil rights movement, but simply to change the policy of the bus company. The bus company agreed to abandon seating designated by race (like in New Orleans back in Homer Plessy's day, where I believe the black seats were designated by black stars). Anyway, the boycott resulted in a new bus policy in Baton Rouge, which eliminated designated seats and merely required (again, check the facts on this) that white seating began in the front and black seating began in the back.
But this time the bus drivers objected and refused to go along with their own company's policy. (We already know that they had police powers to enforce segregation anyway).
So I forget the details, but I think the end result of all this was that the first 2 seats on every bus would be reserved for whites and the last 2 for blacks. Well, by that point a lot of the boycotters said that that just wasn't good enough, however, the majority went along with it and it was accepted.
Rosa Parks was sitting in the fifth seat, right?
Hey Cynique, what do expect from somebody who thinks "all history is fiction" and that The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich is "fictionalized history"? |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 3065
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, November 25, 2005 - 12:51 pm: |
|
I hear ya, Steve! You educated me with your info because I didn't know all of those details but I did think that what Sowell said was conceivable. A lot more is coming out about the Montgomery bus boycott since Rosa Park's death. She was not a simply a meek little black woman who was too tired to move to the back of the bus. She was a community activist, part of a group who was planning the boycott ahead of time, knowing this ecomonic strategy would be the most effective in achieving their goals. BTW. I remember thinking the same as you did when Chrishayden mentioned "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" in response to Yvette's quiery about historical fiction. LOL
|
Troy
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Troy
Post Number: 307
Registered: 01-2004
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 05, 2005 - 12:00 am: |
|
Chris we've gone down this road with Sowell in the past. I could simply cut and paste my earlier comments and your reaction would be the same I'm sure.
If a white racist, Republican or Thomas Sowell says that "incentives of the political process are different from the incentives of the economic process" Does that make them wrong? Does it make them racist, a tool of the man?
Sowell adds a perspective to many issues I often find fascinating. Sowell points out that people often make emotional and moving arguments while being completely ignorant of facts. Thomas' ability to explain the economic impact of situations this is valuable. Thomas has taught me that politicians often make disastrous decisions based upon a exulted sense of believing they know what is right -- when they are completing ignorant or woefully ill informed.
Chris, I would advise young Blacks (all Blacks) to follow Thomas' lead on education and obtain some basic knowledge of economics and history. I would also encourage them not to be swayed by emotional rhetoric and try to obtain some facts, recognize their own ignorance and stop being so damn gullible.
|
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 1029
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 05, 2005 - 09:01 pm: |
|
Troy,
You have romanticized "facts." Socalled facts need to be interpreted. Consequently, how can you call what Sowell states as "facts." As if, he is the only person using an economic analysis and that emotionalism is devoid of facts. He isn't even the only person affirming the importance of education.
Finally, how do you know this particular rendition of segregated transportation is correct? Where is the documentation? Did railroads really fear losing black customers?
Of course,"racially segregated seating on streetcars and buses in the South did not go back for centuries," these forms of transportation were mid 19th and early twentieth century inventions. Railroads, in particular, were not really for passengers, but cash crops and laborers. In addition, railroads did become signigicant in the South until the 1880s.
Also, how many blacks could afford to use the railroads? And why would they?
Also, blacks had to use the buses! How else would they get to work? |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 1030
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 05, 2005 - 09:04 pm: |
|
Blacks used the railroads as laborers, what qbout convict laborers?...and until the great migration...they, mostly, took steamboats to the north...or they were on railroads as sleep car porters... |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 3103
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 06, 2005 - 10:50 am: |
|
Well, Yukio, the fact that other people say what Sowell claims would seem to give validity to what he writes. Sowell is incorporating conventional wisdom into his opinions and, in the process, gives readers something provocative to think about.
|
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 1032
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 06, 2005 - 02:15 pm: |
|
No. At least as it pertains to his rendition of the origins of jim crowed railroads, he is off the mark. The fact that people say what Sowell claims only means that he has followers and if they have gained this information by themselve, then they should pick up a recent history book...which is all I did.
Now is he provocative? For some...but to construct this articles as "facts," as Troy has dones, is a practice of bad empiricism. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 1033
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 06, 2005 - 02:16 pm: |
|
Now is he provocative? For some...but to construct construe his articles as "facts," as Troy has done, is a practice of bad empiricism. |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 3105
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 06, 2005 - 03:17 pm: |
|
OK, Yukio, I can't debate you, but I would think that economist Thomas Sowell has the credentials to explain to you his intepretation of data. Recorded history and the truth are not synonomous, so all assertions about this issue are subject to being challenged. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 1035
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 06, 2005 - 05:44 pm: |
|
Indeed, we have no disagree then. I criticized Sowell's historicism, but more importantly, I am criticizing Troy, when he states, "I would also encourage them not to be swayed by emotional rhetoric and try to obtain some facts, recognize their own ignorance and stop being so damn gullible."
Now, this is essential, for facts help us interpret, but it seems, and I may be incorrect, that Troy is giving Sowell to much credit, for even in the article his facts are indeed approximations. And much of his economic views are also interpretations...this is why there are so many books on the same damn topic...
This is quite problematic...for it is a false empiricism...rhetorically, he has erased his earlier claims, where he states, "Sowell adds a perspective to many issues I often find fascinating." A perspective is an interpretation, but the last sentence of his posts make it seems that Sowell not only interprets but what he states is fact AND others are influenced by emotion rather than socalled fact. |
Ntfs_encryption
Veteran Poster
Username: Ntfs_encryption
Post Number: 65
Registered: 10-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 03:47 am: |
|
Troy wrote; "I would also encourage them not to be swayed by emotional rhetoric and try to obtain some facts, recognize their own ignorance and stop being so damn gullible."
Sounds like a very solid suggestion for developing immunity against an ongoing developing culture of misinformation, ignorance, nefarious political agendas and race baiting histrionics. Intense independent scholarly research and being open to documented facts that reside outside of ones preconceived notions can be quite eye opening and rehabilitating.
|
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 1180
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 03:50 am: |
|
I am a historian.
Most of my "ideas and notions" come from dead black men who were considered the most brilliant of their day.
You will find much of what Kola Boof says already written in the books of W.E.B. DuBois, Senghor, Marcus Garvey, Malcolm X and a few Africans you've never heard of.
And they're STILL right.
|
|
Email This Page