Forward: Queers think they have a right to demand businesses to bake them cakes, using the civil rights laws of the 60's as a guideline. Just when did your rights of a business owner not mirror your rights as a citizen. For example, you can now discriminate who you allow into your own home, or which family members can come to your family picnic, but the second you start a business, you loose these same rights you have for your personal life. It isn't constitutional, but it is the law today. We think these laws a good, yet history shows us for every movement, there is a counter result. I mean nobody could argue that the 1964 rights act was bad for black Americans right? WRONG! The law decimated black owned businesses and communities and led to the situational poverty among blacks today. Don't believe me, here is an article from a black writer from a black magazine called The New African. You would think some racist white southern bigot wrote this. You may think so, but the writer is absolutely correct in the points and facts presented…..
Leslie Goffe
As a result of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the black middle class were able to live wherever they wanted and could afford. Consequently, they fled inner city areas like Chicago’s South Side and Washington DC’s U Street Corridor neighbourhoods where they had been safe from the hostile white world. They were drawn to the white suburbs.
The black neighbourhoods had established black-owned cinemas, black-run churches and black mutual aid societies, but the black middle class gave up this black independence for the chance to move into America’s lilywhite suburbs. They were eager to live in the integrated America that Dr Martin Luther King Jnr. had spoken so eloquently, and tantalisingly, of in his 1963 “I Have a Dream” speech in Washington.
But not everyone embraced King’s integrationist views. “This is a white man’s country,” Malcolm X said in a 1963 interview. “The Negro is nothing but an ex-slave who is now trying to get himself integrated into the slave master’s house.”
The black writer James Baldwin described integration as a “burning house” that he had no desire to live in. Author of the book The Fire Next Time, Baldwin said he would “rather die than become what most white people in this country (America) have become.”
The chief opponents of integration were, of course the die-hard racist Southern whites like Richard Russell, a Georgia Congressman, who promised, but failed, to block the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. “We will resist to the bitter end any measure … to bring about social equality and intermingling… of the races in our (Southern) states,” Russell proclaimed weeks before integration became the law of the land in 1964.
Speaking at an event in April commemorating the Civil Rights Act, President Obama said it opened doors for millions of Americans like him. “They swung open for you and they swung open for me. That’s why I’m standing here today.” Eager for the doors to swing open and hungry for their piece of the proverbial American pie, African-Americans had believed their road to success began in America’s suburbs.
They did not move to these suburbs in order to live next door to whites, they told anyone who asked. They had simply wanted to get away from inner city slums and into squeaky clean new homes in the suburbs. And yes, there were black businesses and wealthy blacks who had fancy houses in the ghetto, but most black people there, they pointed out, lived in rat and roach infested tenements that were too cold in the winter and too hot in the summer.
But this black exodus robbed the black inner cities of some of its best and brightest, and denied these black communities black dollars with the black middle class now spending their disposable income in white business places in the white suburbs.
With their core consumers gone, and unable to cope with competition from white businesses in the city, black businesses began, one after another, shutting up shop. Read More>>>>>>