Jim Crow Remembered

Discussing all things political in NW Arkansas and beyond.
Post Reply
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8193
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Jim Crow Remembered

Post by Dardedar »

DAR
I didn't realise it was this bad. Am I right to use this as an example of sucessful federal overthrow of state power?

***
Jim Crow Remembered

By William Fisher
t r u t h o u t | Columnist

Monday 12 February 2007

Bob Herbert of the New York Times has written a couple of gut-wrenching columns recently about Gary Tyler, a 16-year-old black youth who in 1974 was accused of murdering a 13-year-old white boy outside the high school they attended in Destrehan, Louisiana.

Herbert recounts how "the boy was shot to death in the midst of turmoil over school integration, which the local whites were resisting violently.
The case against young Tyler - who was on a bus with other black students that was attacked by about 200 whites - was built on bogus evidence and coerced testimony. But that was enough to get him convicted by an all-white jury and sentenced to die in the electric chair. His life was spared when the Louisiana death penalty was ruled unconstitutional, but he is serving out a life sentence with no chance of parole in the state penitentiary at Angola."

Herbert writes that "his mother's sharpest memory of the day Gary was arrested was of sitting in a room at a sheriff's station, listening to deputies in the next room savagely beating her son."

After I got my outrage under control, I remembered scenes from 20 years earlier, when I was a cub reporter for a newspaper in Central Florida - then known as the state's Bible Belt.

One of my beats was what my managing editor called C&C - cops and courts. They gave me the grand title of Bureau Chief and sent me twenty miles away to the county seat. There, covering the local police, the county sheriff and the county court offered an eye-opening - and terrifying - glimpse into the abyss of the Jim Crow South. For a young Yankee reporter from New York, it was a never-to-be-forgotten education.

Saturday nights were always the busiest for this fledgling journalist. That's when a couple of dozen sheriff's deputies got into their patrol cars and headed for "colored town" - the county seat's ghetto where the dirt-poor African-Americans lived.

They swept in like the 101st airborne, arresting virtually anything that moved. Men and women - and the occasional child - caught up in the sweep were hustled into waiting paddy-wagons and dispatched back to the sheriff's station. There, they were put behind bars and charged with a variety of heinous crimes - loitering was the most common. If they could post a $25 cash bond, they got out of jail. If not, they stayed locked up.

The sheriff and his deputies much preferred getting the cash, because back in those days they were paid on the "fee system," i.e., their salaries were substantially composed of a percentage of the fines they collected from the "nigras."

The later it got, the more arrests were made. It was Saturday night in "colored town." People drank. Some got into fights. Occasionally there were knifings. The suspects in these crimes were, like their earlier neighbors, hustled off to jail.

For them, there were no $25 bonds. They were quickly put into tiny cells, where most of them remained through their arraignments and until their trials - sometimes for many months. Bail was an unmentionable.

Likewise, legal aid, as we now understand it, was non-existent. The town's lawyers were ordered by the local bar association and the judge to represent the accused on a rotating pro-bono basis. And since they weren't about to give up their own Saturday nights, they rarely appeared until Monday morning. By that time, many of the often-illiterate suspects had placed their "mark" on confessions, largely obtained through empty promises of freedom and/or brutal beatings. The sheriff and his deputies were particularly fond of arresting couples, and then sexually abusing a wife to extract a confession from her husband.

Customarily, the next time I saw these people was when they came before the county judge for trial. Their lawyers were often unaware of the charges, since they hadn't bothered to read the court papers and police reports. Evidence of coerced confessions was routinely excluded, usually without the slightest hint of an objection from the defense lawyers. Juries were, predictably, all-white and all-male. Some of the attorneys appointed to defend the suspects showed up in court drunk, or with Saturday night hangovers. Many literally slept through the trials.

The next stop for most of these convicted felons was the state prison at Raiford, then widely acknowledged to be one of the more notoriously cruel and overcrowded penal institutions in the country. There were few appeals; appeals cost money.

That was justice in Central Florida in the 1950s, and things only got worse for black citizens after the civil rights movement started to gather steam.

the rest...

Image
User avatar
Doug
Posts: 3388
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:05 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville, AR
Contact:

Re: Jim Crow Remembered

Post by Doug »

Darrel wrote:That was justice in Central Florida in the 1950s, and things only got worse for black citizens after the civil rights movement started to gather steam.


DOUG
What Republican can read that without crying?

For the "Good Old Days."
"We could have done something important Max. We could have fought child abuse or Republicans!" --Oona Hart (played by Victoria Foyt), in the 1995 movie "Last Summer in the Hamptons."
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8193
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Post by Dardedar »

DAR
I just checked over at the nwapolitics morgue. So dead. Then I found this blurb:

"Note: NWAPolitics.com is a blog dedicated to the free market of thoughts and ideas in Northwest Arkansas. All of the contributors are real and from the Northwest Arkansas area."

Funny.
User avatar
Savonarola
Mod@Large
Posts: 1475
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 10:11 pm
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50
Location: NW Arkansas

Post by Savonarola »

All of the contributors are real and from the Northwest Arkansas area.
They may be from NWA, but they had/have no sense of reality whatsoever; my slogan with those guys was "get real."

Speaking of which, LaTour still owes us that great explanation of why evolutionary theory is false... Maybe he meant the end of this summer...
Barbara Fitzpatrick
Posts: 2232
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 10:55 am
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0

Post by Barbara Fitzpatrick »

It wasn't quite as bad (Jim Crow) as the Central Florida report in Houston when I was growing up, but the small towns surrounding Houston - now a part of the cancerous growth that is Houston - were exactly the same. I remember Momma foaming at the mouth talking about overhearing a cop (having enough sense of self-preservation not to say anything to him, but still being mad at herself for not) "joking" about his favorite activity of "goin' out to harelip a few niggers". The post-WWII middle-class economic boom was partly based on putting women back in the kitchen and blacks back "in their place". (Women war factory workers got their "pink slips" on V-J Day.) There was a real resurgence of the KKK in the late 1940s and early 1950s - it was the southern addition to McCarthyism.
Barbara Fitzpatrick
User avatar
Doug
Posts: 3388
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:05 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville, AR
Contact:

Post by Doug »

Barbara Fitzpatrick wrote:The post-WWII middle-class economic boom was partly based on putting women back in the kitchen and blacks back "in their place".
DOUG
That's why I vote for Muhammad Ali as the greatest sports figure of the 20th century--and one of the greatest public figures, period. He had a big mouth and fists to back it up and he went around whipping all the "great white hope" palookas that the world put in front of him.

When he won the World Heavyweight Championship he just kept shouting into the microphone that he was "champion of the world." To hell with DiCaprio's "King of the World. Ali was telling the truth when he bellowed.

And white America was SO angry at the "uppity nigger" who "didn't know his place."

Ali was the greatest!

Image
Ali defeats Karl Mildenberger in 1966.
Ali wins in round 12 by TKO.


(Note: Cynic that I am, I half suspect that Ali getting drafted at the height of his career was no random event. From the Wikipedia: "In 1964, Ali failed the Armed Forces qualifying test because his writing and spelling skills were subpar. However, in early 1966, the tests were revised and Ali was reclassified 1A." They reclassified him specifically so they could draft him and get him off the boxing scene, I'd say.)
"We could have done something important Max. We could have fought child abuse or Republicans!" --Oona Hart (played by Victoria Foyt), in the 1995 movie "Last Summer in the Hamptons."
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8193
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Post by Dardedar »

DAR
Look at that reach!
Barbara Fitzpatrick
Posts: 2232
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 10:55 am
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0

Post by Barbara Fitzpatrick »

Ali wasn't the first on that one. Joe Louis was undefeated and considered undefeatable until he was beat in the 12th round in 1936 by German (not Nazi) Max Schmeling, a fight in which white Americans largely cheered the German. By the 1938 rematch America was a little more aware of what Germany was up to, the fight took on a "Nazi v. Free World" flavor, and white Americans (except the Klan and the American Nazi Party) cheered Joe's 1st round knockout of the German.

As to the changing of military standards that caught Ali, Vietnam was the same sort of thing happening now - when you are in a war of wastage, you lower the standards to get "cannon fodder". When you're looking for bodies to "charge down the guns", you don't need (or even want) literacy. Vietnam or Iraq, they just want bodies. The potential to get rid of an "uppity nigger" at the same time was just a side benefit.
Barbara Fitzpatrick
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8193
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Post by Dardedar »

DAR
Evidence for Barbara's claim:

***
Army Giving More Waivers in Recruiting Ex-Cons
By Lizette Alvarez
The New York Times

Wednesday 14 February 2007

The number of waivers granted to Army recruits with criminal backgrounds has grown about 65 percent in the last three years, increasing to 8,129 in 2006 from 4,918 in 2003, Department of Defense records show.

During that time, the Army has employed a variety of tactics to expand its diminishing pool of recruits. It has offered larger enlistment cash bonuses, allowed more high school dropouts and applicants with low scores on its aptitude test to join, and loosened weight and age restrictions.

It has also increased the number of so-called "moral waivers" to recruits with criminal pasts, even as the total number of recruits dropped slightly. The sharpest increase was in waivers for serious misdemeanors, which make up the bulk of all the Army's moral waivers. These include aggravated assault, burglary, robbery and vehicular homicide.

The number of waivers for felony convictions also increased, to 11 percent of the 8,129 moral waivers granted in 2006, from 8 percent.

link
Barbara Fitzpatrick
Posts: 2232
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 10:55 am
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0

Post by Barbara Fitzpatrick »

During times of "peace" when they don't want those cannon-fodder bodies, the military doesn't accept anybody without a high school diploma (which has it's own ironies, since the GED was developed by the Army for its recruits in 1942 - it has been upgraded several times since then to include critical thinking and writing, but still...), and also wouldn't allow "career" military to re-up if that tour would take them over the 20 years for full retirement benefits - among other restrictions. During times of "war" - especially wars that aren't legally wars (don't have the "homefront" backing that WWI & WWII did) they take just about anybody who walks in the door (except homosexuals). As bad as the current situation is, they may even chance their stance on gays, if W attacks Iran.
Barbara Fitzpatrick
User avatar
Hogeye
Posts: 1047
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2006 3:33 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Contact:

Post by Hogeye »

Lew tells the downside of the Civil Rights Act.
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. wrote:The civil-rights movement of the 1960s complicates the picture. My ideological sympathies were and are with those who resisted the federal government's attacks on the freedom of association (not to mention the federalist structure of the Constitution) in the name of racial integration. I never liked Martin Luther King, Jr. I thought he was a fraud and a tool. But when he turned his attention to the evils of the U.S. war on Vietnam, I began to like him. That's also when the establishment turned against him, and soon he was murdered.

These days, the neocons say the 1964 Civil Rights Act was an attempt to remove barriers to opportunity, and only later was distorted with quotas. That's absurd. Everyone, both proponents and opponents, knew exactly what that law was: a statist, centralizing measure that fundamentally attacked the rights of property and empowered the state as mind reader: to judge not only our actions, but our motives, and to criminalize them.
I can only add that progress was already being made wrt racism. Voluntary society was taking care of the problem. Whether the governmental force sped up the reform or protracted it, whether the government meddling reduced hostility or aggravated it, no one knows. We do know that it ramped up State power, to detrimental effect.

Many people fall for historicism here - assuming that what actually happened was the best of all possible alternatives. Questioning the wisdom of entering WWII or the Civil Rights Act is unthinkable for Boobus Americanus.
"May the the last king be strangled in the guts of the last priest." - Diderot
With every drop of my blood I hate and execrate every form of tyranny, every form of slavery. I hate dictation. I love liberty. - Ingersoll
Barbara Fitzpatrick
Posts: 2232
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 10:55 am
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0

Post by Barbara Fitzpatrick »

Oh, an awful lot of white redneck/wingnut Americans question the Civil Rights Act.
Barbara Fitzpatrick
User avatar
Doug
Posts: 3388
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:05 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville, AR
Contact:

Post by Doug »

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. wrote:The civil-rights movement of the 1960s complicates the picture. My ideological sympathies were and are with those who resisted the federal government's attacks on the freedom of association (not to mention the federalist structure of the Constitution) in the name of racial integration.
Integrating schools is not an attack on freedom of association. That is ridiculous. The government tells people which school to go to so that they don't all try to go to the same school (in large school districts this is not possible), and the government can integrate schools. But the government does the same thing in nonintegrated schools, so nothing changed.
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. wrote:These days, the neocons say the 1964 Civil Rights Act was an attempt to remove barriers to opportunity, and only later was distorted with quotas. That's absurd. Everyone, both proponents and opponents, knew exactly what that law was: a statist, centralizing measure that fundamentally attacked the rights of property and empowered the state as mind reader: to judge not only our actions, but our motives, and to criminalize them.
No one criminalized motives. That is a vague statement and an obvious distortion. What was criminalized was intentional withholding of the fair share of the state's resources.
"We could have done something important Max. We could have fought child abuse or Republicans!" --Oona Hart (played by Victoria Foyt), in the 1995 movie "Last Summer in the Hamptons."
User avatar
Hogeye
Posts: 1047
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2006 3:33 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Contact:

Post by Hogeye »

Doug wrote:Integrating schools is not an attack on freedom of association.
Right, Doug, at least for government schools. He's obviously talking about forcing businesses and rentors to associate with people they'd rather not. We're talking about the Civil Rights Act here, not Brown v. Board of Ed.
Doug wrote:No one criminalized motives.
Sure they did. If your motive for not hiring (or renting to, or serving) someone was competence (or property protection, or sanitation concerns, resp.) you could legally refuse association, but if the motivation was dislike or favoritism of a race (or could possibly be construed by the government as such) it was made illegal. As Lew said, "Everyone, both proponents and opponents, knew exactly what that law was: a statist, centralizing measure that fundamentally attacked the rights of property and empowered the state as mind reader: to judge not only our actions, but our motives, and to criminalize them." Aggressive conduct is a legit concern of legal systems; "thought crimes" are not.
Doug wrote:What was criminalized was intentional withholding of the fair share of the state's resources.
I see where you're misunderstanding now. You saw it as an issue of redistributing the State's [sic] resources. Rockwell's (and my) objections have nothing to do with that. Our concerns have to do with the Civil Rights Act's violation of private property and individual rights.
"May the the last king be strangled in the guts of the last priest." - Diderot
With every drop of my blood I hate and execrate every form of tyranny, every form of slavery. I hate dictation. I love liberty. - Ingersoll
Post Reply