Thought for the Day

For over 100 years, the Republican party* fought to establish the civil rights of all Americans regardless of race, almost invariably against the vigorous protests of the Democratic party.

At long last, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlawed discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin in public facilities, in businesses catering to the public engaged in interstate commerce,** in public schools and other government agencies receiving federal funds, and in businesses hiring more than 14 employees.  This latter provision (Title VII) also prohibited discrimination in hiring on the basis of sex.

Almost immediately, the Democrats would begin championing all those who would set themselves off from this civil society on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex.***

Funny how just when we had achieved the full integration of our civil society thanks to the Republicans, the Democrats managed to discover a way to segregate us all over again.

*Founded in 1854 by anti-slavery activists.
**I.e. within the federal government's jurisdiction.
***I.e. through support for Black Power, feminism, and identity politics generally.

Comments

  1. Brian W. OgilvieOctober 28, 2012 at 5:39 PM

    Aside from a radical fringe, in what way do feminists "set themselves off" from civil society? BTW, I've always understood "civil society" to constitute the world of voluntary association outside of the formal structures of kin, market, and state--the world of the Sons of Erin and the Sons of Norway, Amnesty International, the DAR, etc.

    I heard a fascinating talk last fall by Julie Ringelheimer about competing notions of equality in EU law. There are several notions of equality, and they're necessarily in tension at certain points. Equality before the law is one, but keep in mind what Anatole France said: "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread." And equality before the law may require treating some people differently. If Christmas is a public holiday, should Jews working for state agencies be allowed to take Yom Kippur as a holiday? If not, is the state discriminating on the basis of religion by requiring observant Jews to take vacation or a personal day to celebrate a central religious holiday, whereas Christians are not required to use vacation or personal days for the same?

    Then, of course, there's equality of opportunity, which is sometimes in tension with equality under the law, too. For all of its flaws, affirmative action is an attempt to preserve some form of equality of opportunity in the face of the effects of discrimination and economic disadvantage.

    And as for "the Democrats manag[ing] to discover a way to segregate us all over again": really? What have American Democrats done since 1964 that can be compared, fairly, to segregated water fountains, railroad carriages, lunch counters, city buses, etc., or to redlining real estate?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Fencing BearOctober 29, 2012 at 12:58 PM

    I'd say the Democrats have done a bang-up job convincing not a few people that "Republican" means "white, male, greedy, stupid, sexist, and racist." You, for example. And me, to my shame, until I started reading what Republicans actually say.

    "Civil society" as I understand it means those things which we do together as citizens, with the corollary sense of "being civil." These may include government institutions, but they also include other forms of association.

    I think what you give as an example of equality before the law is exactly the kind of conversation we should be having, rather than accusing each other of being greedy (the "1%") and sexist (the "war on women") all the time.

    I disagree about the effects of affirmative action. Thomas Sowell has written a great deal about the way in which liberal policies like affirmative action have backfired on the very communities that they were intended to help. I can suggest some reading, if you like.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my blog post. I look forward to hearing what you think!

F.B.

Popular posts from this blog

Draco Layer Four: The Anagogic or Mystical Sense

Image
Here be dragons. And doves. Human beings long for transcendence. Such longing is, for the world, always out of fashion because, of course, it is not a longing for the world, and the world knows it. We know what the world wants. The world—by which we mean Satan, the Lord of the World—wants above all our obedience, a jewel so precious that he will do anything to get it: lie, steal, murder, bear false witness, pretend to social standing, pretend to insider knowledge to get us to consent to his influence.  “God lied to you. You will not die.” And suddenly we are anxious about having other people dislike us, about losing prestige in our social circles, about other people being more popular or influential or successful, about other people having secret knowledge, about our own influence and fame. “You shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.” And with that temptation, our first parents fell. The irony is cosmic. There they were in the Garden, privy to conversation with God face-to-face, and
Keep reading

Draco Layer Three: The Moral or Tropological Sense

Image
Learn to discern. We all know what sin is, right? Right?!  Once upon a time in the desert , the hermit Evagrius Ponticus (d. 399) set out to make a list of the most deadly ones, albeit he called them “deadly thoughts,” not “sins.” You probably know the list, even if you don’t think you do: gluttony, impurity (a.k.a. lust), avarice (a.k.a. greed), sadness (a.k.a. feeling sorry for oneself), anger or wrath, acedia  or sloth, vainglory, and pride (two different things).  Not quite the list you were expecting? That is because some centuries later—we’re talking ancient times here, when centuries passed like decades do now (or vice versa)—Pope Gregory the Great (d. 604) revised the list, somewhat accidentally, in his commentary on Job.  Gregory had been expounding Job according to its multiple layers—yes, that’s right! Job, like Shrek, has layers! —and he happened somewhere in book XXXI to mention the “seven principle vices” to which Pride,  the “Queen of Sins” gives rise: Vainglory, Envy,
Keep reading

Talking Points: Three Cheers for White Men

Image
1. When white women (see Marie de France and Eleanor of Aquitaine) invented chivalry and courtly love , white men agreed that it was better for knights to spend their time protecting women rather than raping them, and even agreed to write songs for them rather than expecting them to want to have sex with them without being forced. 2. When white men who were celibate (see the canon lawyers and theologians of the twelfth century and thereafter) argued that marriage was a sacrament valid only if both the man and the woman consented , white men exerted themselves to become good husbands rather than expecting women to live as their slaves. 3. When white women (see Christine de Pizan, Mary Wollstonecraft, and the suffragettes) invented feminism , white men supported them (see John Stuart Mill) and even went so far as to vote (because only men could vote at the time) to let them vote, not to mention hiring them as workers and supporting their education. And before you start telling me a
Keep reading

Risus et bellum

Image
MILO really needs to put this motto on a t-shirt: “Laughter and war.” It is what he called for back in November, when accepting the prize for courage in journalism from David Horowitz’s Freedom Center: So let us fight, but let our motto be Risus et bellum , Laughter and war. Because nothing stings our foes, foreign and domestic, more than our hearty laughter at their lies and nonsense. And also because nothing will better remind us what we’re fighting for than the laughter of Chesterton, of Chaucer and of Shakespeare, and of course the God who inspired them all. I have to confess, I am quite weary today. It is taxing withstanding a SJW attack. My colleagues in academia have, over the past week, used every weapon in the standard arsenal: long-running Facebook threads in which they talk about how deplorable I am; an open letter passed round the internet at the speed of light, garnering (at an estimate) some 1,400 signatures from colleagues at large to be sent to my Social Sciences
Keep reading

Progressive is the New Puritan

Image
Joseph Bottum has offered a weak (in the sense of historically shallow) version of this argument in his An Anxious Age: The Post-Protestant Ethic and Spirit of America  (New York: Image, 2014), where he attempts to account for the decline of the mainline Protestant churches in America over the last half century or so. As Bottum tells it, it was above all the new social gospel preached by the Baptist theologian Walter Rauschenbusch around the turn of the twentieth century that was ultimately responsible for the loss of confidence among American Protestants in themselves as Christians, if not in themselves as cultural elites. The story is complicated and involves lots of different currents in American culture from the late nineteenth century to the present, but the result, as Bottum convincingly shows, has been a profound transformation in the way in which American elites identify as religious or (mostly) not. The real question, left to a certain extent unanswered, is why they were so su
Keep reading