Re: Crowds gather for March on Washington 50th anniversary
What history is clear about is that it was a North vs. South issue. Democrats in the North mostly supported the North. Republicans in the South mostly supported the South. Partisanship was irrelevant.
Right. With Democrats controlling the South and Republicans controlling the North. That's been well established.
The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow. Jim Crow Stories . Democratic Party | PBS
No. Re-read my comments. It was sarcasm, mocking what you had said previously. Notice I used nearly the exact same words against you.
Oh, I see. Leftist should avoid sarcasm, irony, etc. because it's too difficult to tell when they are being serious anyway.
No, it was a tradition in the South. And as I mentioned, today's conservatives are the Democrats of that era.
Yes, slavery and Jim Crow laws, supported by the Democrats, were a tradition in the South.
No, it was the South who opposed black rights... then and in the '60's. And in the 60's, Republicans were, percentage-wise, more against black rights than Democrats.
Yes, it was the Democratic South who opposed Black rights but you have offered no support for your contention that Republicans were against Black rights. In fact more Republicans supported the Civil Rights Act than Democrats.
Again, it was South vs. North. There is no denying that.
Then why did you earlier call them areas or sections?
Read what you wrote and compare it what I wrote. This demonstrates that you don't WANT to understand. You just want to be partisan and ignore anything that does not adhere to your world view. There are no human rights violations because of communism, because no true communistic government has ever existed. I said that once... and I just said it again. Do I need to ask you to repeat it so that we can both be sure that you got it? All governments that attempted to be communistic in nature turned to totalitarianism immediately. It's human nature and large scale sociology/psychology.
Yes, since the Cold War ended Leftists claim it was not 'real' Communism, just a perverted form of the real Communism, but which is truly wonderful when done correctly.. However if that was the case why did Liberals (aka Useful Idiots) march for Communists and rail against Conservatives, such as Ronald Reagan, who rightly called the USSR an "Evil Empire". Leftists should have supported him and said yes, the Russians, Cubans, etc. are ruining the good name of Communism with their mass killings, gulags, etc., but they didn't. Instead they attacked the Republican President of the day, and many other conservatives, for pointing out the obvious.
This just demonstrates your ignorance on this issue brought on by your partisanship. No lives were ruined because of communism... because communism has never truly existed as a governmental state. Totalitarianism is what it has always turned into. Please read up on history.
I've actually been in a Communist country and have seen the horrors with my own eyes, and witnessed the propaganda even though our eyes told the truth. You may not want to call it Communism because it contradicts your idea of what Communism should be but in fact Communists knew what was going on behind the Iron Curtain and ignored it because they had to cling to their dream. When millions of people call themselves Communists I'll go along with their self description, not yours. Nazis say that Hitler ruined 'real' Nazism, Mussolini ruined 'real' Fascism, and so on. A pox on all their houses. People who can't even manage their own lives feel still feel they have the intellectual capacity to control the lives of millions of others.
Conservatives only define liberalism based on what they are afraid of. Anything that frightens them, such as progress, they assign to liberalism. They also assign all of the things that they hate about themselves... bias, being reactionary, and closed-mindedness for example. It's amusing as it is sad.
Then lets see examples of Republicans holding back the rights of Black people and then compare them with what the 'progressive' Democrats did.
It was a Southern belief. And it is currently a Republican belief.
It was the central issue with Democrats, and not only in the South. Did you see how well the Democrat George Wallace did? How can there be a Republican belief and not a Democrat belief?
Of course it is. The issue was South vs. North. Democrats and Republicans were irrelevant. You are making a very simplistic correlation not causation logical fallacy. Simple historical revisionism based on lack of logic.
Party philosophies over an issue like slavery are irrelevant? What about in modern times? Are the philosophies of different political parties still irrelevant as well?