top | item 47112187

(no title)

Erem | 7 days ago

What, since released, internal memos or journals from mid-century civil rights leaders have revealed that destroying the constitution was their objective? Seems like a stretch.

discuss

order

mothballed|7 days ago

I believe the civil rights leaders themselves were mostly genuine. I think they were used as useful idiots on a couple instances to support the two most destructive policies of the US.

(1) Secession. This was used for evil in the form of slavery. But it is the most powerful check of federal power by the states we had. The fact it could be used for evil did not mean it is better to get rid of it.

(2) Expansion of the interstate commerce clause to mean basically anything. A main argument for why this can't be reversed is that it would destroy the civil rights acts, which acts upon even intrastate business. Rather what should have happened is 15th amendment should have been written to apply to private entities as well, instead of blasting away the interstate commerce clause.

kryogen1c|7 days ago

Im certainly sympathetic to #2 being one of the greatest unconstitutional practices of the modern US government, but is its genesis really the civil rights movement? There were many settled cases about interstate commerce before the Civil rights act, like Gibbons v. Ogden.

https://www.britannica.com/money/commerce-clause/Interpretat...

zozbot234|7 days ago

(2) is not a problem if you enact equivalent civil rights acts in every state. There would be plenty of political support for doing this today, including in the Sunbelt - which there wasn't in the 1950s.

Erem|7 days ago

With that framing, aren’t those two outcomes detrimental side effects of achieving the objective, rather than the objective itself per your original comment?