This is probably your best argument actually. Excellent point.
The American descendants of black slaves invented Memphis jookin. In Somalia best they can do is wave their hands around and shake the booty a bit
I'm sure it's easy to launch court cases when there's only five professions in like 1890 and half your friends are trained lawyers
I mean we get our soros checks direct deposited, you really should talk to your manager man.
We know for a fact dan pays you to do this. He pays all of us.
Needing to pay for protestors, for political organizations, etc. is only a recent thing.
How could the racists get people to their protest without paying for an add on craigslist
I am making slides to teach kids how to play heads up 7 up and I have to triple check everything to make sure I didn't accidentally paste some shit about the jim crown south into a slide.
like 5 years earlier everyone was literally waging a war for slavery and to establish a government that protected it I don't think you need that much money to get people on that train again LMAO
Surely it was pretty costly to get all those people in Lousiana to violently take over the legislature or whatever. I can't remember what year that was or what it was called. But I bet events like that really cost something.
Just imagining how much less dense the country was back then. But maybe it wasn't so costly to just travel but took forever.
No, Justice John Marshall Harlan did not express regret over his famous dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson. In fact, he firmly believed his "separate but equal" dissent would be vindicated, and his prediction came true when the Supreme Court overturned the precedent in Brown v. Board of Education.
While his dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson was a lone voice initially, it was later recognized as a powerful and prescient argument against racial segregation. Harlan's dissent highlighted the inherent inequality of the "separate but equal" doctrine and foreshadowed the eventual dismantling of Jim Crow laws. According to SCOTUSblog, some legal scholars argue that his dissent was a crucial step towards achieving racial equality in the United States.
Im team dont put actual effort into this too btw
Yes. He's a true blue libtard -- the United States Constitution is incompatible with Civil Rights to a degree but instead of being a judge he legislated from the bench.
the "blues" back then ran the south
Yes. The Democrats are the original racists.
I'm gunna focus on some work now, but I still don't believe that the wealth and power of the post-war South bounced back based on pure racist hard work and ambition. I think they were able to rebuild their wealth largely because they had it in the first place, and in the first place was from slavery. Just like when economic down turns happen now it's the same rich people that bounce back.
But only 30% of southern households had that in the first place. That was the whole point I wanted to make in the first place. Most white people aren't descendants of slave households.
Well you're wrong and only believe that because you're invested in insane redistributive "blck people built this nation" histiography.
I mean most of "wealth" people talk about comes from owning land something certain groups of people could not do and those with large plots they perhaps then sold things produced on said plots would likely be fine...
I don't believe that though. Working people built this country. And I'll give credit to some good state crafters too.
I should have closed the tab faster
1 Like