Pogo, give it up. Even the media admitted he was racist. He used everything to his advantage to gain power.
And Moyers grew up in a very racist town. They even had censorship codes that in the 50’s were finally overturned. It was a segregated town. It was arresting Black students in 1960 for sitting at the lunch counter at the five and dime for interrupting business. He didn’t leave there until at least 1951.
LBJ was both a racist- and also the President who did more for Civil Rights than any President since Lincoln.
By holding up in the Senate for 7 year an identical Civil Rights Bill put forth by Ike, a bill LBJ called the, "Ngger Bill"
Actually in the quote, however apocryphal, you refer to here, he's
pushing to pass the bill. He's speaking to a Southern colleague and code-switching, which he did as adeptly as anybody. I believe the actual attributed quote was "why won't you let this ****** bill pass?"
"Code-switching" means adapting one's own speech to synch with one's listener to create common ground for assent. Everybody does it -- one talks one way to one's boss, another way to one's children, one way to a stranger, another way to a dog. One way to a foreigner, another way to a neighbor. Here LBJ is speaking in the white-Southern vernacular in order to reach his listener. That is, if the quote is real at all.
But this attempt at dichotomy where the use of the word "******" can have only one simple meaning, falls flat. Go ask a black rapper if he means the same thing by the term as a white KKK hooder does. Good luck with that. And again, in the statement he's
backing the bill, not opposing it.
lol so now 'The Media' is suddenly 'credible' when they post fake news about LBJ? The Camelot Myth runs deep in the Establishment Media.
As for 'racism in the South', the fact is it was less than reported, it was just more open and honest and out front in the southern states than in most other parts of the country. See the results of northern responses to making the Civil Rights Acts apply nationwide under Nixon, where northern schools had been
re-segregating along racial lines throughout the late 1940's to the 1970's to levels as high or higher in many places than the South ever had, and the busing riots, the sniveling and violent resistance to expanding the Acts to include banning of literacy tests for voters applied to the 18 states in the north and California who had them, and the race riot still going on in all the usual 'liberal' bastions to this day. Seems like the all the 'liberal, enlightened' types only liked the Civil Rights Acts as long as they only applied to a few southern states, and when those came up for the 'sunset' reviews all of sudden they were' bad laws' and 'unenforceable', for some reason, and would 'only cause violence and problems' ...
In any case, for those in the Peanut Gallery, especially Gen X's and 'millennial's' and those who want to study the real politics and the history of the Civil Rights movement and who derailed and warped it beyond recognition instead of the PC spin and rubbish you have been fed by fake media and academia, your first intro should be Hugh Davis Graham's
The Civil Rights Era'; it's also very useful as an intro on how politicians and bureaucrats actually go about implementing public policy to suit themselves, whether they are 'left' or 'right' wingers, what happens to 'the Good Guys' when they get in the way of power plays by sociopaths and special interest groups, etc., etc., etc. Graham has also written other books of interest worth reading as well, but this one should be required reading in political science courses, starting in high school.
Racism has never been confined to the South, that point is certainly well taken. As I often point out, in the 1860 elections one state also ran a referendum on the question of whether black people should get the right to vote. The results came back decisively as a "No", they should not -- and that state was New York, which simultaneously voted for Lincoln.
Then again, Lincoln, like the rest of the candidates, wasn't making noises about Abolition himself, because they all wanted votes. That characteristic was applied by history later.
Race riots and disturbances, however, have nothing to do with "liberal bastions" --- they have to do with
migration. Specifically significant waves of black migration to the North in order to find employment, and through it a better life, in the burgeoning industrial centers there, including Chicago, Indianapolis, Detroit, Pittsburgh, New York, St. Louis, etc etc etc. This influx, especially active with the explosion of industrialization in the19-teens, and augmented by a parallel influx of foreign workers, generated a xenophobia/racism that both segregated the new black workers (and the new foreign ones), and fueled the rapid rise of the second Ku Klux Klan (founded 1915) which overtly milked that sentiment against blacks, Jews, Catholics, foreigners and labor unions.
Ultimately it has nothing to do with "liberal bastions"; it's the inevitable result of industrial growing pains and the resentment of an ignorant populace to them. Migration means cultural shift, and cultural shift means cultural tension. That's why there were race riots, and lynchings, and the Klan, and at the same time the UDC feverishly putting up statues to a fake Civil War history, all of them the results of the same dynamic.
Sociology 101. (/offtopic)
