Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
Not true. The CIvil Rights movement and MLK had the right idea. Their actions and the way MLK gave speeches, his dedication to a cause and his belief.... helped to educate a populace to vote and to create needed changes. He didn't talk down to anyone, belittle or talk about voters being "ignorant"... The news sources at first portrayed him as a rabble rouser, people laughed at him, government and some churches scorned him calling him a "radical" and trying to defame him..... BUT he stayed the course and changes came. Racist politicians that would never have voted for Civil Rights either did or were voted out of office.
It's the same about Vietnam. The populace became educated and voted in people to end the war. Lennon educated people with his art and voice.
The press always has an agenda, the politicians always have agendas.... BUT THE PEOPLE when educated, when someone stands up and says "ENOUGH" and has the charisma, conviction and faith in his beliefs the people will follow regardless of what their churches, politicians and government say.
There are lots of examples in small cities, states and nationally of people standing up, doing what was needed to educate the voters and changing laws (good and bad).... So again, I say it is easy to sit there and to denigrate the voters, it is easy to cry foul and talk about how bad the media, politicians and government is because the people are "so misinformed".... but those with true belief in their cause, those who have faith in their fellow man and believe that we can and will do better.... those men and women will do whatever it takes to lead people and educate them to help the cause.
|
But how did civil rights changes ultimately come Pan? It certainly wasn't the people that overturned Jim Crow laws. Most of the Jim Crow laws were overturned in front of the supreme court (brown vs board of edu for example) and not by voters who had been enlightened on the issue. JFK when spearheading the Civil Rights act had to appeal to mostly northern congressmen to pass it and met heavy opposition in the process especially from the south. Johnson himself feared the act would be so unpopular that he would lose the southern democrats all together and it probably played a large part in his not seeking a second term. I believe he's quoted after signing the civil rights act as saying "We have lost the south for a generation.". Civil rights weren't brought about just by education and elbow grease alone, it certainly brought the issue to the forefront but ultimately an act of congress was needed as the idea was still very unpopular.
I agree with you in theory Pan but I don't think your stance really reflects our political atmosphere. Lets no forget that history is also filled with examples of people being prone to mass hysteria, public/moral panics, emotions, peer pressure, and bad decision making and this is further exacerbated by a political climate designed to evoke that kind of behavior in the voters. Thats not denigrating voters, calling them ignorant or crying foul its accepting reality. With such a history its perfectly reasonable to question weather or not leaving major issues up to the masses is in the best interest of our country.