« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Labor Refighting the American Civil War

But when major firms move South, it is usually a harbinger of quality decline. Over and over as a labor lawyer in the 1980s and ’90s, I saw companies move away from Chicago, where the pay was $28 an hour, to some place in South Carolina or Louisiana where the pay was about half that….too often, alas, it was the beginning of the end, as it was for Outboard Marine Corporation, where I once represented workers.

– Thomas Geoghegan – Wall Street Journal

As a boy growing up just outside of Richmond, VA, I used to know a few very sad and sorry human beings. I pity these people, because they lived their lives believing in a myth that had died a well-deserved death over a century before. Yet, in their minds and hearts, these people still kept musing “If only Stonewall Jackson had handled himself better on the first day of Gettysburg.”

Today, I still live in the South. In Huntsville, AL, I no longer see people wearing faded-old t-shirts with portraits of Robert E. Lee. However, I picked up the Wall Street Journal and lo and behold, I felt transported back in time to when failed human beings still blamed their circumstances on a war that tore apart America over 100 years ago. Today, I read the words of Chicago Labor Lawyer, Thomas Geoghegan, and imagined him grousing over his bagel. “If only Bobby Lee’s courier hadn’t dropped that battle plan at Sharpsburg. Then we wouldn’t be losing all our high-paying union jobs to that G—D— Johnny Reb!”

Boeing and The National Labor Relations Board have been locked up in a major dispute regarding the rights of The Boeing Company to conduct their business where they see fit to. Boeing has its traditional manufacturing center in the State of Washington. It has built there for decades, and intends to continue so doing. The plant has a capacity of 7 birds per month at full throttle. The boss needs ten airframes per month to meet demand for the Dreamliner Aircraft.

Boeing has anticipated this need and responded by tooling up to manufacture the additional demand in Charleston, SC. This would occur at a pre-existing Boeing Facility that already builds Dreamliner fuselages. Yet according to Thomas Geoghegan, Boeing would be handing off a vital part of our technological base and our national advantage to a tribe of gibbering Cro-Magnons.

Part of the fallacy pitched by the South-Bashers, is to act like all of this started only recently. Then, they pretend further that the new location is just too backwards, uneducated, unmotivated, too…Southern; to properly handle the load. Blogger J. E. Dyer explains how easily debunkable this is with about five minutes of online research.

South Carolina also has a BMW plant, a Honda plant, a Bosch plant, a Caterpillar plant, an American LaFrance plant (fire engines and ambulances), and a Daimler plant, all employing highly-skilled labor to manufacture big, intricate stuff that has to work. That’s in addition to the Milliken, BASF, GE, Core, Bose, BP, DAK, DuPont, Eastman, Mitsubishi, Albemarle, MeadWestvaco, PhilChem, Roche, Mount Vernon Mills, Invista, Metromont, Johns Manville, Alcoa, Kimberly-Clark, Shaw, Jarrett, Mohawk, Anderson, AccuTrex, Sonoco, and Cox Industries plants – and those are just the ones I recognized by industry as I looked through the South Carolina Manufacturers Alliance website.

Walter Russell Mead further pulls back the curtain to reveal what a pathetic, disingenuous pile of bigotry Mr. Geoghegan attempts to peddle on behalf of his labor cartel. He describes what happened when Newsweek actually attempted to rank who had the best public high schools in America.

The results make depressing reading for the teacher unions: the very best public high schools in the country are heavily concentrated in red states. Three of the nation’s ten best public high schools are in Texas — the no-income tax, right-to-work state that blue model defenders like to characterize as America at its worst. Florida, another no-income tax, right-to-work state long misgoverned by the evil and rapacious Bush dynasty, has two of the top ten schools.

And just chest-thumping because Huntsville, AL’s own Sparkman High made the top 1,500 list would only paint a part of the picture. Just how bad are the schools not invited to the top 1,500 list? According to The Detroit Regional Workforce Fund, the following statements are true about the adult population of Detroit, MI.

The National Institute for Literacy estimates that 47 percent of adults in the City of Detroit are functionally illiterate, with staggering rates recorded in some of the suburbs as well: Southfield at 24 percent, Warren at 17 percent and both Inkster and Pontiac at 34 percent illiterate.

Now, someone please explain to me, pace Geoghagen, how moving work away from a region where 50% of the adult population can’t read sends a bad signal to children who want to study engineering? The argument, in general, that companies move south to go cheap on labor costs still holds true. But the argument that the people they hire are all sub-literate morons compared to the capable and dedicated workers you find in Detroit, MI is positively laughable. This begs the question, why are Blue State labor costs so high, if they no longer hold the cognitive advantage that they may have once held back in the 1920s to the 1950s, when American industrial infrastructure built out?

In fairness to both Boeing and to Seattle, WA, a lot of what Thomas Geoghagen argues doesn’t apply. Seattle educates children far better than Detroit, Gary, IN, or Cleveland, OH. Boeing has built at least some FAA-rated components in Charleston, SC for several years. It beats having them built in Australia, Japan, or China. This would be Plan B if the NLRB and Thomas Geoghagen don’t both rapidly dismount from their high horses and stop lying to people.

Geoghagen, the NRLB and the fools I grew up with who still wore Robert E. Lee portrait t-shirts need to realize is that the American Civil War has ended. Continuing to fight it will only accomplish one thing. An entity to be known henceforth as The Wise and Venerable Aerospace Firm Boeing will build all your jets in Shaanxi. They will never be blind or misguided enough to waste their money on American Labor again.

Correction: A.P. Hill, not Stonewall Jackson, had command of the Confederate Cavalry at Gettysburg. (HT: Cheetah)

COMMENTS

  • Cheetah772

    However, Stonewall Jackson’s presence was solely missed by Lee and other generals. Lee felt that he had lost the best general he ever had.

    And let’s face it, we will always re-fight the Civil War every year, nothing new here. The war is over, indeed, but its consequences and ramifications are still felt even today.

    Otherwise, I have no problem with your article. ;)

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      It was AP Hill that missed the chance to recon Seminary Ridge by arriving too late…

  • David Swenk

    Actually both the article and the correction are incorrect. AP Hill was in command of a division in Jackson?s Corps and was elevated to III Corps Commander well after Jackson?s death. He was not in command of the cavalry at Gettysburg, that command was afforded to JEB Stuart and was noticeably absent from Gettysburg until the night of July 2nd leaving Lee blind as to the disposition of the Union army.

    Jackson dies during the battle of Chancellorsville several months before Gettysburg. General Ewell filled in and made a fateful error the night of July 1st not taking Cemetery Hill when it was vulnerable to attack. It is arguable that if Jackson had been at Gettysburg the south would have won as he would not have hesitated like Ewell did. If Jackson had lived, it is entirely conceivable that the confederacy would be alive today. The South did not lose the war at Gettysburg, it was lost at Chancellorsville when Jackson died.

    Just a little note from one of those barely educated southerners who happens to own a Bachelors and Masters degree.

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      So Ewell, not Hill nor Jackson, was the one who let Meade get the elevated terrain.

      • ja_ak

        Close. The Union forces retreated onto the ridges around Gettysburg and began to dig in. Ewell had the opportunity to attack before their defenses were prepared, but chose not to as he thought his troops were spent. After a night of digging in, the Union couldn’t be dislodged.

        • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

          General Johnson thought the same thing after 1st Manassas. He could have possibly taken DC.

          • smagar

            Johnson’s Confederates were as disorganized in victory as McDowell’s Federals were in defeat.

            But, look at it this way, RMJ…your spotty understanding of Civil War history shows how much Southerners have moved on from the Lost Cause.

  • Death_of_the_Donkey

    All the NLRB talk is obscuring another issue with this relocation and that is the roughly $900 million in incentives (ie corporate welfare) that SC is giving to lure this plant. This is a national issue and is essentially a zero sum game nationally where corporations pit states against each other in order to maximize their suck off the taxpayer.

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      they’ll toss Boeing out on their ear and tell them to take hundreds of secure, well-paying jobs elsewhere.

      • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

        They will build elsewhere.

        http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2011/05/06/soviet-style-failed-top-down-planning-in-georgia/?cp=3

        BMW did get incentives to build in my home Spartanburg County many years ago. I think it was a net good deal by far, but I do understand the dilemma. Staes are not nations and have to do things differently.

        But yes RMJ, Obama and the left treats the creation of jobs in Dixie as a de facto unfair labor practice:

        http://www.redstate.com/gamecock/2011/06/03/obama-treats-job-creation-in-the-south-as-de-facto-unfair-labor-practice/

        • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

          “Catch-Up Economics” – The American South has partially subsidized industries to relocate there for a number of years in order to make up for a lot of the historical problems that the Civil War and racial strife caused. This has enabled them to greatly enhance their capital base and more sucessfully compete in modern America. It has also engendered a lot of resentment as it has undermined the cartel support necessary to maintain the so-called “Blue Social Model.”

          http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2010/01/28/american-challenges-the-blue-model-breaks-down/

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
  • Cheetah772

    Okay, this is definitely going off topic, but here goes nothing…

    Even if the South had won at Gettysburg, I seriously doubt that the South could have won the war. One needs to remember that ANV suffered massive losses at Gettysburg, and the South was running out of manpower to replace the losses ANV and other CSA armies suffered during the war. As long the Union kept up its pressure on the South, soon or later, the South was going to crack.

    There are a lot of other factors to consider, but in all, I doubt the South could have won at any point during the entire war,

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      and then won in the court of public opinion. In other words, the Northern anti-war movement could have won big in the 1862 midterms, if US Grant hadn’t been tearing things up west of the Appalachians.

      But then again, people actually believed a CSA win was possible as late as 1863, which would explain why Gen Sherman was once quoted as saying that “The South will only be readmittable to the the Union after at least 300,000 young, Southern men have been killed.” And it’s scary how close he got to killing those 300,000.

    • Doc Holliday

      While I agree a Gettysburg victory in and of itself would not have won the war for the South, they DID have a chance of winning. If they had won and Gettysburg AND got in position to threaten Washington, the Copper Heads could have forced the government to sue for peace.

      People over state the damage Gettysburg did to the ANV, yes they lost many men, but they made it back to Virginia with the army intact, morale still high, and they brought lots of goodies (like miles of wagon trains) from PA. The war continued for two more years, and their was much bloodshed to come.

      Many in the South understood that their only real chance at victory was to defeat Lincoln in the election of 1864. The defeat at Gettysburg, and Grant’s later tenacity in the field, made those prospect dim.

      No doubt the South was always the underdog, but they did have a chance. BTW, funny thing about Gettysburg, the defeat on the 3rd day was not even the worst thing that happened to the Confederacy THAT DAY. The honor goes to the fall of Vicksburg, of course the official surrender was on July 4th.

    • jayjayson

      What is forgotten in all this is that the English almost entered the war at three different times. One of the times was just after the Gettysburg/Vicksburg losses. The English held off siding with the South because they didn’t think we could win. Not too different from what France did in the War of Independence. So a win at Gettysburg could have caused the British to help break the blockade of Southern ports. That could have made a big difference.

      • gburgconservative

        let’s say Jackson had not been killed at Chancellorsville and had taken Culp’s and Cemetary Hills on July 1, 1963. The remnants of the Union First and Eleventh Corps along with the fresh Third Corps would have withdrawn to Meade’s Pipe Creek line (with a solid railroad supply line to their rear) and await Lee’s next move. Lee’s ordnance supply line stretched clear back to Richmond (via wagon). Lee’s options are the same under this scenario as they were historically. Attack or withdraw. If Lee attacks, the results are pretty much the same, large part of the ANV killed or wounded assaulting a prepared position. And aftrewards, he still withdraws.

        Granted, Meade would have benn under tremendous pressure from Washington to attack Lee, but IMHO, Meade is a better General than he’s given credit for and refuses to attack an enemy in a prepared position (Williams port and Mine Run for example.

        Anyway, Vicksburg still falls. Lee still withdraws from Pennsylvania and the south still loses the war.

        • Doc Holliday

          there is quite a bit of knowledge and logic there. Only problem is the “fog of war” thing. I think Lee had a small chance of winning, I mean, he did win a few before and after Gettysburg. He outmaneuvered Grant, even when losing, I think he had a good chance to outmaneuver Meade after a Gettysburg rout.

          People try to place it all on Ewell, but the more one studies Gettysburg, the more “mistakes” are noticed. There were many mistakes made each day, as I am sure you know, Every Corps commander and many division commanders failed at some point in that battle. And yes, I can admit that R.E. Lee shares some of the blame. If any single man deserves the blame, it was Stuart. Lack of intel did the ANV in.

          Meade made a terrible mistake by allowing the ANV to get back into their country intact. Meade was very indecisive, he did not have much imagination, nor audacity. If Lee won the ground at Gettysburg, I would like his chances against Meade one more time.

          to be clear, I agree with the logic of your post, you know a bit about the subject. My only quibble is the inevitability.

          • soljerblue

            Meade’s “terrible mistake” after Gettysburg — and one which upset Lincoln each time it happened during the war, was the failure to quickly pursue the ANV and cut it off north of Virginia. In theory, Lincoln was absolutely right. In reality, however, both armies, Union and Confederate, were fought out and exhausted. If you’re a Meade, or McClellan(after Antietam), that’s a factor in plans to pursue. Additionally, Meade had a number of units in his force whose enlistments expired during or immediately after the Gettysburg fight. Just how disorganized and ‘played out’ both sides were after a Civil War battle is hard to imagine, even for serious students of the time.

            Also, had Meade been pushed out of Gettysburg, and retired to the Pipe Creek Line, he would still have the Army of the Potomac between Lee and Washington. It was something that Lincoln and the administration insisted on throughout the war — protect Washington, regardless of other considerations. The Pipe Creek Line would have been as sure a defensive position as can be had, and the decisions about attack or defense Lee would have had to make remain the same.

            One also has to wonder whether Lincoln under any circumstances would have sued for peace. Personally, given what we know about his intention to preserve the Union, I don’t think that would have happened.

          • Doc Holliday

            but the ANV was in worse shape, in hostile territory, and loaded down with wagon trains of wounded and supplies. Meade did “try” to pursue and cut off the ANV, but he dawdled and lost that contest.

            Northerners and most regular people think of the battle of Gettysburg as a self contained battle, kind of like a football game to be won or lost. But to the Confederates, it was just part of the Pennsylvania Campaign.

            Sure it was the most important part because Lee wanted to destroy the Army of the Potomac. But there were other parts, such as spending time feeding on the enemy’s land, acquiring tons of supplies, allowing Virginia a reprieve, and the magnificent escape back across the Potomac.

            I could argue that Gettysburg “might” have been won, particularly on the 2nd day if the attacks were better coordinated, Hood was not injured, and Ewell had not refused to abandon his position and support attacks on the Union left. That could have happened, and it could have put the ANV between the northern army and Washington. These are possibilities, but they did not occur.

            There is no doubt Gettysburg was the wrong place to fight and Stuart is to blame for that. The union had excellent intelligence on the enemy, the ANV did not. If you run the battle five times, four times you would get a CS loss. Union interior lines and ground were just too good.

            BTW, I agree Lincoln would not sue for peace unless the Army of the Potomac was smashed and the capital in jeopardy. Like I said, the South’s only real chance was to change public opinion in the North against Lincoln and see him defeated at the polls. Of course the invasion of PA did quite the opposite.

          • Doc Holliday

            at this site :)

            A couple one short responses to some of your points I did not get to before.

            1) If many Union troops were soon to be sent home, then that is even more of a reason for Meade to go for the jugular, see Washington at Trenton.

            2) Lee was never after Washington really, he was after the Army of the Potomac. If the Confederates had won at Gettysburg, we can’t extrapolate that Lee would attack an intrenched position simply because of Picket’s Charge. Also, Lee did a pretty good job of protecting Richmond until the end.

            3) I agree Lincoln would not sue for peace. I was trying to say the pressure would be so great to end the fighting, Lincoln’s political position could have become untenable. At least he would be in terrible shape for the next election. Again, The South never dreamed of “taking the North over”, nor by 1863 of destroying all the Northern Armies. The goal was to convince the North that the war was too costly and not worth it. There was always a segment of the Northern populace that did not want to continue the war, see Copperheads, McClellan, New York Draft Riots.

            anyway, nice chatting with everyone about this, I am always open to discussing this subject, we are all learning.

  • lineholder

    Obviously, Geoghegan (as the disgruntled union lawyer he appears to be) wanted to make the case for government intervention.

    “At this moment especially, deep in debt, we cannot afford to let another company like Boeing self-destruct. Boeing is not a product of the free market?it’s an extension of the U.S. government. Over the years, our taxpayers have paid to create a Boeing work force with exceptionally high skills. That work force is not just an asset for Boeing?it’s an asset for the country. Why should the country let Boeing take it apart? Every American should be rooting for the NLRB’s general counsel, as the board itself has not yet found a violation.”

    I like the way Dyer responded. It was a well-articulated set-down if I’ve read one. And did you read the comments to Geoghegan’s article on WSJ? Saying that they weren’t happy about the content of the article is a huge understatement.

    As a native South Carolinian, I’m biased to the utmost in SC’s favor. As someone who worked for over 15 years in the manufacturing industry, I know that there are both automotive-related and aircraft- related manufacturing companies that work on JIT principles. Purchasing of raw mat’ls., production operations, and shipping are closely synchronized to operate on a ‘just in time” production schedule. It’s an inventory control mechanism designed to keep costs low. These schedules don’t leave a lot of leeway for delays. If the producer doesn’t meet customer contract delivery dates, it is possible that the producer will face financial penalties, which decreases their profit margin.

    The unions know this and have known it for years. It’s one of the points that they use as leverage when they plan bargaining strikes.

    Geoghegan’s point about the economy is valid…we are facing some tough times. It is that much more important to keep production moving, especially a business involved in export trade. If businesses can’t rely on union labor to be available so that customer demands can be met, then the business should have every right to move to an area where they can get a workforce that will.

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      A) Boeing were reducing production from the Washington State facility.
      B) Boeing had not already been producing in Charleston, SC
      C) If this were 1950, and South Carolina’s problems were much worse and more profound than they are today.

      Such is not the case, so I felt he was fighting a rear-guard action against an inevitability.

  • jeffstag

    47%..I’ve heard that figure before and every time I do it just boggles my mind…litterly boggles my mind. There are few things that do that.

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      However, for many centuries, much of Europe did.

      • davesinsanantonio

        the rest of the country. It should be allowed to die as any other failure should.
        As for Europe, those days were before the rise of the middle class, and it could be argued they they were not “functioning” well either, they were just scraping by. It was when the workforce began to be educated that the industrial revolution could take off, because the workers could read instructions, do the required math the set up complex machinery, etc. Yes, there were days when illiterates could operate machines by doing rote procedures, but those days are long gone in American manufacturing. The simple repeat jobs are now done by robots. It still takes an educated workforce to actually run the factory.
        The fact that in many places in the South the schools have been improved, while many of the schools in the North have actually gone downhill, gives the lie to the canard that all Southerners are too stupid to do factory work. But, that will not stop the Libs from repeating it endlessly.

      • radicalrighty

        in a Muslum-ruled country. Think Rwanda, Sudan, Lebanon, etc.

        • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack
        • BA Cyclone

          This was a good diary entry from a short while back.

          http://www.redstate.com/mailloux/2010/06/23/amerabia/

        • BA Cyclone

          This was a good diary entry from a short while back.

          http://www.redstate.com/mailloux/2010/06/23/amerabia/

          • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

            He figured that if he brought in lots of Muslims, they would be good, docile workers and he could get them to put up w/ more crap off the corporation. Interesting how that has seemingly backfired.

          • jeffstag

            Are you sure there? I’m under the impression that arab immigration into Dearborn didn’t really get under way until the late 1960′s and early 1970′s. The Dearborn of Henry Ford’s time was almost universally white (Dearborn had a well known under the table segragation policy).

          • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

            According to a historian of Dearborn’s Muslim Community.

            http://search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0oGdXGcSwJOzXgAOTdXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEzMzZyc2hvBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMTEEY29sbwNzazEEdnRpZANINDY2Xzgw/SIG=1259pfi6a/EXP=1308794876/**http%3a//www.patrickbelton.com/dearborn_article.pdf

            And Ford didn’t preferentially bring them there. They came of their own voalition because Ford offered better wages than similar employers.

  • http://www.thehayride.com MacAoidh

    …and it shows how far into the toilet the union movement has gone.

    Unions and government regulations have driven manufacturing jobs to China, Korea and India – where populations were far worse educated than South Carolinians. Quality control didn’t seem to suffer then – are we to infer that he believes South Carolinians are dumber than Chinese peasants when manufacturing took off then?

    Disgusting. The time for giving these people the time of day is past.

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      Than in modern Mississippi. EADS builds the Lakota Helicopter there in a very modern, state-of-the-art facility. It would be very challenging to do that in about 80% on China or India at the present time.

  • Doc Holliday

    there is nothing wrong with remembering great men like Robert E. Lee. I also remember great warriors like Grant, and George Thomas, the Rock of Chickamauga. But I do hold a special respect for Lee because of the man he was, I do not apologize for that.

    BTW, Jackson did as well as can be expected during the first day of Gettysburg. He was well to the South though, and did not move much.

  • Doc Holliday

    He was the commander of the 3rd Corps, Army of Northern Virginia. I have an idea, stop with the history lesson (cough) and stick to the union thing.

  • chuckwagon2u

    Interesting article. Labor needs to get a handle on life. Boeing can just as easily partner with China and build all their stuff in other countries.
    That little triangle in S.C. with all those big name indusrties are there for a reason. Mabe it is a quality of life not found in Chicago. I am sure there at least a few wearing the Union Label.

    Those of us who were born in the South will be cast as barefoot ignorant White Trash through out eternity since our region lost its battle for States Rights. It really doesn’t matter what those nice people say about us. I would still rather raise my kids in S.C. than in Chicago.

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      You totally nailed something there. The big industrial cities are getting to be steadily unliveable. All the South really has to do to accelerate the movement of business from these traditional centers is keep crime and smut from becomming too rampant. Get rid of the so-called “Dirty South”, and you have a huge advantage over the average American city.

  • rightwingmom52

    of another great Democratic spokeswoman who said we don’t know how to build anything in Alabama. The comments to this story are priceless, especially the one from our then Governor Bob Riley who said:

    “Surely Senator Murray was just misquoted because it would be absolutely absurd for anyone to say something so ridiculous. Alabama is, after all, the home of automobile plants, aerospace and defense companies, the rocket that took man to the moon, and many of the same companies that Senator Murray represents.”

    http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2009/12/good_thing_patty_murray_doesnt.php

    On a personal note, I had occasion to run headlong into bias against the South recently. While on a snorkeling trip on vacation a couple of weeks ago, one of the fellow travelers had on a Jack Daniels cap from Lynchburg, TN. Having grown up in middle TN, I asked her if she was from that area. She replied that a friend had sent her the hat and went on to say that she was a little scared of the South, having heard that there are some rednecks there. I laughed it off and advised her in my best “Bless Your Heart” tone just not to insult our mamas or our cooking. Then she had the audacity to ask if we still fly the “colors.” At that point, I was ticked, looked her squarely in the eye and replied that yes, in some areas a few still do, but that most of us really do cling to our guns and religion. I was totally caught off guard, but she did shut up the rest of the trip. I hope my statement was sufficient enough to make sure she went back to where she came from and stays there. I hope she never sets foot in that wonderful, charming, hospitable, magical place we call home, a/k/a the South.

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      People will deny they harbor bias unto to death. But yes, the bigotry still exists. It .eminds me of Gamecock’s comment. Reconstruction wasn’t/

  • tallcharlie

    “…a myth that had died a well-deserved death over a century before.”

    RMJ,
    Are you referring to the “myth” of states’ rights?
    Are you referring to the “myth” of private property rights?
    Are you referring to the “myth” that the States are sovereign and independent?
    Are you referring to the “myth” that the Federal government was created to serve the states?
    Are you referring to the “myth” that the Federal government was subservient to the states, not the other way round?
    Are you referring to the “myth” that the bicameral Legislative Branch was intended to represent the states as well as the people?
    Are you referring to the “myth” of equal representation under the law?
    Are you referring to the “myth” of the right of secession?
    Are you referring to the “myth” of right of nullification?
    Are you referring to the “myth” of the Constitution?

    Just exactly what “myth” are you referring to? Or do you know?

    Whatever the “myth,” at least you made an effort to be politically correct.

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      That you are personally entitled to the labor of another person without having to compensate them from the performance of that labor. Slavery.

  • tallcharlie

    Generally speaking, in the United States, the violent crime rate of an area can be estimated by the percentage of black population.

    This is not to either say or imply that there is something inherently “wrong” with the black race, but to point out the undeniable fact that there is friction between the various cultures, the black subculture in America being the biggest and most influential.

    The Federal government has recognized the existence of the “ghetto” culture, and has studied it in depth. Government studies are available on the web. Their conclusion is that this subculture tends to promote violence, both inter- and intra-racial.

    Anyone wishing to verify these assertions need only refer to the FBI annual report on Crime in the United States, and the DoJ reports on Victimization. The problem is that whenever anyone notes a problem that seems to exist between the races, or can be related to racial differences, that person is invariably accused of racism.

    Now, the bottom line: the state population percentages of blacks in the old South far exceed those found in the North or West. Yet the crime rates in the South have historically been lower than comparable areas in the North, i.e., in the cities. The reason for this, IMHO, is that blacks and whites in the South have had a couple of centuries more experience living side by side than have folks in other parts of the country. Not always peacefully, but not in the manner described by the “myths” of the KKK or Uncle Tom’s Cabin, either.

    Fools (a.k.a. liberals and progressives) often point to other nations and cultures as being examples the US should follow: Japan, Switzerland, the Scandinavian countries, even Australia. What they fail to note is that the populations of these examplars are very close to being homogeneous, of a single, voluntarily-adaped and conforming culture.

    What’s the point of this post? Simply to note that what some perceive as “bias” others will understand to be an unadorned statement of demographic fact.

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      have to do with the labor lawyer from Chicago being full of used food?

      • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

        An answer to the above comment will be required.

    • streiff

      that it is race rather than socioeconomic class that predicts crime. Because most data demonstrates quite the opposite.