DEAR EDITOR:
Mr. Meier, when the Trent Lott dust-up first broke, I spent 20
minutes researching Dixiecrats on the Internet so I could judge the
various media stories.
DEAR EDITOR:
Mr. Meier, when the Trent Lott dust-up first broke, I spent 20 minutes researching Dixiecrats on the Internet so I could judge the various media stories. I get the impression from your “Tell a Bigot to Shut Up” article that you could not be bothered to do any research at all. Bigotry was apparently sufficient to fill in numerous gaps in your factual knowledge.
In 1948, Democrat Strom Thurmond led a splinter party called the Dixiecrats away from the Democratic party to protest federal infringement of state’s rights. The particular issue was a federal anti-lynching law, which has since led leftists like yourself to characterize the Dixiecrats as segregationist.
Racism was the wedge issue being used at the time to undermine public support for state’s rights just as drugs was the wedge issue used to eliminate posse comitatus protections and smoking is the wedge issue now being used to revolutionize liability law.
Strom Thurmond and Trent Lott, also a former Democrat, have repudiated racial politics and become Republicans. Sen. Robert Byrd, a former KKK member, still participates in racist politics in the Democratic party.
The state’s rights issue is now moot since, under current law, the states have few, if any, rights and are essentially administrative districts subordinate to the federal government. However, I would like to share with you the reasons why some populists like myself thought state’s rights worth defending.
There are two justifications for the importance of state sovereignty, one legalistic and one practical. The legalistic reason is, of course, that the Constitution defines a voluntary federation of sovereign states. Federal infringement of state sovereignty is a violation of the Constitution. Since the Constitution is now held in minimal regard, I mention this only as a matter of interest.
The practical reason is that a multi-level governmental structure increases the ability of the people to resist tyranny. One of the main reasons that the American Revolution was successful was that it was led by colonial legislatures that were able to organize logistical support for the revolutionary army. They collected taxes and used them to buy food, clothing, and weapons to maintain the army in the field.
One of the depressing aspects of the Bolshevik communist conquest of Russia is the image of thousands of spontaneous peasant revolts with much the same goals as American rebels being individually massacred by one of the most brutal regimes in history because they did not have any unifying organization like America’s colonial legislatures. The Red Army was repeatedly able to disrupt the local agricultural economy, accept the surrender of starving rebels, and kill them all.
Mr. Meier, I do not support racism or racial politics in favor of any group. But there are things that are worse than racism. Even if a centralized, authoritarian federal government is able to eliminate racism, which I do not see happening, your children and mine may one day bitterly regret the lack of strong state governments to counter federal tyranny.
I hope I’m wrong.
Stuart Allen, Gilroy
Submitted Monday, Jan. 6 to ed****@ga****.com
