Carrol
The reason the Civil-Rights slogans were so clear and precise is that they were all cliches that had been taken for granted by the white population for a century or two. They became much less clear as soon as the movement went beyond the destruction of the legal foundations of southern segregation. An anti-Lynch law unfortunately could not touch the lynching of Troy Davis. Nor could that rhetoric do much when it reached Chicago, where Mayor Daley had no trouble whatever in chasing King from town. In any case "civil" rights stretch no further than the workings of bourgeois democracy: they represent an the abstract equality of citizenship in the bourgeois republic. They are not substantive.
Carrol
On 10/15/2011 3:45 PM, Joseph Catron wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Doug Henwood<dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
>
> I'll bracket the "rights" talk but the fight for full civil equality is a
>> very specific demand, kind of like our own civil rights movement, and not
>> like that other airy-fairy stuff that James quoted.
>>
>
> Yeah, but the airy-fairy stuff has specific rights attached to it. The fact
> that political rhetoric is cringe-inducing doesn't mean there's nothing of
> substance behind it. It may just mean you're not the target audience. ;-)
>