?

Log in

Godzilla, default

June 2017

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930 

Click 'em, you know you wanna

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Godzilla, default

Elljayland Hilarity:

Currently in round II of a set of discussions with a certain person on LJ who has a track record of distorting other people's words and also with some strongly a-historical arguments. In this case this person wants to argue that Baby Boomers made the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s happen. I can simply and effectively debunk this with a simple matter of chronology: assuming the Boomers start in 1945/6 (which is the timeframe my father was born in, incidentally), then for them to be active in the Little Rock and Montgomery era would mean a mass white Children's Crusade happened out of thin air and was covered up. The claim that the Freedom Riders and likeminded groups were the start of that movement is an obnoxious part of white progressive rhetoric that never made sense to me even when I was actually in high school. As someone working on a Master's in history, if I'm going to be lectured by some person who's in the Boomer generation about how the 1960s movements happened out of a vacuum and that 1955 was led by children, I do not have any respect for said person's credibility.

It's about as bad as seeing David Neiwert and Sara Robinson argue against fascism on the one hand and then dedicate an entire post to explaining how Woodrow Wilson, a dogmatic, authoritarian asshole at home was not in actual fact a dogmatic, racist, authoritarian asshole of the very sort that site claims to condemn on a regular basis. Under L does not like being treated as a kid by someone who lived through a movement who doesn't understand the iron logic of chronology.

Comments

IIRC, the Civil Rights movement had roots going back to the thirties at least right?
I'm thinking of the Scottsboro Boys trial. And Ida B. Wells of course.
Boomers are self centered twits. They were the blight of my teens and twenties.
If you wanted to get really technical, it has roots all the way back to 1866 in the person of people like Frederick Douglass and William Lloyd Garrison, whose struggles for equality didn't end with emancipation (albeit Garrison was pretty much alone in the abolitionist crowd where this was concerned). The mid-20th Century movement benefited more from the legacy of WWII in an organizational sense and also A. Philip Randolph winning one of the first major victories during WWII. In fact, if we want to stretch the chronology further, one of the very first clashes over Civil Rights was during the Civil War when USCT men struck over not being paid equal to white soldiers, an issue that unfortunately began with that war.
Wouldn't boomers born in 45/46 be late teens or early 20s in the 60s?
Yes, but not at the time when the modern Civil Rights movement was getting into swing in the mid-1950s and scoring its first major, significant successes. Hence why Paft's point was nonsense.
I am a boomer, born in '59--but I did build a time machine and went back and assisted at the birth of Martin Luther King.

Um. Except I didn't. Neither did any of my classmates or siblings. Or cousins!

As you inow, I did not say that...

"Baby Boomers made the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s happen."

And as for misrepresenting you:

Did you or did you not say:

Yes, I loathe the people who marched in favor of Nixon, Goldwater and the war, I loathe the people who agitated for the Soviets and the Great Leap Forward, I really loathe hippies (because of family issues, which again unlike some people I don't think has any business in the Internet in general because the Internet is a public place where damn near anyone can read it). I do loathe a generation that whined, bitched, and moaned its way from childhood to now when they're the ones screwing my generation over so they can subsist on the system that their grandparents and parents made. Yes, I despise them. However there is some good in any generation. Not in this one, however, as again everything they were credited for was done and done effectively before they started tearing up areas like Chicago and shouting "Ho Ho Ho Chih Minh, NLF is gonna win" and "Hey, Hey LBJ, How many kids did you kill today?". Again, kindly think before you post.

Did you or did you not say that the children of the GI generation "didn't do jack shit to defeat Jim Crow."

That is what I take issue with. And if any of your little friends here from the board want to defend this kind of garbage, I'd like to see them do it.

Re: As you inow, I did not say that...

Yes, I did say that.

Did you not ask an and/or question and then lied through your teeth about what you'd actually said to hammer in a point that had nothing to do with what I asked, directly insulting the people you're talking to the whole time (as I'm not the only one you've done that to, it's a standard order in your posting style).

And frankly put, they didn't do jack shit to defeat it. Not in the Army, where this was done years before most of them were even hard-ons in their old man's briefs, not in the 1950s, when they would have to be children. The 1960s were the culmination of what had gone before, a movement founded by blacks and led by blacks. Yes, people were horrifically murdered on the side of right, no that doesn't have anything to do with their getting credit for what they did not do.

This is nothing but Jeff's argument that Obama for condemning condemnation of Islam was expressing approval of mob murder. Same logical leaps.

I explained after that that my distaste for the Boomers is connected to 21st Century politics and the Tea Party movement which is of them, by them, for them, so they can cheat the system and screw my generation over.

But if you're going to engage in blatant lies here, I'm going to give you a little more room to post before resorting to the inevitable.