Maybe the first generation of segregationists were slave holders, or descendants of them, but in the 1950's, segregationists weren't slave holders.
One white supremicist who wanted to start an all white town who has been in the news recently is part black acording to a genetic test, so his ancestors probably weren't all slaveowners.
Why? Revenge? Forcing your way? If a restaurant owner didn't want to have blacks eat there, he'd be ostracised.
The reason I am writing this is because legislation that was meant to prevent racial discrimination and discrimination based on gender is being twisted to give special protection to people who engage in sexual perversion or have an identity that is related to sexual perversion. .
The 1950's segregationists were the grandchildren of the traitors who had to beaten down by force in the 1860s. By the 1950s, the broader set of issues that drove the Civil War had distilled down to one thing: oppression of blacks. Whatever their grandfathers had THOUGHT they were fighting for, the people of the 1950s, and 1960s, and today, who continue to fight for the right to discriminate against blacks, do so out of hatred, and do so out of a bitter-ender "we will never be defeated" mindset. They're the grandchildren of Nazis who refuse to let go.
They weren't slaveholders in the 1950s, they were people forcing blacks to the back of the bus, erecting white's only drinking fountains, turning lose the dogs and tear gas on equal rights marchers, and provoking the President to send federal troops in to desegregate schools.
The part-black guy who wants to start a whites only town is part black because his black grandmother slave ancestor was raped by a white master.
There is no right to have a whites only town on American soil. It will be stopped. If one is stood up, the police forces will break it, federal authorities will seize property. Whites have no right to set up whites only towns on American soil. That right was lost forever in the deaths of the civil war, the endless resistance of the racists, the riots that burned cities. We have had enough white racist imbecility in this country. Now we respond to it with force.
Why?
Revenge?
Yes, that is certainly part of it. Absolutely. Why do the white racists remain stubborn in their evil and stupidity? Satan? Well, Satan cost a million Americans their lives, and millions more their liberty, on this one issue. The racists forced us onto the battlefield, and they killed us in very large numbers. They lost their right to exist on our soil. If they cannot abide by it, they should leave America. America does not tolerate their beliefs, and will make a special point of crushing them by force, wherever they pop up. We oppress anti-black racists for the same reason that Germans today oppress Neo-Nazis, the French oppress anti-Semites, and the Japanese oppress militarist nationalists: weakness in our national makeup leads each of these nations towards a particular form of evil, and that form of evil caused those nations to shed oceans of blood in recent history on just that issue. The evil had to be forced down by military force, and we are not going to let it get up again. And we're going to punish any idiot now who refuses to accept the correct judgment of history and stands up to fight for THAT cause again.
But yes, revenge. Forcing our way. This issue was fought out on the battlefield. My side won, at the cost of a half million dead people. We're not going to forget that, particularly not since the losers did not relent in their hellbent determination to hold down the former slaves, so in our own lifetimes we have had to experience race riots in our cities, not because of slavery of old, but because of the segregation and redlining and refusal to build proper schools and every other stubborn enforcement of racism by the side that lost. So in our lifetimes - mine anyway - Mississippi burned, and Detroit, and Watts - and that is because the losing side did not give up on their racism and determination to segregate. We still bear the legacy of their resistance to doing what's right. So continuing to force our way is very important. It is imperative that the racists understand who is master, and it is not them, not anymore. They need to continue to be beaten and forced to do what they hate, against their will, so that it gnaws at them every day. Their children and their grandchildren, the new generations, will see the price they bear for their hatred, and will see how society punishes it, and they will not be tempted, for the most part, to follow their parents and grandparents down the rathole of stupid, stubborn racism. But some will go there, and those we will apply the law to, very publicly, to make examples that instruct everybody else. The racists kept the slaves in line by making examples, and that is the way that we keep the racists in line also. Since they won't change their minds, they are publicly pilloried, to influence the minds of others. It is very effective. There is far less white-on-black racism in America than there was when I was young. I see that tide rolling out, and think it is a great victory. But I recognize that the victory was won over a 150 year period by first defeating the racists on the battlefield, and then holding the threat of armed might over their heads (and from time to time using the might of the FBI and federal prosecutors on their heads). They won't change their minds, but they can be terrorized into changing their behavior. Their stubbornness has made it such that the only way that works is force and threats of force.
And because of all of the harm they inflicted in the past and would inflict in the present, the victors - who really do hate the racists every bit as much as the racists hate the blacks - are more than happy to beat them into submission and keep doing it.
When they fired on Fort Sumter in 1861, they started a fight that is still going on. Neither side gives the other any quarter. And that will continue until their side is all dead and gone. That idea cannot be allowed to live on American soil. Three centuries of damage is enough. The laws now are designed to act as a sort of roach motel: they FORCE the racists to serve black patrons, thereby causing them to do stupid things - like take a stand and deny black people service: then we shut them down and leave them poorer and weaker in a society based on money, or stupider things - like join the Klan: then they get on lists and can never hold government jobs or high-paying jobs, sliding further down the economic scale and unable to get out; or insanely stupid things - like shooting people: then we kill them.
They're resolute in their racism and hatred. And so are we. But we have won continuously since 1865, and we are much smarter than them. We'll continue oppressing them. Anti-Black racism has a big "Wrong Way" sign on it. It is enforced. It will be enforced. it's not a matter of free speech. Given our particular history, it is a matter of keeping the peace and of national integrity. If you have to hate black people, you have no place in America. You cannot fit in here. Leave.
Now then, the black-white issue is the ONLY issue like that in our history. The Indians were treated badly, but in a different way, and were not so numerous. And once they gave up, they were not maliciously pursued through the centuries the way blacks have been. America has a bad conscience about the Indians, we knew we did bad and we admitted it, so we've tried to not keep doing it. With the blacks, though, it was illegal for whites and blacks to marry into 1967 in some places. America's evil is thickly entrenched, and has had to be ripped out by force. Every black person in America born before 1964 lived in country that was formally segregated in much of its territory. This is not ancient history.
I agree with you that extending the particular case of aggressive civil rights legislation regarding blacks to cover gays is ridiculous. It is, likewise, ridiculous to pretend that Hispanics, or any other minority (hang an asterisk on the American Indian case) was ever treated as consistently viciously, for so long, as the blacks. Homosexual behavior is a squidgy business, but it is also private activity. Being black is visible, and there's nothing morally questionable about it. They don't stand on the same plane. Gays do not all descend from slaves. Their DNA is not replete with centuries of rape. They were the cause of a civil war and a civil rights movements. Nobody made gays move to the back of the bus. Homosexual behavior is a private activity, not an inevitably exposed public trait.
Homosexuality stands along side of Pedophilia - two forms of sexual deviancy that the society does not like. We have moderated our stance on the one, but have not liberalized our view on the others.
Being black isn't deviant at all.
The gay rights activists, and other activists, have made a lot of ground equating gays to blacks, but it is ridiculous as a matter of facts. Unfortunately, people don't like to speak blunt truths. There is a difference between the oppression of 13% of your population based on their region of origin versus oppressing 1% of your population based on sexual deviancy. And we don't oppress the gays for having sex because, quite unlike the racists against blacks, we considered the situation and decided that we were wrong to oppress people based on their private activity. But the racists will go on hating blacks NO MATTER WHAT.
So we beat them down, and it is right and just to do so.
It isn't really right and just to pretend that gays are like blacks in our history. They aren't. But there's so much political power in doing so that unless that movement is addressed by power, it will continue to advance. The impending Supreme Court decision, when the court decides whether or not a Christian baker has to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple, will decide what direction the country will go.