The backlash to the backlash theory has some merit. It’s true that civil rights tend to be granted to minorities when it benefits the majority. It becomes a political expedient to grant them, in order to stay in power. But the difficulty is in bringing the majority round to the view that granting the rights is indeed of benefit to them. And that can take ages and much energy and dedication. In the meantime there is, as you say, the sad inevitability of seeing the worst in people being spelled out.
To my (admittedly not American eyes) there are a couple of significant differences between Brown vs The Board of Education, which is the finding of the Courts, and the law in Virginia. The Brown case was a positive judgment, which resulted in a negative backlash (the picture you mentioned illustrates this), which then triggered a positive backlash.
On the other hand, I think the Virginia legislation can only be characterised as negative. There may well be a backlash to it (and even here we’ve seen some of the demonstrations against other Bush legislative initiatives, relating to late termination in pregnancy…another minefield of worrying decision-making), but the fact that it is enshrined in law makes it a harder obstacle to overcome. And in the meantime, peoples’ natural rights will be denied.
It’s incredibly worrying when the legislature is used to legitimise inequity. As I’ve mentioned on westmoon’s LJ, it’s the trend in government here too, with the Govt proposing to enshrine in legislation the meaning of ‘marriage’ as being ‘between a man and a woman’. Apparently this is to ‘reaffirm a bedrock of understanding in our society’. Right.
The world is a scary place, after all.
Lol – potterstinks indeed! I have been checking into the ‘Net more times this weekend than I ever have before, solely due to NA. I’m caught, and I’m definitely wibbling.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-05-01 08:15 pm (UTC)The backlash to the backlash theory has some merit. It’s true that civil rights tend to be granted to minorities when it benefits the majority. It becomes a political expedient to grant them, in order to stay in power. But the difficulty is in bringing the majority round to the view that granting the rights is indeed of benefit to them. And that can take ages and much energy and dedication. In the meantime there is, as you say, the sad inevitability of seeing the worst in people being spelled out.
To my (admittedly not American eyes) there are a couple of significant differences between Brown vs The Board of Education, which is the finding of the Courts, and the law in Virginia. The Brown case was a positive judgment, which resulted in a negative backlash (the picture you mentioned illustrates this), which then triggered a positive backlash.
On the other hand, I think the Virginia legislation can only be characterised as negative. There may well be a backlash to it (and even here we’ve seen some of the demonstrations against other Bush legislative initiatives, relating to late termination in pregnancy…another minefield of worrying decision-making), but the fact that it is enshrined in law makes it a harder obstacle to overcome. And in the meantime, peoples’ natural rights will be denied.
It’s incredibly worrying when the legislature is used to legitimise inequity. As I’ve mentioned on westmoon’s LJ, it’s the trend in government here too, with the Govt proposing to enshrine in legislation the meaning of ‘marriage’ as being ‘between a man and a woman’. Apparently this is to ‘reaffirm a bedrock of understanding in our society’. Right.
The world is a scary place, after all.
Lol – potterstinks indeed! I have been checking into the ‘Net more times this weekend than I ever have before, solely due to NA. I’m caught, and I’m definitely wibbling.