George Mason University's
History News Network
share

Will the current outrage in Montgomery provoke a modern civil rights movement against eminent domain through the back door? It certainly should.

On Wednesday in Montgomery, developer Jim Peera displayed this map as part of his testimony at a public forum of the State Advisory Committee (which I chair) of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. The pins show buildings demolished by the city of Montgomery in 2008. As you can see, the vast majority are concentrated in one area which just so happens to be heavily black and low-income. Ironically, the area included the apartment of Rosa Parks.

Typically, the city will designate a building as"blighted" or a"nuisance," sometimes using a subjective and arbitrary standard, as in the Jimmy McCalll case. It then bills the owner for the demolition costs. Because many of these owners are poor, they will either have to abandon their land or sell it at a high discount to either a private developer or the city. Even when they can afford demolition, taxes, and other costs, the city has repeatedly destroyed the current or best use of the land by changing the zoning designation to single-family housing. The result is the same: abandonment of the land or sale at bargain-basement prices.

Unlike conventional eminent domain, the owner under eminent domain through the back door has no right to compensation from the city, even in theory.

Saturday, August 15, 2009 - 09:28
Comments
share
The word is slowly getting out about my book (co-authored by Linda Beito), Black Maverick: T.R.M. Howard's Fight for Civil Rights and Economic Power. John J. Miller has interviewed us for the National Review:

‘While historians have properly acknowledged the contributions of clergymen and grassroots activists” to the civil-rights movement, write David T. Beito and Linda Royster Beito, “they have too often neglected those made by entrepreneurs and black professionals.” The Beitos’ new book — Black Maverick: T. R. M. Howard’s Fight for Civil Rights and Economic Power — begins to set the record straight.
For the rest, see here .
Saturday, August 15, 2009 - 09:26
Comments
share
This video shows some of the more obvious contradictions between his past and present statements on this issue.

Tuesday, August 11, 2009 - 16:47
Comments
share
Mark Bauerlein just reviewed my book, co-authored by Linda Royster Beito, Black Maverick: T.R.M. Howard's Fight for Civil Rights and Economic Power. Fortunately, he seems to like it! Here is an excerpt:

Howard drove Cadillacs and Buicks, wore fancy clothes, and loved guns and big-game hunting. He praised free enterprise with a Booker T. Washington fervor, believing entrepreneurs to be better agents of change than activists. He once sighed for “one bomb that could be fashioned that would blow every Communist in America right back to Russia where they belong.” A flamboyant Second Amendment, anti-communist capitalist doesn’t please journalists and historians searching for civil-rights martyrs.

“Black Maverick,” though, makes room for exactly such a figure, and rightly so. That Howard made an important contribution is unquestionable.

Friday, August 7, 2009 - 02:24
Comments
share
The question of the Free State of Jones in Mississippi, which, according to some, represented a secessionist (or quasi-secessionist) movement against the CSA, has lately generated a debate among historians. Ralph Luker over at Cliopatria discusses the ongoing dispute between Victoria Bynum, the author of The Free State of Jones (UNC Press, 2001) and Sally Jenkins and John Stauffer, the authors of The State of Jones.
Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 10:41
Comments
share
Of course, I am a biased observer but I think that my co-author, Linda Royster Beito, did a superb job in this interview on Chicago Public Radio about our book, Black Maverick: T.R.M. Howard's Fight for Civil Rights and Economic Power.
Thursday, July 30, 2009 - 09:17
Comments
share
As I have said here over the past week, the crux of the matter in the Gates case is that every citizen has a right to argue with a cop. In this superb article, civil libertarian Harvey Silverglate (who has worked closely with the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) puts forward this view in far more eloquent terms:

It is not yet entirely clear whether there was a racial element to the initial decision by a woman on the street—working for Harvard Magazine, no less!—to call the police, although that is looking unlikely. It remains disputed whether Sergeant Crowley treated Professor Gates any differently than he would treat a white citizen in the same position. (In fact, if one accepts Crowley’s claim that he dished out to Gates equal treatment under the law, this case stands as a dire warning to all citizens as to the dangers inherent in exercising one’s constitutional right to free speech when in an exchange with a police officer—but more on that below.)
Hat tip, Anthony Gregory.
Thursday, July 30, 2009 - 09:53
Comments
share
This perceptive comment from the blog, Whatever It Is, I’m Against It, comes courtesy of Chris Bray at Cliopatria:

In their conversation, Sgt. Crowley complained to Obama that the press have been coming onto his lawn. Yes, isn’t it annoying when people come uninvited onto your property?
Sunday, July 26, 2009 - 17:57
Comments
share
Instead of racializing the Gates arrest (without any specific evidence that race played a role) at his earlier press conference, Obama should have simply condemned it as wrong to arrest anyone for the act of arguing with a policeman even if it is part of official "protocol." Any search on youtube will reveal countless videos showing both blacks and whites arrested or tased for nothing more than questioning an officer. Now, with Obama's non-apology apology, a great opportunity has been lost to challenge the growing trend of police abuse against people of all races.

Of course, had Obama done this, it might also interfere with the discretion of federal law enforcement officers under his authority to do the same thing.

Friday, July 24, 2009 - 15:39
Comments
share
To view the arrest of Henry Louis Gates solely in terms of race is to miss a larger point. As with the Denver policemen who pulled a gun for faster service at McDonald's, the Gates incident may also reflect a general trend by law enforcement officals (and others in government) to abuse their power. More ominously, and little publicized, has been the sharp rise in the number of citizen deaths by taser at the hands of cops.

Thursday, July 23, 2009 - 11:14
Comments
share
I voted for Bob Barr but with great reluctance. I could barely get enough energy to check the box by his name. This news makes feel better about my decision. Barr has praised a recent vote by Congress to repeal his amendment from 1998 which prohibited the District of Columbia from legalizating medical marijuana.

“While I in fact sponsored the initial appropriations limitation in 1998, the years since then have witnessed such a dramatic increase in federal government power and an unprecedented decrease in individual liberty, especially since 2001, that I have come to realize that such limitations as the so-called “Barr Amendment” are not and cannot be justified. It has become necessary to reevaluate the power of the federal government that I and others once were able or willing to justify, and do what we can to roll back the tide of government control."
Monday, July 20, 2009 - 18:49
Comments
share
What did the Confederate States of America do when faced with a possible secession movement? Lake all states, of course, it brutally suppressed it. The rebels in the legendary"Free State of Jones" in Mississippi (the subject of a new book by Sally Jenkins and John Stauffer) may, or may not, have been secessionists in a formal sense but they were against the CSA.

Had Lincoln let a weak Gulf Coast CSA secede in 1861, sans Virginia, North Carolina, Tennesse, and Arkansas, it would have been extremely vulnerable to internal rebellions of this type both by dissident whites and slaves.

Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 13:41
Comments
share
If you have any friends who have faith in the comparative competence of the federal government over the free market, show them this:

Thursday, July 16, 2009 - 20:28
Comments
share
No such luck but this quotation from Obama's Africa tour has to win this week's prize for unintended irony:
"No business wants to invest in a place where the government skims 20 percent off the top."
Monday, July 13, 2009 - 13:20
Comments
share

This is the second in a series of photos relating to my book (co-authored by Linda Royster Beito), Black Maverick: T.R.M. Howard Fight for Civil Rights and Economic Power (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009).

The book is about the civil rights leader, self-help champion, entrepreneur, and surgeon, T.R.M. Howard.

In addition to being one of the wealthiest blacks in Mississippi, and a mentor to the likes of Medgar Evers and Fannie Lou Hamer, Howard had a reputation of as America's"greatest black big gamehunter" and led safaris to Africa, India, and Alaska. In this picture, taken in his Chicago office about a year before his death, some of his trophies are prominently displayed.

For the other photos (some of which do not appear in the book), see here.

Monday, July 6, 2009 - 13:34
share

This is the first in a series of photos relating to my book (co-authored by Linda Royster Beito), Black Maverick: T.R.M. Howard Fight for Civil Rights and Economic Power (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009).

The book is about the civil rights leader, self-help champion, entrepreneur, and surgeon, T.R.M. Howard.

Pictured above is Howard, then a Republican candidate for Congress in Chicago, as he meets with Eisenhower on the eve of the 1958 election.

For the other photos (some of which do not appear in the book, see here.

Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 17:11
share
Rand or Rothbard couldn't have done a better job. This speech has it all for libertarians. It comes from a character in Elia Kazan's film Wild River (1960), who is fighting a land grab by the Tennessee Valley Authority.

Delivered beautifully by actress Jo Van Fleet, the speech blasts FDR's New Deal, governmental relief, and power-hungry politicians. Most of all, it eloquently defends property rights.

Van Fleet is so effective in the role that she largely undermines the pro-New Deal message in the rest of the film.

Monday, June 22, 2009 - 19:24
Comments
share
Over at our HNN sister blog, Cliopatria, Chris Bray calls attention to what looks to be a fascinating new book (which I promptly added to my reading list) by Robert H. Churchill: To Shake Their Guns in the Tyrant's Face: Libertarian Political Violence and the Origins of the Militia Movement. According to Bray,
Churchill writes that New Deal progressives, offended and frightened by vitriolic far-right opposition to the New Deal, launched"a systematic campaign of public condemnation and state repression." Private liberal organizations"initiated the collection of dossiers on leading figures of the Far Right," while the FDR administration and J. Edgar Hoover's FBI undertook an effort that led to the conviction of dozens of right-wing figures on sedition charges. (Hoover even maintained a" custodial detention index" of right-wing figures.)

Hat tip Jonathan Dresner.

Sunday, June 21, 2009 - 08:53
Comments
share
Jesse Walker has a thoughtful article over at Reason on the new Militia Scare. He explores the striking parallels to past"scares" (most notably FDR's Brown Scare of the 1930s and 1940s) which used broad-brush attacks, guilt-by-association, and other methods to smear critics:

In the wake of the Tiller and Johns murders, such sloppiness and worse is seeping into the mainstream media. For some pundits, the very basics of critical thought seem to have gone out the window, as they treat a handful of distinct crimes as sign of a rising menace without so much as bothering to check if there's been more small-scale rightist terror this year than in previous years.
Thursday, June 18, 2009 - 10:23
Comments
share
Thursday, June 18, 2009 - 18:39
Comments