3 ms·

Whether or not it was Nixon and friends acting like racists is secondary. Tons of individuals and institutions piled on because there was power and money in it

• nuclearnice1 5y ago
  You can say it’s secondary, but it’s a good answer to the question raised by the parent: “it would be very interesting to know the reasoning to start it.”
• uberdru 5y ago
  My read is that your statement is incorrect, in that they were not simply 'acting like racists'. Instead, they were instituting racially motivated policies to combat the advances of the civil rights movement through the '60s. Plus ca change.
  • throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    Isn't that exactly how you'd expect racists to act?
    • tolbish 5y ago
      The difference is that racism is not a secondary motivator. Racism would be baked into the desire for power, as it would then be a desire to instill white supremacy.
      • jhgb 5y ago
        Why couldn't racism be either primary or secondary motivator for something?
        • tolbish 5y ago
          It absolutely can be. It just is not in this case. They were not merely "acting like racists". I hope this distinction helps.
          • jhgb 5y ago
            The present simple "is not" seemed to be a general statement to me (but that just may be my L2 English).