NAACP rethinks its boycott of S.C.

The State ^ | Oct 7, 2006 | RODDIE A. BURRIS

[300magnum]

For Kitty Green of St. Helena Island, the NAACP’s call for an economic boycott of the state seven years ago was a “slap in the face.”

While the teacher-turned-entrepreneur supports the civil rights organization’s effort to remove the Confederate flag from the State House grounds, the sanctions hit her business hard.

Now some members of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People are questioning whether it’s good policy to continue the boycott. In 2000, the flag was moved from atop the State House dome to a monument in front of the capitol, and there’s no plan to move it again.

[wideawake]

I would imagine that African American business owners in the tourism sector received a disproportionate impact.

[stainlessbanner]

b-u-m-p

[stainlessbanner]

There was many small business owners unhappy with the NAACP policy. Poorly thought-out plan and implementation. In the end, it probably hurt the folks it was intended to protect and proved to be ineffective.

[Hacksaw]

Now some members of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People are questioning whether it’s good policy to continue the boycott.

I wish they would boycott the United States.

[Moose4]

They did. The story of the woman in the article was typical--the impact was disproportionately concentrated in black-owned businesses, and even more so down in the southeastern part of the state, where there is (was?) a growing black tourism industry because of the rich history of the black culture in the Hilton Head/Sea Islands area, both pre- and post-WBTS. The Gullah and Geechee history there is fascinating and was starting to pull in a fair amount of cultural tourism, until the boycott hit them between the eyes and their "socially conscious" clientele bailed out on them to please the NAACP.

In the bigger cities--Columbia, Charleston, Greenville/Spartanburg, etc.--the impact was mainly limited to a few conventions skipping the state, the NCAA refusing to allow college post-season events to be hosted at some venues (like Greenville's Bi-Lo Center or Columbia's new Colonial Center), and the wonderfully hypocritical Democrats refusing to actually STAY in South Carolina when they were campaigning there in 2004. They would either stay in hotels in Georgia or North Carolina and drive across the state line every day (even avoiding buying gas and food in SC as much as possible), or stay in private homes inside SC. All to please their massahs in the NAACP.

}:-)4

[Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin]

How economically astute of them to reconsider. Guess it just hasn't been as economically profitable as they thought. Wonder what state will be boycotted next?

[upchuck]

The Confederate flag flying in front of the state house in Columbia. Along with a bunch of freekin' moonbat war protestors. Click the pic for a larger view.

South Carolina Ping

Add me to the list. / Remove me from the list.

[azhenfud]

"

Stainless, you see the street sign between the stoplight and the CBF? It says, "NO TURN ON RED". South Carolina still refuses to turn on red.

[The Game Hen]

What?
SC turns on red unless there is a no turn sign because visibility is bad or some other good reason.

[stainlessbanner]

bttt

[ladyjane]

There is so much craziness in this world - I understand your frustration.

[azhenfud]

You've misunderstood. RED, the CBF, still flies in SC. SC still refuses to turn on it.

[sdillard]

Boycott?

Does anyone anywhere care?

[lentulusgracchus]

Liberals are hung up over issues that are of no immediate concern to those of us still alive today. This is just to put it all in proper perspective.

It's all about spiking up black turnout on Election Day. They did this in 1998, remember, hot and heavy just before the big effort to save Slick's hide from impeachment by taking back the House. It didn't work -- they took nine seats, but the GOP retained control, so the 'Rats couldn't take down the impeachment articles before the Senate convened to try them.

It's always, always about black turnout.

[elcid1970]

"NAACP"

Will they ever change the name to "National Association of African Americans"?

NAAA!!!

;^)

[NonLinear]

The compromise that resulted in moving the flag to the Confederate Soldier’s Monument did not satisfy the NAACP, which has continued the boycott.

Any objective person would have to agree that once the Confederate flag came off the (State House) dome, many people saw that as the end of the road,” said Bruce Ransom, a Clemson University political scientist. “They said, ‘Let’s put this thing to bed,’ thinking that the NAACP had gotten what they asked for.”

"The NAACP lied, poor people died."
My new bumper sticker!

[elcid1970]

Hey, where are us FReepers who are behind that car?

[elcid1970]

When the NAACP proclaimed the boycott, a state legislator, who happens to be black, questioned the wisdom by asking,

"Do we really want South Carolina beaches to be known as the whitest beaches on the East Coast?"

[PistolPaknMama]

why don't they just change it to a boycott of WHITE owned businesses in SC?

Sounds good in theory but what about the white owned businesses that employ black cashiers, black bag boys, black waitresses/waiters, janitors, drivers, maids, desk clerks, and so on and so on. When those businesses are hit, then layoffs are layoffs. That's not going to effect just white people but all people who are employed by white people.

Buncha dummies, they should have picked a state that had no black owned businesses or employed black people. Fortunately SC has thrived during the "boycott" so if some start up business hasn't done well, she might want to find another excuse for her failure.

[Still Thinking]

I know. I don't think it's a good idea, and I wouldn't choose whom to do business with on the basis of race in the first place, but I'll bet the NAACP would (and I do think they should have the legal right to do that if they want to, even if it's stupid).