[rdb3]

Could you please link to some Lew quotes to prove your case? I've never seen anything racist on his site.

"[Clarence] Thomas calls the segregation of the Old South, where he grew up, 'totalitarian.' But that's liberal nonsense. Whatever its faults, and it certainly had them, that system was far more localized, decent, and humane than the really totalitarian social engineering now wrecking the country."
— LLEWELLYN H. ROCKWELL

[vbmoneyspender]

bump. BTW, if you get the Rockwell people discussing the Civil War, they'll tell you that the slaves would have been better off if the Civil War had never occurred.

[billbears]

Not sure what you're saying other than Rockwell doesn't believe the stance of Justice Thomas. I agree some of the laws here in the South were quite ridiculous and I wouldn't have supported even one of them. However the issue behind that is, do the separate and sovereign states have the right to order their own affairs as they see fit within their borders? Within a true federal republic, the answer would be yes. But by the 1940s, this was no longer a true federal republic. The idea of the states being subservient to the national government from the get go is frankly repulsive. But the myriad of other laws not dealing with race that have been enforced upon the citizens of the respective states by a national government is not right either. Forcable integration by the government was the first step and it could be said, integration notwithstanding, that since the 1940s, the national government has taken its place in the plans of the more ardent Federalists that were dismissed out of hand at the original Constitutional Convention

Segregation was wrong and it could be easily be argued that it was a just cause for the national government to cause those laws to be done away with. But because of this interference, the national government has gone about the business of interfering within the states thinking it somehow has a right to do so on everything from the Ten Commandments to seat belts. My question to you would be is that right also?

[u-89]

The quote you post is saying that Lew thinks totalitarianism is defined by federal government interferences and not by local laws which he implicitly says he finds fault with meaning he does not agree with them. The remarks say that in his opinion the Jim Crow laws were begein compared to the intrusive laws of today that negate property rights and freedom of association.

So one could argue over the definition of totalitarianism but one can not honestly say that Lew Rockwell supports descrimination or Jim Crow laws. There is no room for that interpretation of his statement. Therefore it is not a racist remark.

I do not know the context from which this quote was lifted from but it does not seem like the most diplomatic way of stating his position. For the record I have a broader definition of totalitarianism than LR seems to have as I see Thomas'claim against the State and Rockwell's both as valid examples.