Prometheus 6

If you have a problem you want to solve and you insist the solution must contain certain elements, there is a way to do it. Simply set forth your elements and refuse to allow them to change. The world won't end no matter how silly the position you set forth is...and if you have the power to prevent anyone from adjusting or removing what you've set forth then everyone else is simply forced to adjust their position accordingly.

This is the central technique of neocons and cultural reversionists. And it works, sort of. The reality is, the world adjusts to anything you do. But another reality is, you may well not like the adjustment it makes. Iraq stands as the best example of this whole process. To me, the net result of all this in a few years will be a U.S. military presence firmly and permanently based in Iraq with all the resources necessary to defend our national interests...which will need much more defence due to the way we established that presence.

Yin and yang.

This was also the central technique of the Civil Rights movement of the mid-20th century. Black Americans simply asserted that the rights of citizenship belong to us as well as anyone else. What actually got the mainstream to acquiesce wasn't a recognition of the justice of that claim but embarrassment...the shame Americans felt at seeing how brutally Black folks were treated by Americans, and (most importantly) embarrassment at having that treatment constantly raised in an international context. An amicus curiae brief (pdf, page 9) filed by the feds in the original Brown vs. Board of Ed case explained the federal government's interest this way:

The shamefulness and absurdity of Washington's treatment of Negro Americans is highlighted by the presence of many dark-skinned foreign visitors. Capital custom mot only humiliates colored citizens but is a source of constant embarrassment to these visitors.

Foreign officials are often mistaken for American Negroes and refused food, lodging and entertainment. However, once it is established that they are not Americans, they are accommodated.

It is in the context of the present world struggle between freedom and tyranny tha the problem of racial discrimination must be viewed. The United States is trying to prove to the people of the world, of every nationality, race, and color, that a free democracy is the most civbilized and most secure form of government yet devised by man. We must set an example for others by showing firm determination to remove existing flaws in our democracy.

The existence of discrimination against minority groups in the United States has an adverse effect upon our relations with other countries. Racial discrimination furnishes grist for the Communist propaganda mills, and it raises doubts even among friendly nations as to the intensity of our devotion to the democratic faith.

There's considerably more of interest in the brief (in particular, legal issues that suggest it may not have been necessary to address the "separate but equal" doctrine, that the doctrine should be overruled if necessary but sent back to localities to actually decide how to make things equal). But this is the Federal government's uninterpreted explanation of why they supported the Brown side of Brown v. Board of Ed.

Mind you, the NAACP of the day recognized this. Their own amicus brief included a reference to international opinion. And I doubt they really cared much about it, but in the words of Dr. Gleason Golightly, "A people without power must use deception and guile."

In this regard, little has changed. Right now the nation is divided as it hasn't been since Reconstruction. And we know how the rift was closed in those days...Black southerners were dispossessed and left at the mercy of the KKK and state governments (as though you could slide a sheet of paper between the two at the time). Nowadays, being more civilized, I doubt it will come to a war of secession. There will be negotiations and some of the interests of each side will be sacrificed as a compromise.

Now, who really believes the Republican Party, with their "branding problem," won't drop those interests specific to their Black cohort first?

Probably the same dummies that believe the Democratic Party, with their outreach to white males, won't drop those interests specific to their Black cohort first.

This is not a suggestion that it's all futile...after all, some things have indeed changed. They just haven't done so due to concerns for morality or justice. This is a suggestion that you be up on the real motivation for these changes, and take those motivations into account as you make your plans.