Another interesting report of bigots against business. In this case, two gay partners are trying to run their successful barbecue establishment in the struggling town of Rockaway Beach, Mo., where the mayor and the president of the Chamber of Commerce seem intent on driving them out.
The article is from the Jewish Daily Forward (one of the partners being Jewish), and recalls how prejudice against the "other" - especially when they happen to be more successful than some native locals - is a recurring motif among those who don't cotton to capitalism, whether on the left or right.
23 Comments for “We Don’t Want Your Kind Around Here.”
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
Well, for starters, it looks like the mayor and his attitude are not long for office, according to the story, which is good.
The one thing I don’t like, though, is this whole thing about publishing a newspaper, using a pseudonym, and repeatedly criticizing a fellow store owner and his family. I frankly don’t see the point, and in a town of 600, that will justifiably cause some hard feelings.
Obviously the bigots are dead-wrong on this. But a tiny bit of “get along” effort on the part of the gay couple wouldn’t hurt matters either.
posted by Audrey on
There is too much talk about Ron being Jewish, especially since according to Halakha (Jewish law), he would not be considered a Jew.
posted by Bobby on
Audrey, the name of the paper is The JEWISH Daily Forward, ok? That’s why they’re gonna talk about Ron being jewish, and by the way, being gay doesn’t mean you’re no longer jewish. It doesn’t work that way. If his mother is jewish, then he is jewish.
The best thing the gay couple can do is to continue their business until everyone else simply gets used to them, and move on to another issue.
You don’t give up on the face of opposition. The mayor is an a-hole but he’s within his rights. Free speech is sacred, even from a bigot.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
publishing a newspaper
Perish the thought!
using a pseudonym
Oh dear, are you serious?
repeatedly criticizing a fellow store owner and his family
After said “fellow store owner and family” moved to deny this fellow and his partner a business license — effectively destroying their livelihood.
Incidentally, the story is a perfect illustration of several things:
1) Why the trend towards “licensing” and regulating everything is so destructive and should be reversed;
2) Why “local government control” is not “preferable” to federal control — rather, reducing/eliminating all forms of government control is preferable;
3) Why being anti-gay is just bad economics. Said town would be much, much worse off without the efforts of these two men and their investments, and if they did decide to leave, they’d take much of the town’s appeal as a place for visitors to have fun with them.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
The mayor is an a-hole but he’s within his rights.
Not really. He has a right to *say* whatever he wants, but he’s clearly abusing the government power which comes with his office to attack these two men and their livelihood through “licensing” shenanigans and also using his significant government influence to isolate and target them.
posted by kittynboi on
“”””Why “local government control” is not “preferable” to federal control — rather, reducing/eliminating all forms of government control is preferable;””””
I’m glad to see a libertarian saying this. Far too many people I’ve encountered who claim to be libertarians seem to be opposed ONLY to government on a federal level, while having no problem with giving nearly dictatorial powers to “local” government.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
It’s a sad symptom of the times. Conservatives, embarrassed by the label “conservative” based on the activities of the ones running the government, have decided to describe themselves as “libertarians” because they like low taxes.
Unfortunately, libertarianism isn’t about low taxes — it’s about personal freedom and responsibility, which means low taxes, small government, few regulations, and no ridiculous “wars on terror or drugs.” Lots of pseduo-libertarians are easily identified. . . just look for the self-proclaimed libertarian who is pro-Iraq War, pro-border-crackdown, oriented towards “states’ rights” rather than individual rights, looking to regulate reproductive choices and family relationships, and constantly defending Dubya, and you’ve got yourself a PL. 😉
posted by etjb on
Yeah, but it a libertarian state, what would this gay couple/business owner be able to do about anything?
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
After said “fellow store owner and family” moved to deny this fellow and his partner a business license — effectively destroying their livelihood.
Mhm….they were so destroyed that they couldn’t even open a restaurant and had to leave town with their tails between their legs.
Oops.
The irony is, of course, if someone were to do the same to this person, he’d start screaming bloody murder and crying about how he was being “discriminated against”.
posted by Randy R. on
Sounds like a lot is going on — there is resentment all around. Part of this comes from a declining economy: When that happens, people start to think that someone else’s success is coming at your expense. So the resentment would be there even if there were no gay angle.
Still, any publicity is good publicity. The article repeatedly talked about the good food and high reputation these guys have. If the local talk is similar, then they can experience an increase in business this weekend.
I’d just make sure everything is spotless though, for when the inevitable food inspector (who is undoubtedly part of the ole boy network) makes his appearance.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
a libertarian state, what would this gay couple/business owner be able to do about anything
They wouldn’t have to do anything, since the Mayor and a small group of bigots wouldn’t have the power to shut down their food stand in the first place.
they were so destroyed that they couldn’t even open a restaurant and had to leave town with their tails between their legs.
Oops.
Simply because they were able to find something else doesn’t obviate the fact that their original source of income was completely shut down by a group of government control freaks.
If I step in and force your boss to fire you, and then say “oh well, no harm done, you found another job, what are you complaining about,” it would be much the same.
I’d just make sure everything is spotless though, for when the inevitable food inspector (who is undoubtedly part of the ole boy network) makes his appearance.
Isn’t it interesting how it’s *always* government which ends up being the agent of oppression in these situations? Republicrats and Demopublicans alike love big government and explain how it will protect us from big, bad business — but big bad business pays the campaign bills and gets away with bloody murder, while individuals and small businesses who corrupt politicians and their cronies don’t like get to face having their “license to trade” revoked for no reason, or facing harassment from government reps.
posted by Audrey on
Actually, Bobby, I think only his father is Jewish. Which would mean that he?s not Jewish.
posted by Bobby on
“he’s clearly abusing the government power which comes with his office to attack these two men and their livelihood through “licensing” shenanigans and also using his significant government influence to isolate and target them.”
—Dude, licensing has been around for a long time. Want to set up a bar? You need a license. Want to have an adult store? Make sure it’s far away from a school. You got a restaurant? Keep it clean or the health department will shut it down. The same with strip bars.
In the end, if the gay couple follow the law, the mayor can’t do nothing about it.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
Simply because they were able to find something else doesn’t obviate the fact that their original source of income was completely shut down by a group of government control freaks.
That’s the danger one faces in a democratic society. However, an end result of that is that the mayor who did it will be impeached and removed from office.
Just because the system occasionally spits out a bad result and has to correct it doesn’t mean that the system is flawed. It means that these things take time.
posted by MM on
Gee, I had not realized that government having too much control over the people was a “danger one faces in a democratic society.” I thought democracy was supposed to be a vanguard against excessive government control.
posted by kittynboi on
“”””In the end, if the gay couple follow the law, the mayor can’t do nothing about it.””””
Bobby, your trust that the government and those in power will always do the right thing and are shining beacons of honesty who will never ever abuse their power is truly inspiring in these times of mistrust and cynicism.
“”””Just because the system occasionally spits out a bad result and has to correct it doesn’t mean that the system is flawed. It means that these things take time.
“”””
Actually, some would say just that. And if the system has to correct anything, then by definition there is a flaw, or nothing would have been corrected. How big a flaw is another issue, but yes, if things like this happen, there is some kind of flaw or problem somewhere.
The trust both of you place in authority really makes me wonder about you. Both in terms of what kind of people you are, and if the plural is really appropriate.
posted by Audrey on
Bobby, I know Jewish people can be gay. See: Greenberg, Rabbi Steven; and that Muppet thing who writes the crappie Oscar jokes.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
democracy was supposed to be a vanguard against excessive government control
Pure democracy is just mob rule.
You’re right in that constitutional democratic republics like ours safeguard the rights of the minority from the whims of the majority. Something the Demopublicans and Republicrats seem to forget a lot whenever their latest unconstitutional populist initiatives to target some hated group — blacks, gays, Wiccans, etc. — is shot down by an “activist judge” who insists on the primacy of that pesky Bill of Rights over some majoritarian claptrap like racist segregation of universities or homophobic segregation of government programs.
posted by Bobby on
The majority have rights to, Northeast. I hope you know that. Muslims are a minority, that doesn’t mean they can ban us from eating pork and drinking beer, not in this country. In France however, some schools are removing the pork and ham.
“Bobby, your trust that the government and those in power will always do the right thing and are shining beacons of honesty who will never ever abuse their power is truly inspiring in these times of mistrust and cynicism.”
—I don’t trust the government, I despise the BATF, the TSA and other federal thugs. State government is another matter, state govs are more connected to the cultural values of the people than the feds.
If this homophobic mayor wants to protest outside the store, fine. IF he wants to bitch about the gay couple during office hours, fine. But if he sends his cops to vandalize his store, or denies them a license or wrong or arbitrary reasons, then I’ll support the gay couple.
Don’t worry, Northeast, the mayor knows there’s only so much he can do before getting into legal trouble.
“The trust both of you place in authority really makes me wonder about you.”
—-Rightwingers love authority, so do leftwingers ironically. It’s one of the few things we have in common. But as an individualist and a libertarian sympathizer, I support the individual over all. You don’t have to wonder about me, I’ll let individuals do as they like as long as they don’t mess with my God given freedoms.
” Both in terms of what kind of people you are,”
—What’s that supposed to mean? Can’t speak for the other guy, but I’m the kind of guy that lets you keep your guns, your money, your politically incorrect speech, your religion, your gas guzzling SUV, your pork chops, your sex life and if you want, even your abortions if you ever need to have them, your prostitutes, your porn, booze, drugs, cigarrettes, etc, etc, etc.
I think I’m a pretty damn good guy. One of the few people that doesn’t try to regulate everybody else. I won’t tell you to lose weight, won’t raise your taxes, won’t draft you into the military… What else can I say?
posted by kittynboi on
“”””The majority have rights to, Northeast. I hope you know that. Muslims are a minority, that doesn’t mean they can ban us from eating pork and drinking beer, not in this country. In France however, some schools are removing the pork and ham.””””
France isn’t America, and its not happening here, and if Muslims tried that here it would be ruled unconstitutional.
The majority has rights, the same rights as everyone else. Which does not include the “right” to impose their will on the minority.
For someone who seemingly despises the minority imposing its will on the majority, you don’t seem willing to hold the majority to the same standard.
“”””I don’t trust the government, I despise the BATF, the TSA and other federal thugs. State government is another matter, state govs are more connected to the cultural values of the people than the feds.””””
So you trust state government and see what it does as more legitimate just because of “cultural values”? Do you allow any place for the constitution and the bill of rights? Or is all that overridden by “cultural values”?
This is why I don’t trust “states rights”, because many people talk like state level government should be allowed to be a mini-totalitarian state if it wants too.
The federal government should not have too much power. Nor should state government, local government, the “minority” which you so fear or “the majority” which you exalt. No one group should have too much powerl and certainly not the power to determine what others can and cannot do with their lives.
“”””If this homophobic mayor wants to protest outside the store, fine. IF he wants to bitch about the gay couple during office hours, fine””””
If he wants to protest, fine, if he wants to speak as his own opinion and not for the entire city, fine.
“”””Rightwingers love authority, so do leftwingers ironically.””””
Then I suppose I’m neither.
“”I think I’m a pretty damn good guy. One of the few people that doesn’t try to regulate everybody else. I won’t tell you to lose weight, won’t raise your taxes, won’t draft you into the military… What else can I say?””
For someone so in love with religion and tradition and so enamored with authority, despite your protestations to the contrary, you hold an odd set of views.
The problem is, Bobby, whenever anyone or any article on here attacks some authority figure for homophobia or some other thing, you instantly rush to their defense. Regardless of any laundry list you give of what you believe in, it gives the impression that you will defend authority. Not to mention all your talk in the other thread about preserving the status quo as if that were in and of itself a good thing regardless of who or what the SQ is.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
“The majority has rights too” does not, in any way, result in the revoking of the rights of the minority. In fact, the majority has a number of rights, but none of them include violating the rights of others. This is one of the fundamental underpinnings of the American republic — if you don’t buy into this, then you’re probably better off in a simple majoritarian society like most of Europe.
posted by Bobby on
“For someone who seemingly despises the minority imposing its will on the majority, you don’t seem willing to hold the majority to the same standard.”
—Not true, if the majority is wrong, I will be angry but accept their decision. And if someone tells me “you can’t be openly gay because it makes the majority uncomfortable.” I simply say “F you, I pity your silly values.”
“So you trust state government and see what it does as more legitimate just because of “cultural values”?”
—Of course. Don’t you? Would you like the people of Texas governing the people of California? Each state has a unique culture, with the exception of the bill of rights.
In fact, the argument for states rights is powerful because it was the states that ratified the constitution. Thus it is the states that create the federal government, not the other way around.
“If he wants to protest, fine, if he wants to speak as his own opinion and not for the entire city, fine.”
—Well, that’s assumed. When Bloomberg goes on his usual tirades, it’s obvious he’s speaking for himself even though he pretends to speak for New Yorkers.
“For someone so in love with religion and tradition and so enamored with authority, despite your protestations to the contrary, you hold an odd set of views.”
—Not really, other rightwingers I’ve met don’t care what people do as long as they’re left alone. We’re very independent people. Historically, all drugs where legal in this country, so in a way you could say I’m a traditionalist.
Prostitution should be legal because we allow women to get gifts in order to provide sex. And since whether a woman gets $100 or an expensive dinner is the same thing (something of value), it doens’t make sense to keep prostitution illegal.
Most republicans respect me because I’m a big supporter of school vouchers, the death penalty, lower taxes, the second amendment and the free speech of people who disagree with me.
“The problem is, Bobby, whenever anyone or any article on here attacks some authority figure for homophobia or some other thing, you instantly rush to their defense.”
—Somebody has to. Dershowitz said he would have defended Hitler if given a chance. I admire that philosophy.
And I don’t defend all homophobes, when Phelps wanted to protest at funerals, I spoke against him and others spoke for him.
“Regardless of any laundry list you give of what you believe in, it gives the impression that you will defend authority.”
—Depends. Sometimes I have a problem with authority, sometimes I don’t. What about you? Are you an anarchist?
“Not to mention all your talk in the other thread about preserving the status quo as if that were in and of itself a good thing regardless of who or what the SQ is.”
—Too much change too soon is not a good thing. I don’t need to give you the laundry list, do I?
posted by kittynboi on
“”””Not true, if the majority is wrong, I will be angry but accept their decision.””””
So you would simply accept a wrong decision because the majority is making, and not try to do anything to change it?
“”””Of course. Don’t you?””””
Noooo. I tend not to trust governments.
“”””Each state has a unique culture””””
I’m not part of anyones culture. I’m an individual, not a collectivist.
“”””Well, that’s assumed. When Bloomberg goes on his usual tirades, it’s obvious he’s speaking for himself even though he pretends to speak for New Yorkers.””””
Well, I’m totally unfamiliar with these tirades you speak of, so I can’t comment on them.
“”””Not really, other rightwingers I’ve met don’t care what people do as long as they’re left alone.””””
Yet you trust government to always make the right decision as long as its based on local culture?
“”””We’re very independent people.””””
You don’t sound like it when you go on about the wonders of local government always being right if its in line with local “culture”.
What if local “culture” decides to ban the sale of pornography? Isn’t that not only interfering with free speech but the free market? If people really didn’t want it, wouldn’t the market decide? Is that a case where local government would be wrong?
“”””Most republicans respect me because I’m a big supporter of school vouchers, the death penalty, lower taxes, the second amendment and the free speech of people who disagree with me.””””
Okay. Well, fine. I guess.
“”””Somebody has to. Dershowitz said he would have defended Hitler if given a chance. I admire that philosophy.””””
Well, its a dirty job.
“”””Depends. Sometimes I have a problem with authority, sometimes I don’t. What about you? Are you an anarchist?””””
I’m not an anarchist. I’m just mistrustful of authority and of any one person, group, or whatever, be it state government, federal government, local government, corporations, religion, etc. etc. having too much power.
“”””Too much change too soon is not a good thing.””””
Why? Based on what? Because some people can’t handle it even if its the right thing, or because they simply don’t want it? Or because you simply don’t want it.
You fail to make convincing arguments or counter arguments, and just constantly state your positions on things rather than stating actual arguments. When you do make arguments they’re often incredibly flimsy.