He
claimed that whenever a controversial crisis arose, it would be
prohibited from taking a truly militant position. Even if its
white leadership was capable of making such a radical decision,
it was always forced to consider the effect of an action on its
white, middle-class, liberal financial backers.
Bunche also criticized the N.A.A.C.P. for relying on the courts
and the Constitution for support. He claimed that the
Constitution was a brief, general document which always required
interpretation to relate it to specific, contemporary issues.
This interpretation, he maintained, was always shared by public
opinion. While the courts' understanding of the Constitution
might not always conform precisely to the majority opinion, the
influential, vocal, and dominant segment of the public inevitably
influenced the courts' thinking on important subjects. While in
individual cases it might even contradict this force, in the long
run the Constitution could never be more than what the vocal
maJority wanted it to be. Bunche believed that the N.A.A.C.P.
thinking was always sensitive to the feelings of the white middle
class, and therefore could never afford to alienate that group.
Pages:
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255