Segregationists understood resistance as defending their own rights and freedoms

Evidence

Segregationists, of course, did stand against those things, and often with bloody and brutal consequences. But, like all people, they did not think of themselves in terms of what they opposed but rather in terms of what they supported. The conventional wisdom has held that they were only fighting against the rights of others. But, in their own minds, segregationists were instead fighting for rights of their own—such as the “right” to select their neighbors, their employees, and their children’s classmates, the “right” to do as they pleased with their private property and personal businesses, and, perhaps most important, the “right” to remain free from what they saw as dangerous encroachments by the federal government. To be sure, all of these positive “rights” were grounded in a negative system of discrimination and racism. In the minds of segregationists, however, such rights existed all the same. Indeed, from their perspective, it was clearly they who defended individual freedom, while the “so-called civil rights activists” aligned themselves with a powerful central state, demanded increased governmental regulation of local affairs, and waged a sustained assault on the individual economic, social, and political prerogatives of others. — Kevin M. Kruse, White Flight, 31

Categorization

• XREF: Crucial for the reader: shows how segregationists mentally inverted the civil rights frame — the psychological engine of reinvention into ‘rights’ conservatism. — connects to: Freedom of association was defined negatively as the right to exclude, not positively — Kevin M. Kruse, White Flight: Atlanta and the Making of…, 373; Coded anti-public rhetoric can express racial fears without race words — Kevin M. Kruse, White Flight: Atlanta and the Making of…, 582; Segregationist legislation was justified in the language of property rights and liberty — David Theo Goldberg, The Threat of Race: Reflections on…, 1468 (+17 more)
• SEED: Material for an article on how oppressor groups consistently narrate their own resistance as liberty-defense — parallels to other backlash movements.

Broader Connections

• Segregationist legislation was justified in the language of property rights and liberty #corroborates (0.95) — David Theo Goldberg, The Threat of Race, 1468
• Antibusing activists reframed opposition to desegregation as defense of individual liberty against state coercion. #exemplifies (0.90) — Matthew D. Lassiter, The Suburban Origins of “Color-Blind”…, 58
• Respectable segregationists framed exclusion of blacks as a symmetry of individual choice #expands (0.82) — Kevin M. Kruse, White Flight, 372
• Desegregation pressure forced segregationists to reinvent themselves as respectable homeowners #qualifies (0.75) — Kevin M. Kruse, White Flight, 106