CRUSADERS IN THE COURTS, EXCERPT

"The board [of LDF] was effective and influential, many of the relationships became personal as well as organizational. But, on the other hand, I sometimes wondered how such an elite group, whose members were so similar to one another, could hope to determine the best interests of the black community. We hardly could be said to represent a cross-section of that population--no one set of interests could ever have been best for everyone in so large and diverse a community. Still, we couldn't hold a plebiscite, any more than Charles Houston or Thurgood did, or CORE or SNCC could. There was no perfect answer. I tried to deal with the problems by forming the Division of Legal Information and Community Services, but in the end we had nothing to go on but our own best judgment on where right lay, assuming that where one racial group had been so badly deprived of equal justice, serving justice, even as only we saw it, would inevitably serve the interest of the entire group." P.401, "LDF Grows as an Institution," CRUSADERS IN THE COURTS, by Jack Greenberg (2004) The above admission establishes categorically that LDF had no clue what "the black community" wanted in pursuing its destructive litigation strategy of forced busing and magnet schools from the late 1960's forward. Neither did it attempt to discern the will of its presumed client, the black community, relying instead on detached elitists' seat of their Brooks Brothers pants convictions of rectitude.