> ... your doing so demonstrates an unwillingness on your part to argue in good faith.

You argued:

  A: Unfortunately, in your world, the racists and white
     supremacists take over

That presupposes this:

  B: In a democracy a majority of the people have to agree
     that white supremacy should be the dominant principle for
     governmental rule.

I was pointing out that in order for A to happen, B must happen as well -- but in a rhetorical way to deeply undermine your argument. I assure you, it was completely in good faith. You probably just didn't like the result of it.

> No they weren't. They were accomplished with speech and consequence, often long, violent, ugly protests and frequently civil unrest.

Rosa Parks didn't throw a brick through a window. She refused to sit in the back of the bus. That started a boycott of the bus system, and it worked without bloodshed.

Sure blood was spilled in the civil rights marches but not because the people marching wanted it to be.