|
|||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Copyright © 2000-2024 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Racism is alive and well in America
Hello Everyone, First of all, I think I probably should apologize for making light of the issue. I admit that was a bit insensitive of me, but keep in mind I make light of everything in the rant, not excluding my own fallacies. On the racial issue, my goal has been to present the other side. I pointed out that racism goes both ways and to even use terms like "reverse" discrimination to describe the phenomenon is a racist tactic. I sparked controversy by pointing out that racial quotas are government sponsored racist programs that do more harm than good. And I lampooned the "political correct" movement with a couple of extremely silly metaphors to emphasize just how silly political correction has become. I did this to challenge said politically correct follies and to encourage people to think for themselves. But the question is--did Elmo ever say anything that was actually racist? To answer that, let's take a look at how Merriam Webster defines the word "racism": rac·ism Function: noun Date: 1936 1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race 2 : racial prejudice or discrimination - rac·ist /-sist also -shist/ noun or adjective Well, let's see... I never claimed that race should be the primary determinant of human traits and capacities. In fact, I criticized the government for enacting policies like racial quotas that are based on that very racist supposition. When organizations like the FBI have lower test score standards for minorities, they are the ones insinuating that some kind of inherent mental inequity exists, not I. I believe the opposite is true. Many studies have proven that underprivileged students, even those who were previously believed to be learning disabled, were able to perform on a near-genius level when given the proper attention and educational experience. This was true regardless of race, ethnic origin, or gender. Likewise, I believe that athletic ability is not so much determined by genetics as it is by practice, development, and determination. And I personally would never hire or fire someone based solely on the color of their skin, regardless of what my racist Uncle Sam told me to do. Here's a good question--have any of you ever been to a church that where the membership was predominantly of another race? I have. When I was in Forsyth, Georgia for the summer of 1996, I attended a predominantly African-American church where I and the family that I was staying with were the only white people in the congregation. But I was welcomed with open arms and had a wonderful experience that I will always remember. It is a sad comment on white people that by and large they seldom welcome minorities into their churches as warmly. Most other areas of society have been desegregated, but churches have not. It is ironic that the one place where loving your neighbor and treating others as you would have them treat you is supposed to be the prime directive ends up being the place where it is quite often discarded. Back to the rant. My words were deliberately chosen. I can't stand double standards. The only reason the things I said might have "sounded racist" is because I am a white person saying them. White people aren't allowed to have any kind of racial unity, or racial pride. Anyone who encourages such a thing is instantly denounced as a "white supremacist". Minorities on the other hand are encouraged to have racial unity and take pride in their culture. There are pros and cons for racial unity and cultural pride on both sides, but my point is that you can't have it for one and not for the other. That is a hypocritical double standard, and itself a form of racism. Racism is a serious issue that is still with us--there is no argument about that. I've personally been a victim of it. I have lots of friends who have also been in some form or fashion--both minorities and majorities. I'm sure you know of several people who have been as well. But what is the saddest thing is how often people who aren't the least bit racist are accused of being so just to smear them. It's the new McCarthyism. In the 1950's, if someone called you a Communist, regardless how baseless that accusation, you were through. Nowadays however, if the Powers That Be want to destroy you, they call you a racist. There have been countless examples in recent memory, Pat Buchanan for one, but the most recent victim is John Ashcroft. For those of you who never heard of him, he is the Republican former senator from Missouri, who made the news last year twice by first running for President and bowing out early, and then by being the first man in US history to lose his seat to a dead man. The ultra-liberal wing of the Democratic party is bitterly opposed to his nomination because of his ultra-conservative views. For the record, I disagree with him on a number of issues myself. Like so many on the Republican Right, he hasn't let the Constitution stand in the way of any invasion of our freedom that he thought was necessary to fight crime or drugs. But despite this, I think that he is still a vast improvement over cover-up girl Janet Reno, who had even less respect for the Constitution. He is certainly qualified for the position (having been state Attorney General twice in addition to Governor and Senator) and has a reputation of honesty, and integrity that even his most liberal opponents can't dispute. But now that he has been nominated to be G.W. Bush's Attorney General, they have decided to trash his character instead. So they have resorted to playing the same tired, clichéd racist card yet again. He dared vote against a black state Supreme Court justice who was nominated for a Federal District Judgeship! Oh my God, a white man voting against a black man?! Gasp! He must be a racist! Nevermind that 53 other Senators voted against him. Nevermind his stated reason that the guy's record proved beyond doubt that he was an activist judge more concerned with his social agenda than upholding the law, and we already have way too many of those on the federal bench. Nevermind that Ashcroft voted in favor of over 90% of the other black judges that were nominated during his tenure. Nevermind that he is a close associate of Clarence Thomas--the only African American on the US Supreme Court. Nevermind that he was the one who instituted Martin Luther King Day as a holiday in Missouri when he was governor there. Nevermind that he dedicated the only state monument in Missouri history honoring a black man. But he must be a racist--after all he was awarded an honorary degree from Bob Jones University, which has itself been demonized by the media as a racist institution for its policies banning interracial dating without parental approval. Now think about that logic for a second--does that make everyone who has ever gone to school there and gotten their degree from that institution a racist by association? The Jesse Jackson's of the world would have us believe so. So regardless of all his achievements and qualifications, his position in Bush's cabinet will be decided by whether or not he can convince his former colleagues from the senate that he is not a racist. If they want to oppose him and vote him down for ideological reasons that's one thing, but these scorched earth neo-McCarthy tactics are just not acceptable. Moving right along... Barger once said that we were all b----ing about racism without presenting any real solutions. I do have a few that I think would be far more effective than shoving political correctness down everyone's throats. First, let's stop what doesn't work: You will never achieve a color blind society by forcing everyone to make race a primary determining factor when hiring employees, confirming judges, recruiting members, or handing out so-called merit scholarships. To do those things exclusively for the benefit of minorities, regardless of how noble the intentions, is every bit as racist as to deny them those same breaks based on the color of their skin. No one is born a racist--people must be taught to be one. Sometimes they are taught by individuals, such as family and friends. Sometimes they are taught by the culture they grow up in. Sometimes they develop a hatred for another race because they personally experience discrimination by members of that race. Like I said in previous rants, you can not control people's thoughts. No amount of political correction legislation will ever stop people from having racist feelings. Using government-backed force to attempt this will only have an opposite effect. Now, let's talk about some things that will work. The way to stop racism is through education and the free market. It is possible to provide underprivileged minorities a leg up without discriminating against other races in the process. Outreach programs, head start, and need-based scholarships (as opposed to tainting merit scholarships with racial quotas) are good examples. Cultural opinions can't be changed by legislation, but they can be changed by teachers, media campaigns, and grassroots efforts. And there is one attitude that must be changed if disadvantaged minorities are ever really going to get a fair shake in our society. And that is the attitude that being studious, having ambitions, and working hard for success is somehow "acting white." (We won't even mention the racist undertones in that pervasive notion.) That is one bad attitude that is self destructive to say the least. But you can't change people's opinions by forcing your own opinions down their throats. You do it with logic and reason in a caring and nurturing manner. Instead of focusing on racist private business owners and individuals, we need to focus on racists in the public arena. Racial profiling by the police has become epidemic and has to be stopped. Rodney King was only the beginning. Just this past Halloween an African American was attending a Halloween party dressed as a gangsta, and was shot and killed by the police from the window because they thought his plastic gun was real. Ask any African American who drives a nice sports car how often he has gotten pulled over because the cops thought he might have stolen it. It is really pathetic. Rock star Lenny Kravitz was apprehended by the police a few weeks ago because his physical description was similar to that of a petty bank robber that had just robbed a nearby bank. They let him go once they found out who he was, but what if he had just been an average Joe? Because the police are funded from money that comes from the public trough, legislation to end racial profiling is not only justified, but mandated. As for the private sector--call me an idealist if you want, but I believe that the free market will do a much better job of eliminating racists in the work place without quotas. Think about it. Left to their own devices, of course racists would discriminate in their hiring practices. But this would be visually obvious, word would get out, and their businesses would be quickly boycotted by most people. They wouldn't stay in business long. The market would force them to change their attitudes, but it would have a much more positive impact than quotas would. This way they couldn't blame it on the "liberal" government, or members of those other races--they would have to accept that it was society at large because their bigoted ideology had become as obsolete as the old 386 computers that they also had to throw out in order to stay in business. It is already happening now--Al Sharpton has called for a boycott of New York area Burger Kings because of discriminatory hiring and business practices. I think it will be successful. Finally, despite the fact that I think the Supreme Court made the right decision in the election, I believe that African Americans are justified in feeling disenfranchised. I don't believe it was some organized conspiracy--of course poor neighborhoods would have old voting machines--that's simple economics, not racism. But they certainly have a right to be upset. They are only one group among many who were victimized by the widespread and rampant voting "irregularities" that plagued this election, and probably most or all of our past ones as well. The only thing unique in 2000 was the closeness of the election. Anyhow, you've already read my solution to the vote fraud issue. Centralized, electronic internet voting, with a clear audit trail, encrypted for privacy and security, yet open source so we know their isn't any behind-the-scenes funny business going on. I'm sure that isn't what we'll end up getting, but it's the only fool-proof way of preventing vote fraud. Anyhoo, we still have a long way to go before we truly realize Martin Luther King's dream, but I believe that "PC" McCarthyism, racial quotas, and policies like that take us farther from that goal, not closer. Peace, Elmo Click here to return to the previous page. |
 |