Monday, January 21, 2008

Ending racism in America


“I Have a Dream” August 28, 1963

Today is Martin Luther King Day. Like many other whites, I was skeptical when this day was first declared to be a holiday, but now I am absolutely convinced that we need it. Some holidays are for fun and celebration, like Independence Day and Labor Day; but others, like Memorial Day and this one, are better suited to reflection.Forty-five years have passed since Dr. King shared his dream with the American people. The next year, the Civil Rights Act ended segregation; and in the following year, the Voting Rights Act enabled minorities to enjoy the full rights of citizenship. I was 14 years old when the Civil Rights Act was passed, and I recall thinking even then, that it would take 50 years for the African-American to fully achieve that dream. Looking back, I think that prediction will prove to be about right, but we still have a few problems to work out.

The institutional racism exemplified by the old Southern segregation is long gone, but subtle forms remain. Remnants of white supremacy movements remain. Our schools are resegregated, in part because housing discrimination, while illegal, continues to be subtly practiced. Blacks still have problems obtaining conventional credit, and frequently need knowledge of the banking system that most whites take for granted. In many industries, glass ceilings hold down Blacks from top management positions.

But white racism is not limited to the “Fergit, Hell!!!” crowd. White liberal Democrats are facing an exquisite crisis with Barack Obama’s candidacy for President. Their choice is this: They can reject their own rhetoric about racial equality by not supporting Sen. Obama; or they can nominate him for President, and prove that minorities no longer need protection from the Democratic Party.Then there is the “politically correct” guilt trip that some white liberal extremists try to force on the rest of the race, evidenced by the diversity program that was attempted last fall at the University of Delaware (and fortunately, scrapped).

Whites are not the only racists. Black racism occurs when people presume that all white males are privileged, and therefore deserve to be discriminated against. A particularly egregious example lies in the insistence that today’s whites apologize for slavery prior to 1865. I’m sorry, I see no reason to do this. No one who owned slaves is still living. It’s not my fault that it happened, and no one living who was American-born was ever a slave! Some proponents of this idea cite the apology made to the Nisei (Japanese-Americans) who were interned during World War II, or that proposed for the Native American. Those situations are different. The Nisei apology was made to people who experienced that injustice, and the horrible conditions on the reservations continue for the Native Americans (hence the Lakota declaration of independence).I suspect that one of the drivers of Black racism is the continuing existence of a civil rights movement that appears to have lost sight of Dr. King’s vision. The original civil rights movement unintentionally followed a model use by successful businesses, where the principals are referred to as Mr. Inside (the plant manager or bookkeeper) and Mr. Outside (the salesman). Both have the same goal, but work with different people. The civil rights movement’s Mr. Outside was Dr. King, who worked with white opinion leaders to secure the legislation needed to end segregation. Mr. Inside was Malcolm X, who stressed the need for Blacks to pick themselves up by their bootstraps and set up their own institutions, not depending on assistance from whites. They shared the same end and both were successful, even though (as far as I know) they never coordinated with each other.

Another example of Black racism is a belief that affirmative action should go on forever. I understand that it has been necessary to help level the playing field for equal opportunity in education and in the workplace, and that it may need to continue for several years to come. But its continuation forever will only serve to institutionalize discrimination against white males. It will lead to the kind of grievances that never end, like the Sunni vs. the Shiite, and the Albanian vs. the Serb. We need to come together to find the answer to a question similar to the one about troop withdrawal from Iraq: Not when, but under what conditions, can we say that enough equality has been achieved that students be admitted or people hired solely on personal merit. After all, that was Dr. King’s dream, that his grandchildren would be judged by the quality of their character, not the color of their skin.We also need to work together to find real solutions for the unconscionably high incarceration rate for Black males, and to ensure genuinely equal educational opportunity for inner-city (mostly Black) children. Educational opportunity for all children is the key to ending racism.

As an Ohio secessionist, I would be deeply honored to have a Black sharing its leadership, especially if that person could see that independence will give us a fresh start -- a nation in which all of us, having been created equal, and being accepted as equal from the beginning of the Republic, can use that knowledge to empower ourselves and our communities to realize the dream that Dr. King shared with us so long ago.

6 comments:

Thomas Rowley said...

Harold,

I'm having a trouble reconciling your point about the need to move past affirmative action with your earlier position that Democratics must engage in political affirmative action and nominate Obama as their presidential candidate. The very idea of nominating anyone based solely on their race and would seem to fly in the face of King's dream:

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

I don't think that the country is well served by the notion that Democrats need prove their commitment to racial equality by nominating a candidate because of the color of his or her skin and without regard to character.

Of greater concern should be the continued voter suppression efforts that have such a long and sordid history in our country. From the poll tax to the 2002 NH phone jamming scandal, to the firing of a US Attorney who would not improperly bring a voter fraud case, to the recent efforts directed at voters likely to vote Democratic based on utterly unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud. Nothing smacks of institutional racism more that the present "voter fraud" elimination efforts by the Republican party.

Anonymous said...

Thomas:

Please re-read what I wrote. I am not advocating Sen. Obama's (or anyone else's) nomination. I'm just saying that the nominating contest is a lose-lose for Democratic liberals. If they openly resist Sen. Obama's campaign, they look like hypocrites on race. If they nominate Sen. Obama, they prove that Blacks can make it on their own and need less protection than the Democratic liberals want to offer them.

In fact, I agree with you.

Thomas Rowley said...

Not to argue with you, Harold, but I still don't see how Democrats undergoing an open nominating process can be accused of hypocrisy. In fact, if as you say, Democrats can only prove that Blacks can make it on their own by some sort of electoral obsequiousness, that'd make the party a pretty shallow bunch.

Whether or not a black, or a woman for that matter, becomes the party's nominee pales by comparison to the hypocrisy of a party strategy of wholesale disenfranchisement for the stated reason of protecting against voter fraud, when there is no documentable case of such voter fraud, and the intent is clearly to no such end as protecting against voter fraud.

I've found myself amused by the Republican process that, this time at least, isn't the usual anointment. They all seem a bit flummoxed by the competitive process.

Harold Thomas said...

Thomas:
I am not defending the Republican Party. As far as I am concerned, both parties are pretty shallow bunches; but I have maintained for years that Republicans need to be less allergic to primaries, so maybe (hopefully, cross my fingers, etc.) this primary will have a cleansing effect on the party.

While Ohio has more than its share of white supremacists, it is also hard to do much voter fraud against blacks when your Secretary of State for eight of the last nine years was one (AND he was Republican). (He ran a ridiculous campaign for Governor last year and deserved to lose).

CarolMooreReport said...

Having lived more than 35 years in pretty harmouious communities that are less than 1/2 white in Detroit, Manhattan, Los Angeles and Washington DC I tend to identify with the aspirations of people of color. One of the reasons that I think secession can benefit them, as I explain in some works in progress. (First and foremost by getting the white elite economic boot off their necks.) People who have lived their whole lives in majority white neighborhoods might not get it and not understand that one can be for the right to separatist communities while still recommending integrated communities as a better alternative.

As a libertarian I am for voluntary measures. Some libertarians support voluntary affirmative action, others don't care or oppose it, often on purely personal grounds of whether it will hurt or harm themselves or friends/family.

Libertarians disagree about whether governments should have affirmative action -- and even quotas -- forced upon them, as a way of controlling government power where there is government. I personally am all for affirmative action and even quotas in government - and also for opposing any group having a disproportionate power in government.

So I would have a problem with Mitt Romney appointing 47% Mormons to the highest positions of power, as I heard that Clinton did with some other tiny minority group.

I think we should have quotas in representative and appointed bodies, as well as top executive positions, of approximately 50% women, since in any represented body there will be about 50% or more women.

It's harder to figure out what to do about racial minorities since they tend to be concentrated (often by racist housing policies AND by gerrymandering) into certain districts. One thing such minorities should do is oppose white carpetbaggers with lots of money and power coming in and "representing" them. (Unless the white person has been a longtime trusted community member, of course.)

And of course they should work to make sure gerrymandering does NOT cut out their power, as is often the case. For example taking two majority black areas and merging them through ridiculous line drawing into one all black and one minority black area to make sure there is only one instead of two representatives.

In other words making the legislature do what it has to to make sure a state's representation in its legislature of racial groups reflects the state's racial make up. Similarly with appointed and hired government functionaries, as long as those functions exist.

OF course, on the other hand representative government itself tends to lead to special interest rule and members of any sex or race or other group can be bought off to represent those interests. But as long as we are stuck with this imperfect system, it should at least reflect the people who are the population (as opposed to the 40-60% of people who actually vote, who tend to be a higher percentage of whites and/or of people getting a government check, subsidy or contract in one form or another).

Carol in dc
http://secession.net

CarolMooreReport said...

PS. After Ron Paul, Obama is my next choice because he will end the War on Muslims who are his relatives. His character surely does not have the flaws of the Clintons and their recent attacks on him obviously have been the most subtle (and not so subtle) despicable form of racism. For that alone people should vote against Hillary and for Obama. And evidently many are.

Plus Bill Clinton has raped and abused women and Hillary has turned a blind eye because of her political ambitions.

Like Romney said, who could possibly want another four or eight years of wondering what that guy is up to in his spare time. He says that often enough and he'd whip Billary's butt.