Dreams of day when race doesn’t matter

Thanks for visiting The Daily Sentinel

Subscribers and registered users, log in to continue reading for free*

Forgot your password?    

Register to read for free! Become a subscriber

* 7-day subscribers have unlimited access to online content.
Registered users may read 12 articles per month.


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Kudos to the Daily Sentinel’s editors for “Dreams of day when race doesn’t matter”.

On this 50th anniversary of MLK’s “I Have a Dream” speech at the entirely non-violent March on Washington, it is important to recall that Malcolm X was still alive then and preaching a more forceful message.  Even so, it took the assassination of JFK and grief mustered by a white Southerner – LBJ – to pass the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (“VRA”).

Now, almost fifty years later, in gutting the most effective prophylactic provisions of the VRA – and despite the Fifteenth Amendment’s plain language – our Supreme Court (with Justice Scalia characterizing minority citizens’ “fundamental right to vote” as just another “racial entitlement” akin to “affirmative action”) has reopened the “sore in our culture” and given license to the lingering racism that was closeted for decades.

The debated relevance of minority crime statistics is symptomatic.  “Liberals” attribute those statistics to “external factors” – e.g., poverty, educational deprivation, the War on Drugs, etc.; “conservatives” attribute them to “internal factors” – insisting that non-White minorities – even if not inherently inferior—have a greater propensity for violent crime, which justifies unconstitutional “racial profiling” and/or “Stand Your Ground” laws.

While both sides rely on dubious anecdotal evidence to “prove their point”, the revealing “tell” is that “conservatives” oppose funding every program that is proven to ameliorate the “external factors”, and instead rely on prisons and guns to protect White society.

Unfortunately, the Sentinel succumbs to the false equivalency of “voter I.D.” laws and the VRA – equating the entirely unsupported fear-mongered assertion of “widespread but undetected” voter fraud with deliberate efforts to suppress minority and student voting.

Nevertheless, the ultimate legal question is whether election laws designed to promote partisan Repugnican interests also have the “intent and/or effect” of unconstitutionally discriminating against racial minorities.

As one who leans libertarian, I would say of this particular editorial, “nice try, but no cigar.”
The elephant in the room is so-called “white guilt” combined with the fact manipulative race mongers of the Jackson-Sharpton school of “thought” have succeeded in raising a generation of black youth who are seriously entitlement-minded and hate whites. Any effort to study hard to acquire knowledge and better oneself is commonly referred to in that demographic as “acting white”. Black conservatives such as Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams have fairly addressed the issue to no particular effect in the manipulator-entitlement community.
Any and all attempts at intellectually honest discussion of any issue are very effectively derailed by making false accusations of “racist!” against those with whom the demonizers disagree. It is truly an unsustainable and unacceptable situation.
The Sentinel errs when it appears to try to draw some kind of “touchy-feely” moral equivalence between those who cry “Racist!” and those who cry “Race Monger!” The standard lib rhetorical manipulation (by far more frequently used by blacks than whites) of “If you don’t want to pay more taxes so I can have more ‘freebies’ you’re a racist,” is merely a fraudulent (albeit highly effective) polemic ploy to end and/or prevent all meaningful discussion of subjects such as Economics 101 (including Monetary Policy 101) or Constitution 101.
This problem is not going to be solved until white-guilt addicts join with black conservatives and react to the “R” word with the same level of visceral outrage that entitlement-minded white-hating blacks react to the “N” word.
Jonah Goldberg recently wrote: “From Obama down to his cheerleaders in the press, liberals have declared unremitting war on their ideological opponents, cynically polarizing the country along racial — and, when possible, gender — lines. They, not conservatives, have been the ones dragging race into any and every political dispute they can. This disgusting strategy has worked well for them, galvanizing minority voters and tarring the Republican brand.”
At the very least, let’s don’t pretend that any significant number of people yell “Race monger!” before some entitlement manipulator has first yelled “Racist!” It just ain’t so. Those who yell “Race Monger!” are most often merely engaging in the rhetorical tit-for-tat needed to jar the so-called race “conversation” off dead center.

The general population as been so systematically dumbed down by government schools that they no longer understand the difference between a commodity-based medium of exchange and political-manipulation-based mediums of exchange. Nor do they understand the functional mechanical differences and ramifications between the two different types of mediums of exchange.
No less a luminary than Thomas Paine wrote about paper legal tender: “The laws of a country ought to be the standard of equity and calculated to impress on the minds of the people the moral as well as the legal obligations of political justice. But tender laws, of any kind, operate to destroy morality, and to dissolve by the pretence of law what ought to be the principle of law to support, reciprocal justice between man and man; and the punishment of a member who should move for such a law ought to be DEATH.”
This is but one example, albeit an immensely important one, of a subject which cannot be discussed due to deliberately fraudulent charges of “Racist!” made by manipulative libs — as their preferred choice of political strategies — of all skin colors who don’t want the general population to understand the subject matter. As a result, the U.S. Constitution, rule of law, Golden-Rule morality and reciprocal justice between individuals have not been just damaged. They have been completely destroyed. What was once the American Dream has become the American Nightmare.
Unfortunately for humankind, Justice Field’s dissenting statement in Juilliard v. Greenman, 110 U.S. 421 (1884) (http://bit.ly/17m9lUY), “from the decision of the court I see only evil likely to follow,” has proven to be an all-too-accurate prophecy. That means there will have to be enormous suffering before the entitlement-minded race mongers shut the hell up, start educating themselves, and start producing products useful to, and purchased by,  other humans.

Because John Wilkenson “leans libertarian”, his rambling screed reflects the incoherence and internal inconsistency typical of “libertarian thought”.

The defecating “elephant in [Wilkenson’s] room” is the fact that Libertarians – including Ron and Rand Paul – rely on the Association Clause of the First Amendment to insist that both individuals and businesses (and States) retain the “liberty” to discriminate against whomever they choose. 

However, his personal preferences notwithstanding, racial minorities are constitutionally entitled to the same “liberties” that Wilkenson would demand for himself.

Wilkenson then conveniently confuses for “white guilt” the profound sense of injustice – derived from both the Bible and our founding documents—that originated when the 14th and 15th Amendments were effectively abrogated by the “Great Betrayal” of 1877, when Democrats and Republicans conspired to end Reconstruction – thereby plunging the Old South into another 80+ years of apartheid and lynchings.

Of course, Wilkenson ignores the social and economic consequences of Jim Crow and prolonged segregation.  Even more telling of Wilkenson’s intellectual dishonesty and/or confusion is his failure to address voting rights at all.  Because voting is the fundamental right upon which all other “liberties” depend, one would expect a cogent Libertarian to recognize the despicable un-American injustice inherent in voter suppression.

Wilkenson’s sophistry also denies well-video-taped historical fact – blaming President “Obama and his cheerleaders” for “cynically polarizing the country along racial – and then gender – lines”, when the not-so-subtle racist reaction to Obama’s election (as camouflaged behind “birthers’” rejection of a Black president’s legitimacy) spawned the “Tea Party”, which then induced servile Republicans to pursue policies that necessarily and intentionally “polarized the country along racial – and then – gender lines”.

Finally, Wilkenson self-identifies with that segment of the general population who have been “dumbed down” by Libertarian gibberish regarding our currency.  The vacuity of Wilkenson’s illogic is his pathetic reliance on the lone dissent in an 8-1 Supreme Court decision in 1884 – thereby substituting the dated mercantile opinion of Justice Field for nearly 130 years of more relevant economic experience and theory drawn therefrom. 

However, to the extent that Wilkenson is correct—that “the U.S. Constitution, rule of law, Golden-Rule morality, and reciprocal justice between individuals have not just been damaged”, but “completely destroyed” – the place to begin is with voting rights.  Only by incorporating all citizens in the electoral process can the American Nightmare imposed on racial minorities be transformed into the American Dream described by MLK.

Search More Jobs

734 S. Seventh St.
Grand Junction, CO 81501
Subscribe to print edition
Sign in to your account

© 2014 Grand Junction Media, Inc.
By using this site you agree to the Visitor Agreement and the Privacy Policy