Who’s The Racist?

The American Left tosses the charge of racism around with abandon, so much so that they’ve cheapened the word to the point that it’s virtually meaningless; anything and everything that opposes any prominent liberal African-American person, but especially President Barack Obama, is subject to the accusation. (Liberal is key, here; conservative African-Americans will be ruthlessly and savagely attacked by the Left.)

The latest wave of baseless racism charges comes with speculation that U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice may be nominated to serve as Secretary of State during President Obama’s second term. Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) has accused Senator John McCain of using a code word (we’ve discussed code words here before) by calling Ambassador Rice “incompetent” while questioning her qualifications to serve as Secretary of State. Rep. Clyburn apparently feels that the Ambassador’s recent and rather infamous appearances on no less than five Sunday morning news programs to promulgate the lie that the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya, were the result of a crass, anti-Islam YouTube video isn’t grounds for criticism…when even an amoeba could see it was a terrorist attack, coming, as it did, on the anniversary of the September 11th.

Robert Turner sums it up nicely.

Now we have a member of the House Democratic leadership saying words such as “incompetent” are code words for racism.  Give me a [expletive deleted] break!  In the case of U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, the use of the term incompetent is code for lacking the qualities needed for effective action.

David Duke is a racist.  There are many things you can call Senator John McCain, but that ain’t one of them.

Racism is an ugly thing; it has no place in a civil society, but voicing legitimate concerns isn’t racism; in fact, it is the opposite of racism in that it assumes that the recipient of the criticism is an individual capable of improving her performance rather than an otherwise featureless representative of her racial group in need of coddling and special protections in order to succeed.

Getting back to Rep. Clyburn’s claim that John McCain’s criticisms are based on racism…well, false charges of racism are ugly, too. Nothing in John McCain’s record would lead a reasonable person to believe he harbors any racist tendencies whatsoever. Rep. Clyburn knows this, but crassly makes the false charge. He demeans the experience of other African-Americans who have experienced real racism and dishonors the accomplishments of the Civil Rights era. Why? Because what he really wants to say sound so childish: “Shut up, Senator McCain! Shutupshutupshutupshutup!”

Critical Race Theory, Racism And The Tea Party

“The individual racist need not exist to note that institutional racism is pervasive in the dominant culture.”

Critical Race Theory has been in the news since the release of video footage last week of Barack Obama introducing Professor Derrick Bell during his (Obama’s) days as a Harvard Law student. Professor Bell, a Harvard Law professor, was one of the leading proponents of the theory. Using language more suited to a big tent revival than the halls of education, the young Obama asks the audience to “open their hearts and minds” to the words of Professor Bell.

I’ll be honest with you:  I’d never heard of Critical Race Theory before Breitbart released the video in question, so my knowledge is limited to what I can read about it online. God knows, it’s not something we discussed in my high school Civics class…mainly because I was years out of high school before Professor Bell conceived of this – dare I say radical? – concept.

Reading up about it has been fascinating, with articles ranging from plain vanilla, palatable for the masses, to those discussing the more controversial components of the theory.

Even bland vanilla, possibly inadvertently, can shed some light on the underlying assumptions of CRT.

“Learning to look critically at race relations is a key part of critical race theory. Examining everyday interactions, and finding the racial component in them…” (emphasis added)

Applying common rules of English usage, we learn from the above passage that a racial component is assumed for every interaction between people with minority status and, presumably, white people (although if you continue reading, the example given mentions several combinations of white and minority people; I’m not sure if CRT would actually consider all of them or if they’re included merely to add to the yummy vanilla flavor of the article).

Moving on to the even more controversial aspects of the theory, we learn:

“CRT recognizes that racism is engrained in the fabric and system of the American society. The individual racist need not exist to note that institutional racism is pervasive in the dominant culture. This is the analytical lens that CRT uses in examining existing power structures. CRT identifies that these power structures are based on white privilege and white supremacy, which perpetuates the marginalization of people of color. CRT also rejects the traditions of liberalism and meritocracy. Legal discourse says that the law is neutral and colorblind, however, CRT challenges this legal “truth” by examining liberalism and meritocracy as a vehicle for self-interest, power, and privilege.  CRT also recognizes that liberalism and meritocracy are often stories heard from those with wealth, power, and privilege. These stories paint a false picture of meritocracy; everyone who works hard can attain wealth, power, and privilege while ignoring the systemic inequalities that institutional racism provides.” (emphasis added)

For those of us who have spent the last three years wondering how in the absence of any real evidence, the race industry has felt justified in calling the Tea Party racist, we now have an answer. Yes, I understand that many of those doing the name-calling were doing so solely for purposes of political expediency, but others were motivated by sincerely-held beliefs, shaped by Critical Race Theory, about the nature of our culture.

CRT tells us that whether or not there are any actual racists involved with the Tea Party is irrelevant, because the Tea Party is defending a dominant and inherently racist culture. Tea Partiers look at the Constitution and see an enduring document intended to preserve and protect the rights of all citizens, and CRT sees a document that serves only to protect white privilege. Tea Partiers look at the Supreme Court and believe Justices should be selected based on their willingness to operate within the bounds of the Constitution as written  and CRT believes they should be selected based on racial status, because miniorities have unique experiences that will lead to greater overall “justice.” Tea Partiers embrace Martin Luther King’s ideal that we should judge people not “by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character” and CRT tells us that a meritocracy is not and can never be colorblind.

It sounds absurd to me to say that racism can exist in the absence of any actual racists, but that’s obviously because I’m an ignorant, white yokel, incapable of understanding the more nuanced approach of Critical Race Theory. As I once wrote, “God save me from a nuanced approach. Nuance is the mantle intellectuals like to don when espousing ideas that slap common sense in the face.” I believe common sense is reeling from the blow.

When Racism Isn’t Racist At All

Perhaps the next time Gawker chooses to lecture on racism, a quick check on the meaning of “race” and “nationality” would be in order. Last time I checked, Germans, Russians, Greeks, Vikings and the French were all Caucasian. Some of these were categorized as not being racist, but for all the wrong reasons.

To their credit, they did correctly note “French isn’t a race, but it is a nationality,” leaving one to wonder why the French maid was included at all.

H/T Dan Collins

Speaking Out Against Charges Of Racism

“This movement isn’t just about taxes and it has nothing to do with the color of the President’s skin. It is about returning this country to the principles of limited government, free markets and individual rights that our Founding Fathers intended.”

Jennifer Burke speaking at Seattle's 2010 Tax Day Tea Party

Jennifer Burke is the wife of Matthew Burke, candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives in Washington’s 1st district. She is the youngest of 6 from a working class family. She is originally from the great state of Texas. A graduate of Texas A&M University, she has a degree in Psychology and has lifetime teacher certification in Texas. Jennifer taught Math, History and Speech Communications to 5th through 8th graders for 11 years. She is mom to 3 kids and 4 dogs.

She’s also a newly minted Tea Party activist. Recently, Jennifer had this to say about charges that the Tea Party movement is racist.

“The Tea Party movement has been wrongly and unfairly characterized as a racist movement. As evidence of this, detractors of the movement like to point out that there are very few people of color involved in Tea Party activities. I believe that the reason there are not many people of color in the movement is due to a misunderstanding of what the movement represents. I also believe that minority groups have been taken in by the distortions and misrepresentations that are reported in the media and disseminated by a Democratic Party that is feeling very threatened.

This movement isn’t just about taxes and it has nothing to do with the color of the President’s skin. It is about returning this country to the principles of limited government, free markets and individual rights (granted by God, not the government) that our Founding Fathers intended.

I was drawn to the Tea Party Movement as I watched the core integrity of my country being pulled away at a rapid rate. Granted, we had been on a slippery slope for quite some time, but 2009 was a full speed, head on attack on the principles, values, history, and citizens of this country. On election night, I was astounded that so many Americans fell for the picture the media painted of Obama as a centrist. I paid attention to the truths that came out about his background and affiliations. When looking at what he stood for, his voting record as a Senator, things he’d said, and what he’d done in the past, I knew he was not a centrist, but rather a radical leftist. It disappointed me greatly when I heard people speak about how the election of Obama was a realization of the dream of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. My belief is that his election was quite the opposite; contrary to the vision of Dr. King. If America truly judged this man by the content of his character and not the color of his skin, then all controversies surrounding his past would not have been denounced as racist. Nearly every argument against him both during the campaign and since the election have been denounced as racist. There is a movement to silence the voice of the people by defaming them.

The Democratic policies to expand the welfare state and grow government do not help. It simply keeps people stuck in a place in which many can no longer see their way out. When you have generational welfare with even the youngest believing that is their lot in life, a thought process that I worked hard to counter in my years as a teacher, then there is a problem. Couple those policies with their constant use of class warfare and race baiting and you have not a party or President seeking bi-partisan solutions in an attempt to bring the country together, but a party and President seeking to pit Americans against each other using clearly partisan tactics.

I felt that I had to address these attacks on the Tea Party movement. To ignore their attacks would simply help perpetuate their stereotype and allow them to silence and shame us into submission. The fact that there have been many vocally criticizing this attack on the Tea Party movement as itself being racist has caused the left to pivot and search for yet another claim to make. Now, the attack being made is that this movement is one of sedition. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the definition of sedition is incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority. If it is seditious to expect that our government leaders will follow the Constitution, then we have a problem here in America. Contrary to what many, including our president, would like you to believe, the Constitution is not a ‘living and breathing document.’ That idea is being pushed for the sole purpose of transforming this country into a place that is completely counter to what the Founding Fathers intended. The people that came before us did not go through everything they did for us to slip quietly into the night and become another European society.”

To for more information about Matthew Burke, visit his campaign Web site.

I’m Not From Missouri, But Show Me Anyway

So the Washington Post reports “Black lawmakers say ‘tea party’ protesters used racial epithets.”

Black lawmakers said Saturday that “tea party” protesters outside the Capitol hurled racial epithets at Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), a former civil rights leader who was nearly beaten to death during a 1965 march, as he headed out of the building on his way to President Obama’s final health-care rally.

Rep. Andre Carson (D-Ind.), walking next to Lewis after the Obama speech, told reporters that protesters yelled “kill the bill,” then used a racial epithet to describe Carson and Lewis, who is a revered figure on both sides of the aisle. By the time the president spoke, thousands of protesters had gathered south of the Capitol.

Snip…

Lewis’s office has not yet commented on the matter.

(Apparently the headline writers at the Post can’t be bothered by pesky facts such as, for example, the fact that only one of the black lawmakers named has had anything to say about the alleged incident.)

After watching this video, I’d say that Rep. Carson must have special, slur enhancing ears (is that a super power?) if he could hear a single voice or two shouting racial epithets over the crowd’s chants of “kill the bill.”

Here’s another…I’m not going to say that I envy the Congressmen making that walk – it must have been very unpleasant – but while there’s plenty of jeering and chanting, it’s remarkably epithet-free.

But let me get to my point. If Rep. Carson wants to make accusations of tea party protesters slinging racial slurs, I say”show me.” There were plenty of video cameras around; footage should be available. It’s very, very easy to make specious accusations of racism and they are unfortunately damaging and difficult to disprove.

Truthfully, leftists have relied on the racism charge so heavily as a means to shut up their opposition that it’s lost much of its sting. Still, from now on, if leftists want to cry racism, I say make them prove it.

Update 1: More information on this story from the D.C. Independent Examiner.