Don't get me wrong: There is an ideological split in America. Only one side of the split thinks it has anything to do with racism, and that is because the Leftist side benefits from the racist aspects they have encouraged in the split. Shapiro nailed it when he said:
...in the 1960s, the Marxist Left provided Americans communal meaning in ethnic and racial solidarity. Even as America began to move beyond its historic racism, the Left hijacked the conversation around race and divvied Americans up into subgroups of ethnic haves and have-nots. City governments became playgrounds for racial factions taking control of government and expanding their power. Student groups divided along racial and sexual lines. The social fabric frayed.This is one of the few truisms in both articles, and is quite representative of the world we see today.
There are many examples of black success in this country today: President Obama and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas are both examples of black success in the area of political power, even as we see many other successful blacks in Media (Oprah Winfrey) and athletics (Michael Jordan, who may be the first billionaire athlete ever), just to name two areas. There is nothing preventing blacks from achieving whatever they want.
Yet the majority of blacks don't reach such lofty heights. Then again, neither do most whites, and nobody worries about that, mainly because it has been obvious whites can achieve whatever they want. What makes the "black problem" a problem is the unequal representation of blacks below the poverty line. So what is keeping them down?
Don't ask Shapiro or Chait, who are both too busy arguing over what Obama did or didn't do, what Obama said or didn't say. Obama isn't the problem here, nor is he the solution. We know he isn't the solution because blacks have not improved their economic status under his administration. On the other hand, blacks aren't much worse off under Obama either, so he isn't the problem. At worst, Obama can be accused of continuing the problem, but that assumes he has the power to solve it, which I do not believe.
No, the problem lies in the heart of the black people themselves. Martin Luther King Jr. said it best:
Oppressed people deal with their oppression in three characteristic ways. One way is acquiescence: the oppressed resign themselves to their doom. They tacitly adjust themselves to oppression and thereby become conditioned to it. In every movement toward freedom some of the oppressed prefer to remain oppressed.A lot of what is passed off as racism today is, in reality, nothing more than some blacks preferring to remain oppressed.
King went on to say:
To accept passively an unjust system is to cooperate with that system; thereby the oppressed become as evil as the oppressor. Non-cooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. The oppressed must never allow the conscience of the oppressor to slumber. Religion reminds every man that he is his brother's keeper. To accept injustice...passively is to say to the oppressor that his actions are morally right. It is a way of allowing his conscience to fall asleep. At this moment the oppressed fails to be his brother's keeper. So acquiescence-while often the easier way-is not the moral way. It is the way of the coward.Too often, the Democrats tell the black community that they are being kept down because of racism, which isn't their fault. The truth is contrary: The black community is accepting the "soft racism" of the Democrats, and thereby becoming complicit in their own oppression. If you are offered a yoke which comes with a gift, would you wear it? At some point, blacks will have to say "no".
No comments:
Post a Comment