If you’re a Republican, you’ve probably been called a “racist” at some point in your life.
Democrats accolade themselves as the progressive bastion of diversity in modernAmerica, but their policies tell us otherwise.
Before I delve into my liberal bashing, let me digress to the question of “What isracism.”
Unfortunately, even a very basic question such as this one has been muddled byliberal whackjob college professor thinking, and if you’re Bill Clinton, the word “is”is itself ambiguous. But I must be dogmatic and stick with dictionary definitions that etymologists agree upon.
Racism is, according to the Republican conspirators at American Heritage Dictionary, “1)the belief that race accounts for differences in human character of ability and that aparticular race is superior to others or 2) discrimination or prejudice based on race.”
In his famous “I Have a Dream Speech,” Martin Luther King Jr. asked that people bejudged “not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”
King hit the nail on the head. A racist sees a person as a color. A nonracist sees a personas an individual.
The founders of the Civil Rights movement dreamed of a post-racial society in whichblacks and whites (and other races) could achieve their goals without the interference ofa government caste system that mandated inequality.
Dr. Carter Woodson, the man who created “Black History Week,” the predecessor to modern Black History Month, envisioned a day in which the accomplishments of BlackAmericans would be taught alongside those of whites, and the special commemoration for blacks would no longer be needed.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m all for Black History Month. Because of it, I know GeorgeWashington Carver did a lot of cool stuff with peanuts and Garrett Morgan invented the gas mask and traffic light. Yet I had to Google the creator of the atomic bomb (who happened to be white).
The founders of the NAACP dreamed of a day in which the organization would no longer be necessary. It is remarkable that the NAACP has not only outlived its intended purpose, but has become one of the biggest perpetrators of discrimination against blacks as part of the liberal political regime.
Democrats will argue that affirmative action is key to overcoming racism, when, in reality, the very programs designed to help needy minorities play a significant role in perpetuating their discrimination by validating the notion that minorities are unqualified and incapable of competing with whites in a free market economy.
Liberals love to champion First Amendment rights to free speech, yet they have monopolized debates on racial issues by shutting up anyone who hasn’t memorized their handbook of politically correct, culturally-sensitive (assuming it’s a minority culture, that is) rhetoric and taken every last bit to heart.
Yet this rhetoric has an overwhelming negative effect. Instead of generating open-ended discussion on progress toward racial unity, those who disagree with liberal policies that hurt minorities encounter an environment of hostility and intimidation.
Even minorities who speak out against such policies are branded as racists. If Dr. King were alive today, one can only wonder whether or not he would be slammed as a “sellout.”
So then why do liberals pretend to like minorities?
Two main reasons: votes and guilt.
If it weren’t for lying and pandering to minority voters, Republicans would have won virtually every single Presidential election since the 1960s. It’s easy to understand why liberal, far left politicians seized the opportunity to manipulate an entire demographic of voters when poll taxes that discriminated against black voters were Constitutionally banned by a Republican Congress in the 1960s. Democrats were clamoring for votes, desperate to remain a viable political force.
The other reason is the obese godmother of white liberal racism: guilt. Without a doubt, blacks and other minorities were the victims of severe discrimination in the past, and remain victims of stealth discrimination today.
But supporting liberal policies is nothing more than a sick way of assuaging one’s guilty conscience while underhandedly perpetrating discrimination.
It’s like boycotting Wal-mart because it pays people minimum wage and then turning around and buying groceries from an organic “health foods” store that sells overpriced, inefficiently-grown crap that poor people could never afford and pays people the same wages as Wal-mart.
Oh wait. Liberals do that too. And I’m sure they could feed about 10 starving orphans in Africa (or impoverished parts of the U.S.) if they substituted Hy-Vee rotisserie chickens for the locally-grown, free-range ones they bought at Whole Foods and donated the savings to charity. But who cares about personal responsibility? It’s the government’s job to solve society’s problems, silly libertarian moron!
Is the Democratic Party today really any different from the one that filibustered the Senate’s attempt to make lynching a federal crime in the 1920s? I think not.