the non-equivalence of racism
Unfortunately, Orwell was quite predictive of the kulturesmog (thanks Emmett Tyrrell) which exists today and the reality that facts aren’t as important in polemical contests as they once were. Therefore, to win, we conservatives will have to remove the only weapon they have, i.e. the accusation of “racism” itself. We must endure it, confront it, root it out, marginalize it and minimize it. Without it, the dems cannot win.
We must make them prove it. And disagreeing with their irresponsible public policy initiatives DOES NOT constitute proof of racism. That is, we cannot let the lie continue that one group of people is inherently “better” or more caring than another simply because they are more anxious to spend other peoples’ money to prove it. In fact, it is becoming increasingly clear that spending money we don’t have will end up hurting everyone, with “poor and minorities hit hardest” (until recently, the left’s favorite headline about attempts to control outlandish gubmint spending.) We must confront it on the beaches, we must confront it on the landing grounds, we must confront it in the hills; we shall never surrender… (apologies to Sir Winston Churchill.) Capiche?
Just yesterday (Sunday), our young (black) pastor was holding forth about how we as Christians should not be overly influenced by any group, “…like the Republicans, Liberals, The Tea Party or the New Black Panther Party…” Now, his ostensible main point is well taken – of course we should not be instructed by anything but Scripture – we should be “in” the world but not “of” the world. I’m totally down with that.
However, he is implying equivalence (naively and without guile, let’s hope) between the Tea Party and the NBPP – a blatant and groundless accusation of racism. Absolutely no real evidence exists that the Tea Party is racist. Some have claimed they “heard someone” use the “n” word at a Tea Party rally and so on, but no real proof exists. Any time actual racists have attempted to associate themselves with the Tea Party, or current members shown themselves, if not racists, then extremely classless and ignorant, as in the Mark Williams affair, the Tea Party has quickly, completely and publicly disavowed them.
Contrast that to the NBPP where King Shamir Shabazz has quite PUBLICLY called for the “killing of white babies”, not to mention standing in front of a voting place in Philliy with another NBPP thug, wearing paramilitary outfits, swinging billy clubs and daring white people to vote there. Are these hateful remarks and violent shennanigans at all comparable to the Tea Party? Hardly.
No, indeed, any rational being wouldn’t hesitate in calling Holder & Obama racists for failing to prosecute these yahoos — even going so far as to interfere with a prosecution which had already taken place. But rationality is not at play here. Name-calling and false equivalency is.
Would it have been any less fair for our erstwhile young pastor to cite “the KKK and the NAACP, the Nazi Party and the New Black Panther Party” as groups not to allow influence over our thinking? Alas, the cleric had predicated his remarks with a long disquisition about how people are often “taken out of context” on many occasions. It does make one wonder whether he was being too clever by half in an effort to draw equivalency between the NBPP and the Tea Party and maintain plausible deniability, even a pre-existing offensive tool to vanquish any who might question him on the matter.
I would truly hope my youthful pastor is not so cynical and devious as to have made all these considerations beforehand. I would like to think he was simply trying to be relevant and emphatic. Making false and defamatory equivalencies is indeed quite a contemporary PC meme and thus quite relevant in its’ own way. However, since he usually makes an effort to be politically neutral, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. Besides, if you can’t trust your pastor, who can you trust?
But I will confront every intimation that those who favor a smaller gubmint are racists. I will fight every accusation that those who believe in personal responsibility are racists. And I will contest any proposal that suggests all argument has been foreclosed based simply on the provision of a false and politcally charged ad hominem attack made by mostly disingenuous and hotly interested parties.