James Tarranto of OpinionJournal quotes, from the New York Sun, a remarkable performance by Rep. Charles Rangel before the Congressional Black Caucus:
WASHINGTON
Previous Entry: USA TODAY Letter
Next Entry: The Diversity Dilemma
James Tarranto of OpinionJournal quotes, from the New York Sun, a remarkable performance by Rep. Charles Rangel before the Congressional Black Caucus:
WASHINGTON
As Saul Alinsky once said, “Agitate, agitate, agitate. Even after you win concessions, keep agitating and keep the power structure on its heels.”
Sen. Hilary Clinton, a supporter of preferences, considered Alinsky “a mentor.” Rep. Rangel has expressed admiration for him, too.
Because of P.T. Barnum-style hucksters such as Alinsky, the Civil Rights movement morphed from a noble endeavor into a cash cow for those who would exploit it. And that’s a disgrace…
Excellent point you brought up about the counter-argument that has been created.
John writes:
>>>”Although there are still no “compelling arguments on the other side,” the civil rights movement is now in tatters because it and its liberal allies have created a counter-argument where none existed before: that civil rights requires racial preferences, that colorblindness is racist, etc.
That argument embodies uncomplicated wrongness; it does not appeal to the conscience of most Americans; and it is widely, and deservedly, rejected — except at the Supreme Court, in admissions offices and editorial board meetings; and in elite circles elsewhere.”
You see, the problem I have with this argument is that it makes two troubling assumptions:
A) The Civil Rights movement THEN and NOW are essentially LIBERAL movements (which would place conservatives as the opposing force, which is historically accurate)
B) The conscience of the white majority will not recognize and act upon an obvious injustice, or unchallenged argument without the most extreme stimulus.
–Cobra
Cobra, you are wrong. The kind of statements that Rangel and we often make turn people who are not black against civil rights. That kind of extreme stimulus disgusts people. It is hysterical and irrational and factually incorrect and serves no purpose. In one way it’s a veiled threat, a threat to do what exactly? In another way, it’s begging. Please white people feel pity for me. I’m so wretched. It’s undignified. And it’s all aimed at getting white people to do something or the other. If the aim is to improve conditions for black people its the wrong method. The aim might be something different however. Anyway, I like Zora Neale Hurston, who refused to be “tragically Negro.” I refuse it too.
Anita writes:
>>>”Cobra, you are wrong. The kind of statements that Rangel and we often make turn people who are not black against civil rights. That kind of extreme stimulus disgusts people.”
Really? So your argument here that non-black people are easily swayed from believing in civil rights for all people based upon the words of one black congressman?
You are KIDDING, right?
Anita writes:
>>>” And it’s all aimed at getting white people to do something or the other. If the aim is to improve conditions for black people its the wrong method.”
Exactly what is the correct method of improving conditions for black people in America? Hmmm…let’s take a trip down memory lane.
Slavery for centuries…from 1604 to the Emancipation…Jim Crow from that time until the 60’s…rampant and DOCUMENTED job, housing and loan discrimination against blacks TODAY?
I mean, Anita, an outsider would be led to believe that Rangel isn’t that far off base about the treatment of blacks here, yet you would seek another strategy for change…one which I would like for you to define here.
Your debate isn’t with me on this one. Your debate is with the reality of American history and its account of barbarity concerning African Americans.
–Cobra
It’s not just the word of one congressman. It’s the half begging half threatening overwrought statements constantly issued by black people in response to which white people are supposed to feel guilty and start frantically proving they are not racist. More and more non black people are just rolling their eyes in response to that approach. The word “racist” is losing its magical powers. As for what we should do, we can do things for ourselves without waiting for a revolution by or in white people. We can stop crime in our own neighborhoods, discipline our own children, go into our own schools to improve education, stop littering in our own neighborhoods and a bunch of other things that have nothing to do with white people. And even if the approach is to get whites to do something, the continual begging and threatening is not going to succeed.
It’s comparing the tactics of MLK with those of Malcolm X. You can’t say that MLK did not knew the history of black people! But he did not threaten or beg, even as he and his followers were attacked and arrested. Malcolm X ridiculed King, and continually threatened, but to what end? Malcolm did not believe in integration and hated whites, so what was he recommending? Race war? Rangel could have said that race had something to do with the Katrina situation without comparing Bush to Bull Connor. The minute he said that he lost a large part of his audience. Every bad situation is not bad to the same degree or in the same way and if the aim is to improve the bad situation, there has to be honesty about how bad it is. Otherwise, it’s just crying wolf.
Anita writes:
>>>”It’s the half begging half threatening overwrought statements constantly issued by black people in response to which white people are supposed to feel guilty and start frantically proving they are not racist.”
You make an interesting statement here, Anita. You’re basically insinuating here that white people are collectively BLIND; that they can’t see for themselves the very REALITY of racism in America, and any claims to the contrary by African Americans will be viewed as shrill, inflammatory rhetoric.
Fascinating. But you don’t stop there…
>>>The word “racist” is losing its magical powers.”
I wasn’t aware that word was “magical” at all. What I do believe it IS, is a factual description of American reality.
>>>”We can stop crime in our own neighborhoods, discipline our own children, go into our own schools to improve education, stop littering in our own neighborhoods and a bunch of other things that have nothing to do with white people. And even if the approach is to get whites to do something, the continual begging and threatening is not going to succeed.”
Well, if I was a stranger to this weblog, I would be under the impression that you support a SEGREGATIONIST approach to solving problems, and not the “color-blind” strategies embraced by
John Rosenberg and other anti-affirmative action types here.
Do you really embrace a “separate but equal” attitude in all aspects of life?
Why else would you say “OUR own neighborhoods”, “OUR own schools”, and a “bunch of other things that don’t involve white people…”
Very curious indeed, especially in light of the attacks you make against Malcolm X, here:
“Malcolm did not believe in integration and hated whites, so what was he recommending?”
Does an “integrationist” (or any color blindness advocate) make statements like “our own anything” in regards to racial matters?
–Cobra