Posted on 08/13/2003 6:57:47 AM PDT by bedolido
While doing my weekly shopping at the Jewel-Osco, I overheard a very unusual conversation. It was between two young baggers who were talking about an article one of them had read regarding President Lincoln. Both men happened to be black. One of them informed the other that President Lincoln cared nothing about blacks and was actually a racist. I was stunned. I wanted to interject a million things to their discussion but I didn’t. Instead, I silently watched the checker ring up my order. The incident immediately brought to mind the old commercial from the seventies where tears run down the eye of an Indian brave as he paddles across a river filled with pollutants. I felt like that Indian as I listened to President Lincoln, the man who freed the slaves, badmouthed by a couple of assistants in a grocery store.
This was the same Lincoln who, during a triumphant walk through Richmond, told a group of bowing slaves to get up because the only king they should bow to was Jesus Christ. I wanted to explain to the clerks that men should be judged by the standards of the days in which they live. Some of Lincoln’s opinions may seem outlandish today, but during the 1860’s he was one of the most enlightened men on the continent. By the standards of the nineteenth century, black Americans had no better friend than Abraham Lincoln.
Race is the biggest taboo issue in America today. Almost everyone acknowledges this but acknowledgement does not make our dialogues any smoother. I discovered this for myself the other day after I wrote a column about rap music. It was a favorable elaboration upon one wrote for City-Journal by John McWhorter. Based on my observations of urban youth, I supported McWhorter’s claim that rap music keeps blacks down through its celebration of pointless rebellion, violence, and nihilism. I received many irate responses. One of them turned into a ten email debate with a reader. By the end of the discussion, we knew a great deal about one another and, vicariously, quite a bit about discussing race in America.
Our little dispute could well have been a microcosm of the nation as a whole. It is unfortunate that I, and numerous other Caucasians, do not always emphatically state our views when asked. Yet, there are major hazards to beware of when addressing race. You never know what the reaction of the person you’re speaking to may be and no one wants to get fired over a conversation.
I could tell that the young man at the other end of the server was not used to dealing with white people like me. He only knows whites who defer to him and agree when he says that he has been wronged. He has been conditioned into thinking that all whites will apologize for their ancestry. I, absolutely, and under no circumstance, will ever apologize for my ancestors. In fact, thank G-d for my ancestors! I wish there were more Americans like them.
He began our exchange by telling me that I shouldn’t be writing about rap music at all as I don’t know anything about it. He also believes that there is nothing wrong with it and that it doesn’t harm anyone. I countered by stating that, while it’s true that I don’t know all the names of the famous rappers, I have unfortunately been subjected to a ton of it and know firsthand adolescents who emulate the words and actions of their favorite stars.
The dialogue went downhill from there (if that’s possible). There was practically no common ground between us, yet I think that is how it should be. White Americans, if they honestly responded to the claims of black separatists and black powerites, would hear little with which to agree.
Most Caucasian Americans are hard-working and middle class. There are very few like Bill Gates or Paul Allen. Most of us make a decent wage and are content with it. We oppress no one. No ancestors of mine were in the United States before 1910, but, even if they were, it would be superfluous as I personally have committed no wrongs to anyone. I told the young man that white guilt is one of the most pernicious influences within our society. Although this white guilt has not hurt our economic success, it has made many whites regard themselves as being morally inferior to the rest of the population.
He made the point that “institutional racism” is the reason many blacks “have not made it.” I told him there was no such thing. It is a creation of the university Marxists who have substituted “African-Americans, Hispanics, women and gays” for the word “proletariat.” The entire concept of “oppressed” and “oppression” is merely idiotic Marxist claptrap. It’s a product of juvenile leftists and should be disregarded. Besides, if there were such a thing as institutional racism no blacks would have ever made it. They’re be no Cedric the Entertainer’s, Deion Sanders’, Tiger Woods’ or Halle Berry’s. If there were any truth in the flawed rubric of institutional racism, all the aforementioned successful blacks would have been poor sharecroppers rather than cultural icons.
We, of course, also clashed on affirmative action. He regarded it as a prerequisite for black success. He said, “The Supreme Court finally got it right.” I, on the other hand, think, “The Supreme Court wrote more legislation.” Clearly, affirmative action is one of the reasons blacks have not been more successful since 1970. You can’t put an average student in Cal Tech and expect them to flourish. They fail and the race hustlers could care less how the experience impedes their future development. Even more grievous, is that affirmative action gives racism the imprimatur of the state. A federal stamp of approval compounds its evil.
Towards the end of our exchange, the reader admitted that he felt blacks should not have to work more than one job and do overtime to get ahead in life. Their route should be more direct. He felt long hours were for immigrants and that “we’ve already played that game.” He argued that blacks have put their blood and sweat into this country’s infrastructure and deserve reparation for their effort.
Honestly, I have no respect for this argument whatsoever. The request for reparations could not be less valid. Blacks in America already have the world’s greatest reparation: United States citizenship. Every single one of the reader’s racial cousins in Africa, or anywhere else in the world for that matter, would kill to be in his shoes. They would stow away in a mouse trap just to get here and have an opportunity to be Americans. Most of them fantasize about an existence without murderous kleptomaniac dictators and having children who are free from disease. America is opportunity and blacks are no different from whites in that we all should be forever thankful that we somehow got to these shores.
I discovered that I profited greatly from this reader. Christopher Hitchens, in his fascinating book, Letters to a Young Contrarian, informs us that the great thing about argumentation is that both sides refine and modify their positions which doing it. I hold this to be true and my exchange with the young man is evidence of it.
In this particular argument, I realized something that I never had before. Clearly, it is conservatives like me who care about poor blacks (most, in fact, are middle class) as opposed to the pseudo-liberals. We offer them the best route for advancement. We want to challenge them and make them stronger. We resist the desire to infantilize them. By treating them like adults and inculcating responsibility through achievement, they will prosper just as every other group of Americans have before them.
My opponent, perhaps unconsciously, wants them to stay poor so he can continue to berate America and critique our way of life. Were their lot to suddenly improve, he’d have no positions and no identity.
Before this conversation, I never realized just how much that I am rooting for poor black folks. I want them to be as productive as everyone else and to “make it” in America. I want no less for them than I do for myself. It would please me to no end if all our citizens were grateful for what they have. No white people get anything out of a major percentage of the population being resentful and angry.
Racial harmony can only be achieved if we treat one another as individuals and not as members of fictitious classes. If you want to be oppressed you’ll find a way to be oppressed, and such a condition damages society as a whole. Racism is wrong in any of its manifestations. We will never all get along if we continue to pretend that some of us, due to the melanin content in our skin, are better than others. Period.
To comment on this article or express your opinion directly to the author, you are invited to e-mail Bernard at bchapafl@hotmail.com .
Before the Constitution, there was a confederation of States organized as a Republic, cooperative with each other, but much more individually sovereign. After, there was a more perfect Union, a Nation in truth.
Yes it is still just a dream. It is a dream that has reached the hearts of millions. Oddly it seams more white people dream it these days that black. All to often I see people asking that special treatment be given to them because they have dark skin.
When you speak of this, it reminds me of my time in the military where we were required to do things that we did not agree because the instructions were given by someone who has the legal authority to do so...
I hope there was a typo there. I painted grass green due to a legal order once. Then I wrote about it to the people who ran Fraud Waste and Abuse. I never painted grass again.
I think that we should have a law concerning speed traps but it is not up to me. I still have to follow the law or risk losing my life or my freedom or my property. I do not agree with the law but I follow it.
No Argument there.
Are you taking the position that though affirmative action is the law, you are willing to violently oppose it or are you stating that there are others (not you, of course) that feel as if a race war is going to result from affirmative action?"
Not at all. I believe there will come a day when the current 'goals' are achieved and the bar will be raised even higher. I believe that there are groups of people who attempt at every turn to achieve superiority rather than equality. I believe there are people who will, given the opportunity, seek to give themselves permanent privileged status. I believe that there will come a day when they will be stopped. If they are not stopped by the very people they claim to be helping, all of those people will be caught up in the backlash that follows.
So, back to what I asked earlier, Who determines when enough is enough?
If you think there is an end to it, then by all means find that end and get the supposed 'leadership' on board to support bringing things to a close.
You asked in your post if you can trust me, I say yes you can. I live in the south, racism was frowned upon in my all white high school. Racism is frowned upon by leadership at work. I haven't heard any racist jokes (if you don't include polish, Irish, and Scottish jokes as racist---most don't) in an incredibly long time. (Except on BET and heck, I laugh at those too.) Things have changed incredibly in my lifetime alone. For the most part American's of European lineage have sought understanding and granted acceptance. Sure there are still many hearts left to change, but you wont do that with a sledgehammer, you will only breed contempt. Understanding and acceptance must come not only from those hearts that pump blood to melanin poor skin cells. If the debate gets too one sided, contempt, fear and hate are the inevitable outcome.
This begs the question if Lincoln broke the Constitution. It's a "have you stopped beating your wife" type of question. There are two sides to the question, but I am of the opinion that the President did not exceed his authority, and that it was the Southern States that were acting unconstitutionally by attempting secession by force of arms.
If the South had wanted to test the Constitutionality of secession, they should have done so through the Supreme Court, not armed rebellion. By raising an army, they violated Article 1, Sections 8 & 10, and allowed habeas corpus to be suspended under Section 9.
So, instead, the matter was resolved by force of arms; the questions of secession and the keeping of slaves was a fait accompli, and the Southern cause was lost.
You pays yer money, and you takes yer chances.
Ironically, you state Lincoln didn't overstep the bounds of the USC, but you admit the suspension of the habeas corpus, incorrectly placing blame on the southern confederacy. Let me remind you the Congress of the CSA voted twice to suspend, and failed to grant approval with Davis' final request. The difference? Congress was called to a vote.
Don't be fooled into thinking it was an emergency and Congress could not be called to session; the WBTS did not happen overnight.
Can you include that specific line items from the Articles and dates where they were violated (incl. by whom)?
Ah. I thought we were discussing Lincoln in this thread, not all the other people who were President when the Union was in danger of breaking. So, which President did you have in mind?
Ah. I thought we were discussing Lincoln in this thread, not all the other people who were President when the Union was in danger of breaking. So, which President did you have in mind?
Ironically, you state Lincoln didn't overstep the bounds of the USC, but you admit the suspension of the habeas corpus, incorrectly placing blame on the southern confederacy.
Well, they were in armed revolt, weren't they? Lincoln didn't just wake up one morning and decide to suspend the writ on a whim.
Let me remind you the Congress of the CSA voted twice to suspend, and failed to grant approval with Davis' final request. The difference? Congress was called to a vote.
The suspension of habeas corpus is an undelegated power in the Constitution. For further reading, see here: http://hometown.aol.com/gordonkwok/habeas_corpus.html
....And thus remains with the state. Now we are getting somewhere!
The writ is "the fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action."
--Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 286, 290-91 (1969).
Thanks for the link. Bottom-line: Congressional approval is required to suspend the writ.
Thanks for the link. Bottom-line: Congressional approval is required to suspend the writ
Case cites from 1969 do not pertain to actions in the 1860's. At the time, the power was undelegated to either the Executive or the Legislative; it was simply a power of the Federal govt. during time of insurrection. Lincoln, seeing a state of insurrection and without a Congress available in session, exercised this Federal power.
Justice Taney ruled after the fact that the power belonged to the Congress, but then again, Taney was about as unbiased as the current high court of Florida, and was ignored, seeing as how there were more pressing matters for the military to deal with. The matter wasn't really taken up until after the war. Bottom line, it's a moot point: as far as when Lincoln took the action, it was legal for him to do so. Afterwards, the war was in full swing and military law was in effect.
Well that's a lie. I've already documented that they met for you several times, Walt. Hay sent Butler a memo with Lincoln's endorsement on April 10 informing him that they would meet the next day. For an index containing the memo's location see the Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, Vol. 8, p 588.
Lincoln did nothing to support colonization after 1/1/63.
And that's also a lie. In November 1864 Lincoln went to his AG Edward Bates and asked for a ruling that would allow him to retain Mitchell as his colonization commissioner. As Bates' response of November 30, 1864 irrefutably indicates, the purpose of his retention was to continue the pursuit and enactment of colonization policies.
Well that's a lie.
It's not a lie. The Butler story does not seem to appear in any of the major bio's of President Lincoln. No reputable historian gives it any credence. There is no mention of it in the Oates bio or the Donald bio. They are the recent major works on the man. The story is simply not credible.
Walt
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.