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 didnt. 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 Lincolns opinions may seem outlandish today, but during the 1860s 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 McWhorters 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 youre 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 shouldnt be writing about rap music at all as I dont know anything about it. He also believes that there is nothing wrong with it and that it doesnt harm anyone. I countered by stating that, while its true that I dont 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 thats 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. Its 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. Theyre be no Cedric the Entertainers, Deion Sanders, Tiger Woods or Halle Berrys. 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 cant 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 weve already played that game. He argued that blacks have put their blood and sweat into this countrys 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 worlds greatest reparation: United States citizenship. Every single one of the readers 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, hed 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 youll 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 .
Minimum? I think it's full-blown, just under different names.
You are right.
Thank you, Battle Pop.
Kittens.
I throw mewling, cuddly kittens.
You are simply wrong about that. Between Jan of 1863 when the EP took effect and Dec. of 1865 when the states ratified the 13th Amendment, over 3 million slaves were freed by the EP. Nearly 100,000 of those freed slaves served in the US Army. Look up Juneteenth to see how every slave in Texas were freed by the EP with the arrival of Union troops in Galvaston.
"The people of Texas are informed that in accordance with a Proclamation from the Executive of the United States, all slaves are free. This involves an absolute equality of rights and rights of property between former masters and slaves, and the connection heretofore existing between them becomes that between employer and free laborer."Read about this stuff instead or relying on Marxist propaganda that attempts to paint Lincoln as some sort of demon.
-- Major General Gorden Granger, USA.
June 19, 1865, Gavalston Texas.
The bottom line is that the EP freed millions.
He could not issue the proclaimation in the North. Had he done so, it may have pushed the loyal slave states, such as Missouri, into joining the Confederate states. Emancipation in these places had to be done by Constitutional amendment, which Lincoln pushed for. It did not pass until after his murder by a Southern radical.
In short, President Licoln attempted to free those whom he had no control over and leave those in chains that he did.
Exactly the opposite. To his way of view, he had legal authority to free the slaves in the rebelling territories, but the freeing of slaves in the non-rebellious states was up to the legislatures of those states, or the establishment of a Constitutional provision to do so.
LOL!!
Entire generations (black & white) have become accustomed to the soft, sweet, do-nothing life afforded to them via the socialist support network spawned by FDR and cultivated in the fields of LBJ's "Great Society". These souls will continue to find little incentive to pick themselves up by the bootstraps. Lets face it; its easy to be a victim these days. Pity the person who becomes comfortable with their status as a victim.
Institutional racism continues to exist today; of that I have no doubt. However, its form and presentation is not the same; handouts disguised as hand-ups. Not everyone has a conscience (or a work ethic). The institutional racism prevalent today in its present form panders to that. It becomes all the more insidious by virtue of its disguise . . .
On Jan. 1, 1863, U.S. President Abraham Lincoln declared free all slaves residing in territory in rebellion against the federal government. This Emancipation Proclamation actually freed few people. It did not apply to slaves in border states fighting on the Union side; nor did it affect slaves in southern areas already under Union control. Naturally, the states in rebellion did not act on Lincoln's order. But the proclamation did show Americans-- and the world--that the civil war was now being fought to end slavery. Lincoln had been reluctant to come to this position. A believer in white supremacy, he initially viewed the war only in terms of preserving the Union. As pressure for abolition mounted in Congress and the country, however, Lincoln became more sympathetic to the idea. On Sept. 22, 1862, he issued a preliminary proclamation announcing that emancipation would become effective on Jan. 1, 1863, in those states still in rebellion. Although the Emancipation Proclamation did not end slavery in America--this was achieved by the passage of the 13TH Amendment to the Constitution on Dec. 18, 1865--it did make that accomplishment a basic war goal and a virtual certainty.
The above italicized is from a Lincoln admirer and presents some flaws in your argument that Lincoln only acted "constitutionally". Lincoln acted pragmatically, strategically and politically. He freed the slaves when and where he did simply beacuse he wished to, to sate the Radicals, and most importantly to try to damage the infrastructure of the South at which he was at war.
Authority belongs to the one with the power to make it stick. You can assert anything you please, but if you can't walk the walk, all you've got is talk.
My 7 year old claims I have no authority to send him to bed. I assert I do. We fight it out, and, lo and behold, my kid's secession from my authority is found to be imaginary, and my authority was found to have been valid all along.
So, you see that the Emancipation Proclamation really did nothing: it was a fraud, for all intents and purposes.
So, you see, the secession of the slavocrats did nothing; it was a fraud for all intents and purposes. They proved not to have the ability to impose their authority. Who says war never solves anything?
But slaves that chose to free themselves had a place to go closer than Canada or Mexico. And many did.
The EP weakened the rebellion. Your sophistry is moot.
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.