After Decades Of Dividing America On Race, Left Insists The Right Is Really To Blame

Demographics aren't destiny, culture is. The sooner Americans return to affirming "E pluribus unum," the faster we can mend our national wounds.

A new book, “Let Them Eat Tweets,” by political scientists Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson, is the latest attempt to shift the blame for identity politics, maintaining that conservatives are exploiting ethnic anxiety sparked by “changing demographics.”

Yes, after creating a caste order dividing society into identity silos based on race, ethnicity, sex —anything that conveys feelings of victimhood — the left is now shocked that some whites could, too, fall prey to identity politics. Nothing could better illustrate the left’s gaping blind spot about human nature.

To their credit, Hacker and Pierson admit that forecasts predicting America will become a majority-minority country by mid-century are “misleading.” Such estimates do not, for example, take account of ethnic attrition: the children of marriages between whites and members of groups designated as “minorities” will “tend to identify as white” and not feel marginalized.

What’s important, however, is that “today’s native-born whites see it as dramatic.” They cite experiments that claim that when majority-minority projections are shown to whites, they elicit “big reactions, including anger, fear, greater identity with whites, and greater resentment toward nonwhites. It also produces a significant shift to the right on a range of issues.”

Vox founder Ezra Klein ate it up: “Republican elites weaponize racial resentment to win voters who would otherwise vote their economic self-interest.” But what if these experiments (if they are valid) reveal anxiety about not just demographic change? The questions deal, after all, with the concept of minorities.

Truly, even before the American Revolution, U.S. demography was in constant flux. What held such a heterogeneous multitude together was something that is anathema to today’s cultural elites: the melting pot, assimilation, adherence to the Founding creed, and the general culture of the country. Or, as it can be summed up by the traditional, unofficial motto of the United States: E pluribus unum (“Out of many, one”). Whatever you call it, it mediated the continuous arrival of tens of millions of foreigners.

The country’s leaders could have decided long ago — for instance, during the 1893-1925 Ellis Island period — to herd the teeming masses of Armenians, Greeks, Hungarians, Jews, Lebanese, Sicilians, Slavs, and Syrians under artificial identity categories. They could have labeled them “minorities” in need of compensatory justice, and constantly inculcated grievances in them.

As changing demographics are challenging enough, however, America’s earlier leaders sensed that would be a grave mistake. So they did the opposite, extending the enjoyment of equal treatment under the law along with the possibility of becoming American to all newcomers to the nation.

This unique approach was built into the very fabric of the republic. As Secretary of State John Quincy Adams wrote to a prospective German immigrant in 1819, “This is a land not of privileges, but of equal rights.” Decades earlier, James Madison repudiated internal divisions in Federalist No. 14:

Both ironically and sadly, this model began to change during the hopeful era that aimed at bringing into the American family those who had previously been excluded: blacks. President Kennedy’s Executive Order 10925 directing federal contractors to take “affirmative action to ensure that applicants are treated equally without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin” was turned on its head by his successor, Lyndon B. Johnson.

“Affirmative action” came to mean the opposite: making hiring, contracting, and housing decisions with regard to race, sex, and national origin. These immutable characteristics thus became the alchemy of something new: officially designated minorities. To justify the benefits and the balkanization, activists instilled the members of such minorities with a sense of victimhood.

The categories also became rigid, the sooner to get to the majority-minority tipping point. Ethnic attrition is not allowed to work its magic; if your grandfather is Uruguayan, you’re told you’re a marginalized minority. The oppressors, on the other hand, are told they are at fault for society’s unequal outcomes. Does this have any chance of ever working out well in the mid or long term?

As Zach Goldberg put it in the Tablet last week, “dividing a diverse, multiethnic society into oppressed and oppressor categories on the basis of skin color have, as a matter of historical precedent, more often led to sectarian bloodshed than enhanced justice and equity.”

This new model of pitting “minorities” against the “majority” understandably rankles deplorable “fly-over” Americans. It also confuses some on the right, who think the problem is demography. But to say demography alone is destiny is to say that cultural habits inhere in DNA.

Culture is destiny. Indeed, moving away from the E pluribus unum ideal has been a worrying cultural change. Self-preservation is the first law of nature — which the left always misunderstands — and creating a caste system of power dynamics seeds conflict and solves nothing. Let’s hope enough Americans realize it’s still not too late to turn around.

Over time, America's education system, along with parents, churches and communities have failed to teach all children of the real history of our nation?

To understand something of the degree to which today's generations have been failed, one needs only to reference the following information and the Library of Congress web site referenced in the post.

Ohio State Senator and A.M.E. Bishop Benjamin W. Arnett, outstanding scholar, Legislator, and Minister, who lived through the period of the Civil War and delivered a most outstanding Centennial Sermon, at St. Paul Church in Norwalk, Ohio, by invitation, honoring the 100th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, in which he traced the history of nations and that of America, from it's inception and up to the Year of the Centennial of its Declaration.

In that Sermon, Dr. Arnett issued a grave warning of what might happen to America if a group, including academics who then self-described as "Liberals," had its way. Excerpts follow:

"The Danger to our Country.
"Now that our national glory and grandeur is principally derived from the position the fathers took on the great questions of right and wrong, and the career of this nation has been unparalleled in the history of the past, now there are those who are demanding the tearing down the strength of our national fabric. They may not intend to tear it down, but just as sure as they have their way, just that sure will they undermine our superstructure and cause the greatest calamity of the age. What are the demands of this party of men? Just look at it and examine it for yourselves, and see if you are willing that they shall have their way; or will you still assist in keeping the ship of state in the hands of the same crew and run her by the old gospel chart! But ye men who think there is no danger listen to the demands of the Liberals as they choose to call themselves:
"'Organize! Liberals of America! The hour for action has arrived. The cause of freedom calls upon us to combine our strength, our zeal, our efforts. These are The Demands of Liberalism:
"'1. We demand that churches and other ecclesiastical property shall no longer be exempt from just taxation.
"'2. We demand that the employment of chaplains in Congress, in State Legislatures, in the navy and militia, and in prisons, asylums, and all other institutions supported by public money, shall be discontinued.
"'3. We demand that all public appropriations for sectarian educational and charitable institutions shall cease.
"'4. We demand that all religious services now sustained by the government shall be abolished; and especially that the use of the Bible in the public schools, whether ostensibly as a text-book or avowedly as a book of religious worship, shall be prohibited.
"'5. We demand that the appointment, by the President of the United States or by the Governors of the various States, of all religious festivals and fasts shall wholly cease.
"'6. We demand that the judicial oath in the courts and in all other departments of the government shall be abolished, and that simple affirmation under the pains and penalties of perjury shall be established in its stead.
"'7. We demand that all laws directly or indirectly enforcing the observance of Sunday as the Sabbath shall be repealed.
"'8. We demand that all laws looking to the enforcement of “Christian” morality shall be abrogated, and that all laws shall be conformed to the requirements of natural morality, equal rights, and impartial liberty.
"'9. We demand that not only in the Constitution of the United States and of the several States, but also in the practical administration of the same, no privilege or advantage shall be conceded to Christianity or any other special religion; that our entire political system shall be founded and administered on a purely secular basis; and that whatever changes shall prove necessary to this end shall be consistently, unflinchingly, and promptly made.'
"'Let us boldly and with high purpose meet the duty of the hour.'
In another section of the lengthy discourse, Bishop Arnett addressed the topic of "The Greatness of America," as follows:

"Let us see what it is that makes us so great; wherein lies our strength. What has made us one of the greatest powers of the earth, politically and intellectually? Have we come to the conclusion that it is Righteousness that exalteth a nation? We have met to-day at the request of the President of the United States, Ulysses S. Grant, and also the Governor of our beloved State, Rutherford B. Hayes. For what? Why call us from our homes? Why come to the house of God? Why not go to the hall of mirth and to the places of amusement to-day? No that is not what they want us to do. We are commanded to go to our 'several places of worship, and there offer up thanks to Kind Providence which has brought our nation through the scenes of another year, and blessed the land with peace, plenty and prosperity.' Then as Americans we have reason to rejoice and congratulate ourselves on the greatness of our beloved country; at this the close of the first hundred years of experimental government of the people, by the people, and for the people. To be a citizen of this vast country is something, and to share in its privileges and duties is more than something." - Dr. Benjamin W. Arnett, 1876 "Centennial Thanksgiving Sermon" -

CENTENNIAL Thanksgiving Sermon, DELIVERED BY REV. B. W. ARNETT, B. D., AT ST. PAUL A. M. E. CHURCH, URBANA, OHIO 1876 - available in the "Library of Congress - Historical Collections" - "African-American Pamphlets from the Daniel A. P. Murray Collection," 1820-1920; American Memory, Washington, DC.
This historical treasure is one which should be prominent in our national discussions, especially now, when our philosophical foundations are being challenged, and when the views of a learned man like Dr. Arnett might shed light on centuries-old ideas about America's history. His theme: Righteousness Exalteth a Nation, but Sin is a Reproach to any People."
"Withdraw from Christendom the Bible, the Church with its sacraments and ministry, and Christian morality and hopes, and aspirations for time and eternity; repeal all the laws that are founded in the Christian Scriptures; remove the Christian humanities in the form of hospitals and asylums, and reformatories and institutions of mercy utterly unknown to unchristian countries; destroy the literature, the culture, the institutions of learning, the art, the refinement, the place of woman in her home and in society, which owe their origin and power to Christianity; blot out all faith in Divine Providence, love, and righteousness; turn back every believer in Christ to his former state; remove all thought or hope of the forgiveness of sins by a just but gracious God; erase the name of Christ from every register it sanctifies—in a word annihilate all the legitimate and logical effects of Christianity in Christendom—just accomplish in fact what multitudes of gifted and learned minds are wishing and trying to accomplish by their science, philosophy, and criticism, and what multitudes of the common people desire and seek, and not only would all progress toward and unto perfection cease, but not one of the shining lights of infidelity would shine much longer. Yes, the bitterest enemies of this holy and blessed religion, owe their ability to be enemies to its sacred revelations - to the inspiration and sublimity of that faith which reflects its glories on their hostile natures. They live in the strength of that which they would destroy. They are raised to their seats of opportunity and power by the grace of Him they would crucify afresh; and is it to be thought that they are stronger than that which gives them strength? Can it be supposed that a religion which civilizes and subdues, and elevates and blesses will succumb to the enmities it may arouse and quicken in its onward march? Are we to tremble for the ark of God when God is its upholder, and protector, and preserver?” - Dr. Benjaming W. Arnett, St. Paul A.M.E. Church, Urbana, Ohio, Centennial Thanksgiving Sermon, November 1876
Dr. Arnett, an A.M.E. Minister and Ohio State Legislator, was invited to publish this remarkable sermon commemorating the Centennial of the Declaration of Independence by the following method:
To:
Rev. B. W. ARNETT, B. D.
Dear Pastor:
Will you please prepare your “Centennial Thanksgiving Sermon” for publication: together with whatever matter pertaining to the colored people of this city, you deem worth preserving.
We make this request of you, believing that the publication of such matter, will be of benefit to the present and succeeding generations.
Yours Respectfully,
J GAITER
J. DEMPCY
C. L, GANT
Trustees W. A. STILGASS, W. O. BOWLES
Urbana, O.
December 7th, 1876
J GAITER, J. DEMPCY, C. L, GANT
Trustees W. A. STILGASS, W. O. BOWLES

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.