White without Apology

TooGoodReports ^ | 08/13/03 | Bernard Chapin

[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 .

[WhiskeyPapa]

Why, whatever do you mean???

Gee, thanks. :)

The moderators seem to sending all ACW threads to the Smokey Backroom. We'll see how long this one lasts.

Walt

[Johnbalaya]

Geez, I'm learning more about Lincoln here than i ever did in school....

[Hatteras]

Dang, and all this time I thought they were saying Lincoln worked in frayed sleeves... I'm soo embarassed...

[dwd1]

I also remember when my career took off and I got moved into a higher tax bracket... I started to feel like I was working for others that did not appreciate it or do anything to improve themselves... I have been told that is the price we pay to have a society where everyone should feel hope because they have a shot at the dream...whether they step up and take the shot...Hmmmm

Also, it is the generalizations that all blacks feel a certain way about all whites and all Africans feel a certain way about all other nations... Please remember that there are differences of opinion and voices of dissent and reason in every culture...

[rdb3]

I'd just love to have a one-on-one chat with your supervisor.

[XRdsRev]

It's called politics. Every President from Washington to Bush has had to restrain their ideas and plans until they could make sure it was the right time to implement them, sometimes that time never comes.

Even during the debates about our Constitution, men such as Washington and Mason (both southerners) felt that slavery was a blemish upon the new nation. But both knew that the infant nation couldn't abolish the institution at that time. Both were slaveholders and realized the economic and social impacts of emancipation upon the country, slaveholders and the slaves themselves. Even though they morally believed it should be done, they both knew that the country would fall apart if it happened in 1787.

The political situation at the time required that the new nation come first and be allowed to form and grow before slavery could be addressed. Unfortunately it took a horrible war that destroyed the lives of many honorable people, North and South, before we finally addressed the issue.

In 1861 the political situation seemed to dictate that that the Union be preserved first before slavery was addressed. Remember there was a great deal of sympathy for the Southern States in parts of the North before the firing on Fort Sumter. New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland and even New York had some strong Southern sympathies until the first shots were fired. Rodman Price (former Governor of New Jersey 1854-57) was advocating that NJ become allied with the Confederacy in 1861. New Jersey was not a slave state anymore in 61 but it was one of the strongest bastions of "states rights and private property" at that time and as such, it initially sympathized with the south in it's struggle against the Federal Government.

Lincoln may have had Abolitionist views but I am sure he didn't want to be the President of a country that was falling apart in front of his eyes. He said so himself "A house divided against itself, cannot stand". If he had signed the Emancipation in 1861 when he came into office, it is possible that Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, Kentucky and Missouri would have seceded within days or withdrawn their support for the Federal Union.

[wardaddy]

and the occupied areas of the South such as New Orleans as well.

Right?

[squidly]

There was no good reason for him not to issue the EP once the war had started, yet he waited until the second fall of the war. Why is that? And why wouldn't he free the slaves in the non-secessionist states? I know the answer to the second question, and it is just more proof that he wasn't fighting the war to end slavery, as the revionist historians would have us believe.

[A_perfect_lady]

Look, I'm just cranky today. Forgive me.

[ought-six]

The ironic thing is, Lincoln freed almost no one. The Emancipation Proclamation, which went into effect in January, 1863, only applied to those states that were still in reberllion, and that were not under Northern control; nor did it apply to the border states where slavery existed, nor to Delaware, which still had some slaves (granted, not very many). So, you see that the Emancipation Proclamation really did nothing: it was a fraud, for all intents and purposes. The only states it was supposed to apply to were not affected by it, because they had already seceded and Lincoln had no authority over them. Slavery wasn't abolished until the passage of the 13th Amendment in 1865.

[dwd1]

Very interesting...

I am thinking about thinking about Professor Nash who was profiled in the movie "A beautiful mind". It seems his ideas were in place back then... small adaption "We do what is best for ourselves and the nation!" This was the clash of societal principles that took a civil war to resolve...

The one thing your post also shows me.... As a society, we have survived because of our ability to recognize a problem and work for a solution that is best for the nation... Not always fair to everybody...Not always nice...Every group is not always going to be happy but we are doing the best we can... And we have been around for quite some time... Sounds like we are a nation of pragmatists....

Nice post...

[ought-six]

"...there were many folks (North AND South) that didn't even see blacks (or Indians, or Chinese, or Irish...) as human..."

Or Germans. Especially Catholic Germans.

[wardaddy]

yea...that 1920 suffragtette thing is a bit of an itch...lol

...as for black males voting...no problem..lol

when we granted full rights to women, we doomed ourselves to a lengthy flirtation with modern liberalism...emotive politics.

Do I have any answers?...no....just an observation.

[ought-six]

The Emancipation Proclamation freed almost no one. See my earlier post.

[dwd1]

Nothing to forgive... I served nine years and twenty days to support the right we all have to agree and disagree... I welcome a good discussion because as a nation, people need understand that you have case... Nothing will be solved if we don't talk...

Thank you for the reply...

[wardaddy]

The grand effort at full black emancipation that occured from 1861-1970s was and still is a vast social effort (experiment) that does indeed entail many aspects of at a minimum socialism.

You are right.

[dwd1]

I think you are just like the rest of us... No easy answers but you are looking every chance you get... Good to hear from you....

BTW, what part of Florida should I direct the police to search for your body in case your wife reads your post? :-)

[dwd1]

But don't you just love those Juneteenth Celebrations?

The sad part about all of this is that until we become a true "established interest" within this country not taken for granted by the Democrats, this may well continue...

[XRdsRev]

Of course there was good reason. The North was losing militarily in the battlegrounds of Virginia. 1st Manassas in June 1861 was a devestating defeat that threatened the Capitol itself, Balls Bluff while a small battle was another defeat that had tremendous political effect with the death of General Baker, the Penninsula Campaign ended badly, Cedar Mountain, 2nd Manassas, Chantilly...all defeats with high loss of life including publicly beloved generals. Slaves who fled to the safety of the Army in 1861-62 became a problem and a threat to already questionable military effectiveness. The Army was not prepared to handle or feed these people and it was not until the Freedman's Bureau was up and running that they could do so.

The Army of the Potomac went through 3 changes of command and was very disorganized. It was hardly a good time to make a groundbreaking change in public/military policy. The Battle of Sharpsburg and the defeat of the Maryland Invasion provided the victory needed to boost public confidence in the administration and allowed them to make the radical jump the President had wanted for a long time.

[wardaddy]

Nashville actually.

Knowing her, probably one should look for my teeth in the Insinkerator...lol

I'm not bashing the ladies but without them, I doubt we would ever have even crossed the New Deal Rubicon.

Regards.