Please, Let's Have that Honest Conversation about RaceBy Eileen F. Toplansky
So let's have that honest discussion about race that people keep clamoring for.
Someone please explain the brainwashing of a 5th-grade African-American girl who, when she was introduced to Duke Ellington's music, said, "I don't wanna hear no white man's music." She was merely echoing the implacable hatred that she learned at home. Any way that the teacher responded would only reinforce this young child's racist predisposition.
Why in a New York City high school of 5,600 students, with 36 white students, was there only one black honor student? While many of these students were not planning on going onto college and many did succeed in vocational jobs, it puzzled the white students that there were such disproportionate numbers among the black and Hispanic students.
What is one to make of the "don't talk white" attitude? It demeans those black students who aspire to a good education. And the difference between "nigger" and "nigga" is cogently explained in this piece by Cornell Dews.
Then there is Alice Walker. Best known for The Color Purple, Walker's latest book, The Cushion in the Road, is "replete with an abundance of anti-Jewish rhetoric." Will English departments ever discuss why so many literary luminaries hold anti-Jewish sentiment as they gush over Walker? Why should whites accept the obvious contempt that a Jaimie Foxx demonstrates? I would be aghast if a white actor made a similar comment about black people, yet Hollywood smugly smiles when Foxx says that he enjoyed "killing" whites in Django Unchained.
Of course, a white person will be wary when black Muslims repeat the hateful remarks of Farrakhan and behave in a militant manner, demonstrating their disdain for the entire white race. Why is detestable black militancy accepted? Is it not as bad as KKK hate speech? Will anyone demand an explanation of the hypocrisy consistently used by Jackson, Sharpton, and Obama? And what of the shameful behavior of the NAACP in their shabby treatment of conservative black speakers?
Why is there no call for investigating the New Black Panthers' public display of inappropriate behavior during the 2008 and 2012 elections? Why does it appear that illegal black behavior is given a pass? Why the double standard?
When something does not go well, why is the race card immediately dangled? David Dinkins was the first black mayor of New York City. His term was an unmitigated disaster because of "his inability to understand that it was his performance rather than prejudice that [ultimately] soured many New Yorkers[.]" And yet, even now, he trots out the racism card. Obama appears to be a lineal descendant of this attitude.
Why, after any well-publicized trial of a black person, do neighboring communities brace themselves against possible violence by young black people? During the 1967 Newark riots, Governor Hughes stated that "[t]his is a criminal insurrection by people who say they hate the white man but who really hate America." Race-baiters of today benefit greatly from America while spewing their bile under the guise of a quest for racial justice.
When a verdict comes down upon a Jew or an Asian, no one expects the respective communities to burst into violence. Why does it happen in so many of the black communities? Instead of comprehending that such wanton violence will deter any business from establishing itself in such a community, cries of racism are immediately hurled.
How did we get to the point where a young black male is applauded by his peers when he shows an ultrasound of his girlfriend's baby during a public speaking introductory speech? The pregnant girl is already receiving financial aid to attend college and gleefully says that she will now receive more financial aid since she is pregnant. When asked where she thinks the money comes from, she blithely states, "The government," totally unaware that it is the hardworking American ultimately picking up this tab. And any moral judgment is prohibited in our multicultural world. This goes for any woman, regardless of her ethnicity.
Since the 1960s, under the guise of assisting once-oppressed groups of people, the government decided to use racism in order to counter racism. Thus, certain groups of people would now receive preferential treatment in education and employment merely because of their race or gender or perceived oppression. That one should find this puzzling would only incur the wrath of others who had now decided upon a new set of rules concerning what was racist and what was not.
In light of the often downgraded abilities of students who have been accepted via open enrollment or affirmative action programs, a disturbing result has emerged. If a professor maintains a high standard of expectations, then many academically challenged students will simply not be able to fulfill the assignments. An instructor can either dilute the coursework, ensuring that most students pass, or she can inflate grades so that the "C" becomes a "B." Thus, I was faced with this dilemma, as evinced by the following unaltered e-mail from a student at a four-year university.
Sadly, this affirmative-action student cannot even fathom her deficient critical thinking and writing skills. Is it racist to be concerned that such a person, with diploma in hand, will probably now be hired as a teacher or a nurse or an ObamaCare negotiator because, as a minority individual, she presumably has greater empathy? Affirmative action does not stop at the college door -- it is evident in hiring practices throughout the country. Yet, what is the caliber of many of these new hires? And if businesses complain, they are slapped with liability issues from the federal government.
When will the black community demand accountability of its leadership? When will good folk refuse to accept the covert racism inherent in so many government programs? Far too many black youth are being sold a bill of goods, designed not to liberate, but rather yoke them to yet another government program.
In addition, instructors are now being threatened by a new variation of grade-grubbing, which I dub the "R" grade, by students who whip out the racist charge as a means of intimidating an instructor. A student recently e-mailed a colleague of mine the following:
Consequently, a half-century later, since the inception of affirmative action, any objective evaluation of a student's work may result in being called a racist. And this mentality is being aided and abetted at the highest levels of government. In the age of affirmative action, diversity, and multiculturalism, and particularly under Barack Hussein Obama and Eric Holder, the term "racism" has morphed into a rather clever means of ending all conversation that does not conform, intimidating those who make educational appraisals based on once-approved assessment standards, and generating a level of contempt for excellence and high expectations.
What exactly do race-baiters like Sharpton and Jackson actually want? When queried, these men and their followers engage in the most vacuous generalizations about coming together, becoming as one. Never do they address the culture that permits the murder of black youths by other black youths. The cowardice by the alleged leaders of the black community who use race-baiting in order to put themselves in the limelight is exquisitely damaging to the black community. Shelby Steele has correctly stated that these men "work by moral intimidation, not reason."
And since when does disagreeing with someone's ideas constitute racism? If I disagree with the ADL's Jewish leaders, does that make me anti-Semitic? If I disagree with John McCain, does that mean I hate whites?
Why is logic so blithely thrown aside? During his now widely touted speech, Obama maintained that violence against blacks in the Jim Crow era has resulted in the disproportionate numbers of black victims and black perpetrators of violence. If this were a useful train of logic, then Chinese people should be murdering Chinese people because of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. Or Jewish people should be murdering other Jews because of 1940s discriminatory practices when Ivy League universities restricted Jewish student enrollment. Clearly none of this makes sense, so why doesn't anyone call Obama out on his logical fallacy?
The sad fact is that none of the above is about race. It is about a coarsened culture that is afflicting people of all backgrounds. It is about a culture that sees unwed mothers passing on self-defeating attitudes to the next generation.
Why are the murders of young black people being perpetrated by other young black people? This is the core question that needs to be addressed -- and not by a vacuous assumption that because racist laws used to exist, black people maim their own.
When I look at people like Allen West, Ben Carson, Deneen Borelli, and Thomas Sowell, I stand in awe at their poise, linguistic skills, and thoughtful deliberation. When I consider the Haitian black nurse's aide who so ably assisted my mother, I don't see her skin color; I see her compassion and common sense.
In reality, the Trayvon Martin case gave Obama another way to avoid dealing with issues of national and international importance. Cries of racism permit Obama to deftly avoid the penetrating questions that need to be asked about the ongoing scandals that plague this country, be it the IRS, the NSA, Benghazi, Fast and Furious, the Federal Data Services Hub revelation, or the "impending train wreck" of ObamaCare.
There is no dealing with an individual who changes the rules of the game and makes them up as he goes along. When the American people understand this and liberate themselves from such race-baiting, we will be able to make some real and definitive steps to halt the ongoing assault on this country. It is an assault that hurts blacks and whites alike by a man and a party who care for neither group, except as a means to expand their grip on power.
Eileen can be reached at email@example.com.
FOLLOW US ON