We’ve all heard the story “The boy who cried wolf” about the boy who falsely cried out so often that when the wolf finally appeared none of the townsfolk came to his assistance because they assumed he was once again lying. The same thing has been happening in the United States with the charge of racism. The problem is, when the word racism is used so often by so many people in such patently absurd contexts the charge and the word cease to have any value.
Of course, what many people often refer to as racism is in reality racial discrimination, and in most cases the activity charged as racism is neither.
Racism is a belief in an inherent difference in the cognitive and physical abilities of members of different groups based on race, which manifest themselves in social and economic achievement. Such differences are usually organized in hierarchical manner putting the proponent of the theory’s race in the superior position.
Racial discrimination is the treatment or making a distinction, gift or punishment for or against, a person or group based on the race to which that person or persons belong rather than on individual / group merit.
The dilution of the charge of racism has been going on in the United States for decades. The housing crisis that brought about the economic meltdown in which we find ourselves today was the direct result of federal regulations intended to counteract false claims of racist / discriminatory practices on the part of mortgage lenders.
More recently the cries of racism have been thrown around like rice at a wedding since Barack Obama became a candidate for President. From individuals to Tea Party activists to radio talk show hosts, every disagreement with the policies of Barack Obama is at some point reduced to the simple charge of racism. It does not even appear as if race itself is a defense against such claims as can be seen by the denunciations of Herman Cain.
Is it possible that by 2012 the overuse of the charge of racism has finally contributed to its own demise? Perhaps two absurd events from last week will be a sign of the false charge’s swan song.
The first comes from Dallas and has to do with Microsoft’s purported “Avoid the Ghetto” app for smartphones – a name suggested by critics rather than the company. The app, which is said to use crime statistic data, is supposed to offer drivers and pedestrians the opportunity to set routes to their destination that avoid high crime areas.
Dallas NAACP President Juanita Wallace seems to be unhappy about the as of yet unavailable product: “It’s almost like gerrymandering,” she said. “It’s stereotyping for sure and without a doubt; I can’t emphasize enough, it’s discriminatory.” However, the app will not label communities based on race. It is not going to tell users to avoid minorities or minority communities. It is is rather simply going to inform users about neighborhoods where a high number of crimes have been reported and offer them alternative routes to getting to their destinations. Certainly James Cooper and James Kouzaris could have used it.
Whatever the demographics of the neighborhoods drivers or pedestrians avoid as a result of Microsoft’s app, claims of racism or racial discrimination are absurd. Crime is crime, regardless of who perpetrates it. Indeed, it is President Wallace who has suggested the connection between crime and minority communities, not Microsoft.
The second story comes from Burlington, Vermont. At a time when consumers are put off by many bank’s limited hours and increasingly automated services, TD Bank sees an opportunity to distinguish itself from its competitors by opening for business every day other than Christmas, Thanksgiving, Easter Sunday and New Years Day. In the highly competitive marketplace the bank is seeking to succeed by providing more services to attract more customers. The result? The branch in Burlington, Vermont was picketed for being open and serving its customers on the MLK holiday. Protesters printed flyers suggesting the bank was racist: “Dear TD Bank, you are defying the King holiday. Shame, Shame, Shame. This is a racist act. Shame, Shame, Shame.”
In what universe is a company seeking to provide its clients – all clients, regardless of race – with better service acting in a racist, or more accurately, a racially discriminatory manner? Only in a leftist, victim mentality universe fueled by the Democratic Party.
As we approach the battle for the White House those of us who disagree with the policies of President Obama should be prepared to be labeled racists for virtually every utterance. Of course it is possible that the false charge of racism has jumped the shark and will finally be disregarded by citizens as just another Democratic tool of intimidation and slander. Possible, but unfortunately… unlikely.
I’m afraid it’s more likely to be another Hollywood creation, Freddy from the Friday the 13th franchise that more accurately characterizes the future of the false charge of racism. Even when it is so widely seen as debased and hollow, when it should be dead after so many false utterances, the charge of racism is likely to once again be an instrument of the left with which it seeks to intimidate conservatives and distract voters from the abject failure of decades of Democratic policies – whose victims are both black and white. That’s unfortunate because real examples of racism and racial discrimination do indeed exist, but because the left has purloined the charge for its insidious ends those real examples are far less likely to be taken seriously. And for that we are less well off.
See author page
Mata #Roger that. You reiterate you are an Independant and not a “large C” Conservative/ Party. Correct?
My problem with folks like Hard Right who declare themselves Conservatives should be obvious to anyone who can read. I’ve never seen you hold back from criticising those with whom you disagree. Therefore 82 and clear in So.Cal Enjoy the debate WATCH RUBIO over next few days.His actions will determine the winner.
Sorry Mata. It appears he is “downgrading” you because you won’t rebuke me. You know, the very thing he has made it a point not to do to his fellow leftists. Case in point, the Tucson shooting of Giffords and how the left smeared the GOP/Conservatives with it.
@Lorie Robinson, first let me apologize because I didn’t see your answer to my two questions.
As to your response to #1, repeated below:
Lorie, that statement makes no sense. Were Newt attempting to “play to the more racist element to his base”… ergo KKK types that would prefer a society cleansed of all blacks…. he certainly wouldn’t be doing so by suggesting that there be incentive programs to help them acquire entry level jobs. Most especially by taking away some cushy union jobs. If anything, such proposal would turn off the racial bigots in any party. (and you have more than a few in your party as well… including a former Klan leader)
In fact, if this supposed racist base believed it was a racially motivated program, they’d be shouting it from the mountain tops as being a form of affirmative action.
What most of us understand is that the program is not geared to race, but to entry level opportunity for anyone that wants to take advantage of it. Perhaps you don’t know much of Newt’s background, but as a former teacher, and one still involved in education, he has made the poor and students… of all races… an issue for years. For those to twist this program, and the context of that remark, as racist is simply the shoe on the other foot. The accuser is, in fact, the one playing the race card. This has been the point I’ve been trying to make… but I suspect you will resist despite all facts and history of that candidate. You insist upon hearing exactly what you want to hear, and close your eyes to anything else.
sigh… I’m not exactly sure how to present to those of the lib/prog bent that I find attempts to pigeon hole, categorize, and place people into classes so very offensive. I am, like every one else, a potpourri of political leanings, and individuals just don’t fit into little labels.
So frankly, I haven’t got a clue how to answer your question. I’m not a “party” anything. I’m an individual who decides on issues for sundry reasons.
I haven’t got a clue as to why I’m *supposed* to be rebuking you, HR. If it’s your direct, unedited opinions of Lorie’s commentary, I’m afraid I can’t let Lorie off the hook for her own participation in playing the race card. We all respond negative to such false charges. The only difference between your responses and mine is the approach and delivery…. not the meat of the disagreement. Or perhaps because I’m demonstrating more patience for what I truly will admit is a likely lost cause.
I grew up the daughter of first generation Americans, and have heard more than a few bigoted insults tossed at my parents. But none of us seethe with rooted resentment. It was a different era than today.
I also still know a few bigots to this day… most of which I have absolutely no patience with, and will not associate with unless forced to for business. Then I simply deal with business alone, and never broach any other subjects.
But I will also say that I have met just as many black bigots as white bigots. Racism is not a trait that is owned only by Caucasians.
@Richard Wheeler:
Rich, I will state this again, albeit a little differently. Hopefully you understand after it.
Being an “Independent” does not have anything whatsoever to do with being a liberal, conservative, or even a moderate. All it means is that a person does not affiliate him or her -self with any particular party. I believe that you are confusing the terms “Independent” and “moderate”, and attempting to use them somewhat interchangeably.
I am an Independent, as I do not affiliate myself with the GOP, or the Democrats. However, I am a conservative, so subsequently, tend to vote more for the GOP candidate, and especially in a national political race.
Please quit confusing the terms, Rich. You are smarter than that.
@MataHarley:
Mata, I would comment more often, but I have this little thing called work that at times, leaves me with very little free time to even read the postings, let alone comment on them or others’ comments. I did find it quite funny that Lori assumed that because I had commented a few times, up to that point, and directed them at her, that it meant that I didn’t have a life away from the computer. And what is even funnier, is that somehow my few comments mean that I have no life, yet she was responding to several different people, and with quite a few interactions with those people.