CONTENT OF CHARACTER?

  

 

This recent Martin Luther King Jr. holiday and the ongoing Black History Month has spurred much thought and soul-searching. Have such concepts as “affirmative action” and “quotas” become obsolete? In fact the opposite often is the case. Increasingly, integration has failed to achieve a meaningful integration.

When I was a lad about the time of Brown Vs Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, the white population in America was about 88%. African-Americans made up the great bulk of the remainder – about 10%. American Indians, Asians, et cetera, completed the demographic map.

One of the issues of the time was the Southern system of “
separate but equal.” Although derided today, the system had been vindicated around the turn of the Twentieth Century by the Supreme Court case of Plessy vs Ferguson. The prevailing opinion of the court at that time was given by Justice Henry Brown of Michigan. His opinion went, in part, thusly:

“We consider the underlying fallacy of the plaintiff’s argument to consist in the assumption that the enforced separation of the two races stamps the colored race with a badge of inferiority. If this be so, it is not by reason of anything found in the act, but solely because the colored race chooses to put that construction upon it… The argument also assumes that social prejudice may be overcome by legislation, and that equal rights cannot be secured except by an enforced commingling of the two races… If the civil and political rights of both races be equal, one cannot be inferior to the other civilly or politically. If one race be inferior to the other socially, the Constitution of the United States cannot put them upon the same plane.”

Any possibility of the “separate but equal” policy operating Constitutionally was obliterated by the systemic sabotage of the concept by the very people who fashioned it. The Americans known as “Coloreds” and “Negroes” were premeditatedly deprived of equal access to public funds, public laws and public maintenance and improvements. Such things as sewerage pipes, water pipes, sidewalks, parks, et cetera, were typically ignored. Pay scales were unequal. Indeed, the whole system was transformed into another form of oppression. “Benign neglect” characterized the practice of the ruling white majority. It had to be replaced with something more effect.

It was the long practice of white people of sabotaging their own system in the South that led to the idea of a kind of quantum leap to achieve that elusive equality that “separate but equal” sabotaged. “Affirmative Action” was that social formula by which federal leaders meant to scientifically repair and heal the damage done by the now overturned Plessy decision.

Now, I find myself watching television news in which the reporters are at least 50% African American. The white reporters are typically Jews. It may be true that these massive media enterprises are private, and, hence, they need not apply federal law beyond the letter. In some ways they do reflect the “New America.” The old WASP image has given way to Latino, Asian and Muslim images.

In sports a team may field 100% African Americans, and few, indeed, consider the matter odd. In basketball it is commonplace. In professional football it occurs, and no one blinks an eye. Professional teams may import white players from Europe. Apparently, none could be found locally. Yet, the fee paid professional athletes for services rendered suggest that many skilled white players would be interested.

Since our leadership in America has been pressing the concept that we are all equal, I can only infer that some folks are more equal than others. I don’t believe that affirmative action explains the issue adequately.

I am not naïve about the two dominant minorities usually setting “public policy” for America. These two are Jews and Freemasons.

As Abraham Lincoln observed, someone must lead. He stated he preferred that whites lead, rather than blacks. This view has changed to accommodate “new realities.” Our leaders cannot be adequately described by the term “white.” Most white people are described as “profane” by Freemasons, and Jews have used a correlative “other” term such as “stranger” or “alien.” They also use the term “goy,” when presenting themselves as “Israel” (sic). White people may as well be “honkies” to Masons and Jews; that way they can show solidarity with radical African Americans.

I believe that the present white proportion of the total American population is presently in the 66% range. I believe that African Americans have a demographic percentage of about 14%, and that Latinos have bulked up to about 16%. That would give Asians and others about a 6% proportion of the American population.

If one considers that the percentage of whites in the American population who are 40 years old or younger is probably about 45% to 50%, then you can begin to perceive the rationale of the dominant minorities who set America policy. They are looking ahead. After all, kids in school can see that white kids aren’t overly prominent as a proportion of the school population.

Hence, the owners of major media outlets are hiring for the future. A visibly proportionate white representation on news stations is not thinking “ten years ahead.” WASPs are too yesterday.

Further, one must assume that our leading minorities in the major media feel that the content of white people’s character is shockingly low and reprobate. Hence, rejecting them is only pursuing a positive educational approach. Change and prosper.

This may prove to be a success, as the fees paid to news reporters – especially at the center desk – is reputed to be rather good. Many reeducated WASPs might like to give the job a try. Good jobs seem to be getting scarcer.

One of the last vestiges of state-supported inequality is the disproportionate amount of wealth in white American hands. The transfer of white middle-class wealth to the deprived people of the world is running apace. It’s a small world after all.

Our leaders tell us that it isn’t wise to tax the rich beyond a pin prick, as they are our “job creators.” Naturally, taking money from them would stymie job creation. Guess who the rich tend to be?

As an aging white man, I can only wonder if “what goes around, comes around.” Since I’m not convinced of the elevated character of African Americans collectively, I can see another era of “separate but equal” looming – to the distinct disadvantage of white people.