I do pick on California a bit and quite frankly, I think
they deserve it most of the time. It is a land that is mired in a social
oxymoron. Millionaire elitist movie stars remonstrate causes celeb while
extolling the virtues of almost socialistic issues to those who probably
won’t amass a wealth equal to a year of their incomes. Elected officials
spend their way into record deficits and then sit around Sacramento pointing
fingers of blame at everyone but themselves. Birds get more protection than
the homeless. Yes, there are many reasons I believe that we should seriously
reconsider their statehood but then there comes a man who serves as an oasis
of common sense among those devoid of the idea. Then there comes Ward
Connerly.
Ward
Connerly is a well-to-do businessman and regent at the University of
California. He is black, successful and a common-sense-do-what’s-right kind
of guy. So, it should come as no surprise that he is greatly disliked by
many of his own race, the NAACP, the Mexican American Legal Defense and
Education Fund, and many others. This comes as a shock to you? Really? Well
let me explain why.
You see Mr. Connerly believes that if we are all to be treated equally, both
in society and the work place, we need to eliminate the badge of race. He
isn’t asserting that you shouldn’t be proud of who you are, your ancestry,
he is simply saying that for society to become ultimately colorblind, which
is what all of the Civil Rights advocates have been working for all these
years, you have to remove the ability to be a racist. Makes sense, right?
Mr. Connerly was the force behind Proposition 209, which prevents California
state agencies from using race as a factor for college admissions,
employment and contracting. He believed that if the best person for the
position or job was always getting hired then it would not only benefit the
company or institution but would benefit the populace in mass. It would
force people to better themselves to get ahead instead of having the
government constantly handing out freebies to those who would accept the
status quo. In California that can be pretty common.
"You can take a position in support of racial discrimination, as long as it
is racial discrimination against a white or an Asian, and you are a hero,"
Mr. Connerly said. "You take a position in favor of equality of all people,
and you are a villain, and you expose yourself not only to verbal abuse but
the possibility of physical abuse."
So, it would seem that people like Julian Bond, the heretic from the NAACP,
aren’t very fond of Mr. Connerly and I have to say that I can definitely see
why. If Mr. Connerly were to get his way and have the issue of race deleted
from our societal lexicon there would be no reason for Mr. Bond to exist.
Why would there be an organization for the advancement of "colored people”
(say that in an inner city setting and see how fast you get your butt
kicked) when everyone was playing on a level field? It would be racist to
have an organization like that, right? Quite frankly, I believe the NAACP’s
very existence is racist but that would make me a racist for pointing out a
racist organization. I mean really, if they aren’t racist and discriminatory
how come they don’t condone the advancement of those colored pink or pasty
white? The simple fact is organizations such as the NAACP and MALDEF, are
entitlement organizations who scream racism from the tops of their lungs
while very efficiently feeding off of the public tax trough. They tend to
use extortion tactics such as the NAACP did in Miami against the Democratic
presidential candidates who didn’t show up to pay homage or the way
Rainbow/PUSH extorted silence money from NASCAR. They haven’t really
championed any program that would lead to effective equality during their
existences because they have been consumed by the very political machines
they once railed against. Mr. Connerly sees this and he believes that it is
wrong for entire races of people to be so terribly enabled; to be
handicapped by mediocrity.
Now comes an effort by Mr. Connerly to move the issue of racial erasure
forward once again. Mr. Connerly is promoting an initiative that would ban
the gathering of racial data in the State of California for use in
classifying current or prospective students, contractors or employees in
public education, contracting and employment operations. Organizations that
oppose Mr. Connerly’s train of thought complain that it would essentially
ban the gathering of information on critical matters such as Latino
birthrates and American-African academic achievement and that may very well
be. But it should be pointed out that more often than not, studies and
statistics such as those are used to promote more programs that are targeted
to racially divided groups. If American-African academic achievement is low
then the NAACP will scream for more funds to help those poor underachieving
students do better when all they really have to do is to stay out of the
bars, away from the parties, off of the basketball courts and instead crack
a book or two in an effort to learn. If Latino birthrates go up then MALDEF
starts to scream that more money should come their way so that they can
defend the rights of those who have none due to the fact that they aren’t US
citizens. It is all special interest. It is all divisive. It is all very
much racist.
Mr. Connerly has the right idea. A colorblind society would be the best
thing for this nation and quite frankly, the world. It is quite a far way
off but it will never be achieved if one foot isn’t put in front of the
other on the path towards this goal. Organizations like the NAACP and MALDEF,
while born of valiant intentions at their inceptions have lost their way on
a path that bordered good and evil. They have strayed to the evil side and
have become exactly what they initially fought against; greedy political
machines that extort tax money for the advancement of the few over the
greater good for all.
Besides, if all of the data that these studies, and all other society based
statistical studies use had to come from the occasional US Census perhaps
people would take it a bit more seriously.
Racial erasure: a colorblind nation for the greater good. Good job Mr.
Connerly.
I recently received a letter from Mr.
Connerly. Here is what it said:
Dear Frank,
My very dear friend, Pam Kelley, sent me your email about Prop 54; and I am
immensely grateful for the sentiments expressed therein. Quitting is not
something to which I am accustomed, especially when I believe that I am
right about something; and, I have never been more convinced in my life that
the government should not sanction the division of its citizens into
separate "racial" groups based on the color of skin, the width of noses, the
slant of eyes or the size of lips, which are the traits that we associate
with "race." Racial classifications are truly arcane and unenlightened. How
"progressive" people can delude themselves into believing that such a
practice is "progressive" forever astounds me.
I am in your debt for your offer to help us. Believe me, we will take you up
on it as we prepare in a year or so to bring this issue back to the people
of California.
All the best,
Ward Connerly
Frank Salvato is a
political media consultant and the managing editor for The New Media Journal.us. He is a
contributing writer for The Washington Dispatch, GOPUSA, OpinionEditorials,
Men’s News Daily, Canada Free Press & AmericanDaily. His pieces are
regularly featured in Townhall.com. He has appeared as a guest on The
O’Reilly Factor, The Kevin Matthews Radio Show (Chicago) and The Brad Messer
Radio Show (San Antonio). His pieces have been recognized by the Japan
Center for Conflict Prevention and are occasionally featured in The
Washington Times and The London Morning Paper as well as other national and
international publications.
|
