Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

MEADOR: Racism not dead in American policy, consciousness

Published: Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Updated: Thursday, February 25, 2010 22:02


There's a funny thing about seeing yourself as superior to everyone else. Since you're not perfect, you're going to make mistakes. And when you do, you have two choices: admit that you're not as great as you think and deal with the imperfection in all its messiness and brokenness, or attempt a surface-level quick fix that doesn't ultimately solve anything but allows you to preserve your myth of superiority.

On the question of race, the United States has always opted for the latter. And as we commemorate Black History Month, we'd do well to remember that. As evidenced by the absurd and hateful response to the presidency of Barack Obama, racism is still a significant problem confronting our country. We are not post-racial, we are not colorblind. If we were, conservatives wouldn't make remarks about the Obama presidency proving once and for all that affirmative action is a failure. (For that matter, we wouldn't be passing ridiculous bills like last year's Proposition 424 banning affirmative action.)

Rather, we have simply perfected the art of obscuring our nation's perverse racism by draping it in a veil. And when one veil starts wearing thin, we wrap it in yet another. The end result is that the ugly underbelly of our society remains largely unchanged, even if a superficial analysis might suggest that we've made progress on this contentious issue. Time after time America has had to choose between dispensing with the tired myth of American exceptionalism or dealing with our many racial sins. Invariably, we pick exceptionalism - even if the rest of the world stopped buying that myth long ago.

The process began in 1776 when it was important that we present ourselves as an oppressed, trodden-upon people, rebelling against the overseas tyranny of George III of Britain. Never mind the fact that the taxes really weren't that absurd and that our legal argument was very weak within the British legal system. We were an oppressed people, damn it, and we weren't going to take it anymore.

So we pen the Declaration of Independence and talk all high-minded about all men being made equal. Never mind the fact that the author of those words owned slaves (and carried on a sexual relationship with one of them).

Then over ten years later we create the Bill of Rights and go on talking about liberty and equality. Meanwhile, below the Mason-Dixon Line African slaves were treated as property and north of it they were seen as savages in need of a good bit of "Christianizing."

After the Civil War we add a few amendments to the constitution, further "proving" our commitment to equality. Thirty years later one of those amendments became the basis of Justice Henry Billings Brown's opinion in Plessy v. Ferguson ruling that the Constitution allowed for "separate but equal" schools, train cars and the like.

Yet somehow we were still "the land of the free and the home of the brave."

Then the coup de grace comes in the form of Brown v. Board of Education, a Supreme Court case that overturned the Plessy ruling of 50 years prior. Surely this proved that the United States was finally willing to fulfill its lofty promises to its nation's non-white population?

Sadly, no.

Brown v. Board came within the context of the Cold War. Namely, at a time when the USA was keen to look progressive on matters of race so as to earn the approval of non-aligned, newly-created nations in Africa and south Asia. In the crucial west African nation of Ghana, the Ashanti Pioneer reported on southern racism calling it "a daily disgrace to the United States and all humanity."

What's more, the American policy makers knew that domestic race relations affected foreign policy. In an April 1957 report to President Eisenhower following a trip to west Africa, Vice President Richard Nixon said, "We cannot talk equality to the peoples of Africa and Asia and practice inequality in the United States. In the national interest, as well as the moral issues involved, we must support the necessary steps which will assure orderly progress toward the elimination of discrimination in the United States."

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

7 comments

J.B. Clamence
Sat Feb 27 2010 12:38
Anon:

Jake has been known to come out of the woodwork when the zing hits too close to home. Just keep in mind that thin skin is usually the first to loudly accuse others of "yelling."

Anonymous
Sat Feb 27 2010 12:17
Anti

Stop condemning posts as unreasoned, just because reason is beyond you. J' cuse!

Anti-Climacus
Sat Feb 27 2010 12:07
@Anonymous... Oh, almost everyone is anonymous...

How is it that I love the world in which we find self-condemning condemnation condemning an article that is supposedly self-condemning condemnation? Or perhaps irony was the key to a joke-post?

Please, though this space welcome all comments, remember: well-reasoned opinions are much better than well-yelled rhetoric.

Anonymous
Sat Feb 27 2010 11:45
To quote the psycho in "ConAir", "Define irony:" Meador enjoys taking center stage with his dramatic declarations and sweeping condemnations, exactly because it makes him feel superior to the hoi polloi out there. This is the problem with the world, both secular and religious. Everyone wants to be convinced he is better than others, which is what the Bible calls Pride. Everyone wants to find a perch from which he can condemn others. If anyone ever comes along with the light of Truth, the religious people feel threatened and crucify the bearer of Truth. They figure the religious vineyard is their turf. Most of the world is nonChristian, including Christians!
Anonymous
Sat Feb 27 2010 11:43
ha
Referee
Fri Feb 26 2010 19:38
As a centrist that loves to ridicule right wing nut and left wing screwballs, I like concrete examples that illustrate contrasting points of view. Having Troy Wiegand’s letter to the editor provide an example of Affirmative Action policies clearly discriminating in favor of an ethnic group is a critical blow to the message of Meador’s column. Having the left wing screwball posting his inflammatory comment to show how an Affirmative Action proponent presents his view is a double-whammy against the column.

Score:
+2 for the RWNs
0 for the AA proponents.

Are there any right wing nuts out there daring enough to even the score?

Anonymous
Fri Feb 26 2010 15:14
Excellent article. Now wait for the right wing nuts to come out of the mother's basements and hurl abuse at you.






log out