I was recently listening to a radio talk show on which the host and various guests were discussing the distressingly relevant subject of racial reconciliation. I was hearing two primary messages one which I agree with wholeheartedly but the othernot so much.
What I agree with is the absolute unreserved and unequivocal repudiation of any form of racism along with the expression of sympathy and understanding toward those who have (in reality) suffered from it. Enough said on that one.
But beyond that the host and guests were further suggesting that every one of us non-minority people ought to bury ourselves in dust and ashes while prostrating ourselves in unconditional surrender to the accusations of widespread systemic and even congenital racism. This groveling capitulation to the full extent of the professedly perceived injustices suffered by our accusers is allegedly the only way to achieve racial reconciliation. In fact it was actually asserted that if you deny any accusation of racism you are being uncharitable and insensitive to the accuser!
So therefore we should all be worshiping before the golden image of inherent white guilt erected by the extreme politically-correct race-baiters of the age placing ourselves in abject and shamefaced acquiescence to any and all accusations of racism (if not made strictly individually then certainly on a corporate basis). Such a categorical and unquestioning assent to the charges of racism (or at least the gratuitous readiness to tolerate the indiscriminate leveling of those chargespun not tended)and the compliant acceptance of the retribution that would naturally accompany such atrocityis after all the only just and reasonable way to achieve reconciliation with those who have suffered the blight of racism now isnt it?
Im terribly sorry but my first inclination at hearing something like that is to say: UhNot No but Bloody H - E - Double-Framing-Squares NO! I am what some sociologists would describe as a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (although to be sure not part of the elite) but I am not a racist. I loathe and detest racism. I have never been a racist and so I have no personal history of racial bigotry to apologize for thank you very much. (I guess the racism gene widely reputed to be irredeemably and inextricably woven into the very fiber of Caucasian DNA somehow missed me or it was so recessive in my case as to manifest no evidence of its presencealthough it supposedly lingers there like a tapeworm ensconced in the bowels of my soul.) And so as a decidedly non-racist person who has always been decidedly non-racist I simply do not see how it can be claimed that genuine racial reconciliation can only be achieved by me graciously taking upon myself the mantle of corporate racism thrust upon me by certain accusers among whom there happens to be many who have a vested interest in the benefit they can reap from driving a hyperinflated racist victimhood narrative even though that very narrative is itself racist because of its denigration of me solely on the basis of my skin color!
Reverse Racism (whether perpetrating it or groveling before it) is not the way to amend the evils of racism! Racism was not the original sin of Caucasian people and I refuse to accept the presumptive imputation of it in accordance with some depraved theology of Racial Federalism being proposed by people who demand that I bleed for the sins of my collective pigmentation group past and present!
Is there racism in modern society? Undoubtedly there is. For the sake of discussion are there people with lets say red hair who happen to be racist? Assuredly there must be. But does that mean that all redheads are therefore necessarily racists and in fact have an intrinsic predisposition to racism? Certainly not! But because there have been some redheads in the ranks of racists does that mean that every living redhead today must beat their breasts in collective repentance and self-abhorrent solidarity with the whole mass of racist redheads throughout history? Such a proposition is self-evidently absurd and it is every bit as twisted and unjust as the actual racism it purports to redress!
Were there racists and slaveholders among my ancestors? Yes indeed. But were there also non-racists and abolitionists among my ancestors? Absolutely there were. So I think the relevant question is: Do my attitudes convictions and actions align me personally and individually more closely with the racists of my past or with the abolitionists? And now heres the real kicker of a question: If I am absolutely an abolitionist and absolutely a non-racist (both of which are true) exactly how does having my teeth set on edge remedy the fact that a certain number of my forefathers have eaten sour grapes (Ezekiel 18:2)? But even that analogy is too constrictive because I am being asked to wear the robes of wickedness that were woven by people with whom I have no familial relation and in fact share nothing whatsoever in common beyond the color of my skin!
Do I think we should weep with those who weep (Rom. 12:15) and be sincerely and extremely sensitive to the genuine pain and plight of those who have truly suffered from racism both now and in the past? Absolutely we shouldwith great compassion and strenuous sympathy! But I see no valid imperative for me to accede to the role of scapegoat in bearing the sins of others and receiving a scourging-by-proxy in the stead of those who were directly guilty of the crime but who (inconveniently) are not immediately present and thus not capable of receiving the vengeance they merited for themselves. Neither do I perceive the legitimacy of someone ascribing to me an ineluctable predisposition toward racism simply on the basis of the skin color I happen to have in common with some racists. On the contrary I feel that going along with this whole idea of associational guilt and retributioneven if the proposition is motivated by sincere sympathy for the sufferers of racismis endorsing something that is essentially fallacious and thus destructive of genuine racial reconciliation which does not happen on the basis of mere realignment of group identity ascendancy but can only succeed in the context of universal respect for and acknowledgement of the dignity of individual personhoodor as otherwise stated: on the basis of the content of a persons character not on the color of his skin. You dont solve a slavery problem by making the former masters into slaves and the former slaves into mastersyou solve a slavery problem by making everybody free!
So can I promote racial reconciliation only by capitulating to every accusation of racism and abjectly owning it whether it is corporately or individually assigned? Or am I so blinded by white privilege that I am utterly incapable of perceiving my own intrinsic racism or the rectitude of embracing my culpability-by-association in the crimes and evils of racism which is the only adequate and tangible way for me to express sympathy with its victims?
If this last-resort appeal to the insuperably self-delusive quality of white privilege is going to be the broad and all-encompassing repudiation of the points I have made then Im terribly sorry to say it but racial reconciliation is still a long way off and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.s dream continues to languish perpetually supplanted by the nightmare of race-baiters who take advantage of the tragic fact that there has beenand continues to besome real racism in order to either excuse their desire to loot pillage and destroy or (in a more subtle and less immediately barbaric way) to perpetrate individual or corporate character-assassination with false accusations of racism in order to achieve or magnify a political benefit (even while making the ridiculous claim that such brutality represents justice).
The purveyors of such pathetic slander fail to realize that every false accusation of racism dilutes marginalizes and overshadows any of the real instances of racism that actually do exist.
When will people learn that the antidote to falsehood is truth not the mere substitution of another contravening falsehood?