I Must Be A Racist (for the liberals tell me so)

I will admit that I chose the title for "shock effect". For that, I apologize. But the truth of the matter remains that, in the eyes of most of liberal society, I would probably be classified by that most onerous and odiferous label without any preliminary inquiry into my actual beliefs, precepts or judgements. Why might this be so? And, more to the point, why might it be a throughly inappropriate designation? And so as not to disappoint Attorney General Eric Holder, I refuse to be a "coward" and eschew discussing my opinions on racial matters. And, I will continue to do so. Let us engage this slippery slope in frank dialogue and, hopefully, exchange ideas.

First, I am, born and reared, a Southern white male. In the minds of the remaining 70 per cent or so of the nation, that - simply a priori - proves that I must be racist. After all, my ancestors 4-5 generations ago were "responsible" for slavery. I hasten to add that there deserves a sizable sharing of blame with the northeast shipping industry which ran the Western Passage with their tragic cargo and the hypocritical states who, in the mid-19th Century, legislated an end to slavery in their states and then proceeded to sell their chattel to the South rather than force liberation on their owners. These "minor" details are, conveniently, lost to the history taught recent generations. The South did perpetuate slavery long after it was an economically viable practice. Vanity and stubbornness have trumped common human decency and compassion throughout the history of man and no greater example of it can be found than in the antebellum South.

The South eventually waged a bloody rebellion which, by the accounts in the schoolbooks, was executed solely to preserve the slave economy, i.e. so that Scarlett O’Hara and Wesley could cavort at gala parties and never actually work for a living. Students are not taught that the Confederate states had other issues, of equal importance to their interests in justifying disunion, that were beyond the simplistic view that slavery was only casus belli of the Civil War. These would include (but not be limited to) state sovereignty and the powers "reserved by the States" in the Constitution of 1797. But, since history is always written by the victors, Southerners choose not to swim, salmon-like, against this particular torrent of public opinion. My State and my region fought that horrible war two centuries ago and paid dearly for our vanity, our blinded vision and mortal hubris. Whatever the price, it does not and will never excuse that most vile institution and, justifiably, it is a stain we must all bear. Apparently, the South and those who reside there will wear this heavy yoke until the earth suffers the heat death. If that be the case, so be it.

Second, I am - politically - what is today referred to as a "conservative". While I prefer to characterize myself as a "classic liberal" (of the school of 18^th century liberalism championed by Edmund Burke and others), political comings and goings of the last century have played scrabble with the words. As a result, what were, in truth, socialists or Progressives (Woodrow Wilson, FDR, et al) became the new "liberals" and classic liberals became "conservatives" (whatever that may actually mean to any particular person). Sadly, for me, nothing will ever change that bastardization of the true etymology of the words. It is surely beyond my means to do so here. So let us work with the labels we are left with.

What, precisely, is "my" conservatism? It is buttressed on the simple belief that man is an imperfect creation and, save the intervention of the deity, incapable of achieving perfection. Thus, the laws and largesse of government - as long as they are to be ruled and directed by man with his ill-conceived machinations - will never solve the problems of the millions of Homo sapiens who live together in our - or any - society. Which is to say, there will always be poverty, social and fiscal inequality, suffering, homelessness, savagery, disease and premature death, war and all the other timeless and irreparable ills of imperfectable man. That is it; that is "my" conservativism. It is simple and delicate but, at the same time, it is an intricate and a powerful guide. It has, rightly, as many sides as a snowflake but - as a personal philosophy - it has served me and those who elected to follow it well throughout history. It should be a maxim: When man (and the systems of power he concocts) knows his limitations, civilization flourishes. It is when leaders allow their egos and their arrogance to be their guides that nations falter.

The offshoots of this core understanding of man are obvious. To wit, all the king’s horses and all the king’s men cannot change mankind. Governments, though they often shoot for the idyllic "Heaven on Earth" will always fail in their frivolity and presumptuousness. In the eyes of the classical liberal, the purpose of government is finite and limited to protecting the "inalienable rights" of man - i.e. life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness - and little more. But, in the minds of, first, the Jacobins and later the Progressives and, today, those who have hijacked the name liberal, government is the rightful and anointed savior of mankind. for them, the duty of government is to refine, perfect and "lift up" its citizens to the highest plane and to establish a Camelot devoid of want or need. And the devil take those who disagree.

The French Revolution sought to tear down the old guard and build Utopia anew. It failed and Napoleon was born. Woodrow Wilson, using a crisis as his justification, usurped freedom for the "public good". He, also, failed and the League of Nations was stillborn. FDR solved a depression by going to war and, along his merry, always-smiling way, established the nascent Welfare State - his root goal all along. The Kennedy/Johnson hydra completed the transformation of a proud, productive laissez faire nation, two centuries old, into the full-fledged "Nanny State". To posit that the nation has achieved a negative trajectory ever since should be obvious to any observer.

Government, at the hands of both the liberals and those who are Janus-faced (campaigning as conservatives but with a liberal core; e.g. George W. Bush), have successfully expanded the Leviathan to a size that is now beyond tether. If (from my lips to ears of the gods) a true classical conservative were miraculously - and it would truly be a miracle of Mosaic proportion - elected President now, he or she would have no chance of parring down the creeping tentacles of the beast set in motion by the liberality of enlightened man. It is my belief that this Domesday Machine - one that needs no pilot and generates its own momentum - is steadily in motion and wholly untamable. Government has scaled Mount Olympus and has displaced the gods as the deliverer of the masses.

Where we once led the world in productivity and innovation, we now lead the world in empty-headed, time-wasting hedonistic pursuit of individual pleasures. The government has achieved its purposes: First, it has exceeded, by size alone, the understanding of any individual citizen and, secondly, the citizens, sensing their powerlessness and insignificance before the Beast, have thrown down their swords and shields. They are now contented by vanity, materialism and superficiality in their interests and what little remains of their attention spans. The Leviathan as foretold by Hobbes has, indeed, arisen but our lives still seem to be no less "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short". Would anyone disagree?

A final observation: The chains of slavery were loosened by the Civil War and were almost sprung open by Dr. King and the Civil Rights Movement in the halcyon days of the mid-20th Century. Sadly, in contemporary America, they have been reapplied, as firmly and as burdensome as ever, today by a different but no less pernicious overseer. To wit, government as savior, provider and Great Father.

Which returns us to the subject of this piece. While it is I - the conservative nee classical liberal - who is viewed, de factor, by all the world a racist, it is exactly the opposite in reality. I believe in the Declaration of Independence that proclaims, rightly, that "all men are created equal". The truth of the matter is that those of the left (a.k.a. the modern "liberals") whose history is steeped with eugenic balderdash and the assumption that the melanin content of one’s skin determines one’s human potential shoulder much of the blame for the stubbornness of contemporary social and fiscal inequality. It is they who have made a crusade of ill-conceived "uplifting" social engineering to "level the playing the field" that assume some need "special" help and "affirmative action". It is this religious fervor of the liberals which has wrecked havoc on America’s minorities for nearly a century now and have accomplished - what?

Yes, we have a minority President. Minorities citizens fill positions of power and influence throughout industry, education and politics. But, I humbly ask, what of the "forgotten men and women" of color? Has the plight of the average black or Hispanic citizen been measurably improved? Are the plagues of violence, drugs, homelessness, illegitimate births, fatherless-households, prostitution, domestic violence, rates of incarceration, unemployment and school dropouts alleviated by all the efforts of government and its vain attempts at social engineering? Personally, I think not. Yet, I am called a racist.

I still believe (cling to, in fact) that any man or woman living in this nation can become anything they chose to be. They can achieve this through their own diligence, discipline and sacrifice. But, as long as there is the Siren call of "government assistance" (an oxymoron if ever there were one), many will remain addicted to the handouts and never climb the stairway of hope to personal dignity.

I believe in the potential and the talent of my fellow citizens, whatever race, sexual orientation, creed or any other artificial divide that the sociologists and the quota-pushers can dream up. Further, I believe people are people and to continue to examine every issue as a "black problem" or a "white problem" or a "immigrant problem" only serves to keep us divided and suspicious of our own brothers and sisters. We are, after all, "one nation, indivisible" - or so it was in times past. I do not believe any man who is able to work benefits from a government that pays him not to. I believe a single-parent can, with resources already available in the public sector, learn new job skills and become a productive member of his or her society and care for his or her family with pride and heightened self-esteem. I believe to the very marrow of my being that we - all of us - are our own salvation. We, ourselves, are the only ones who can make our shattered self-image and our crumbling nation whole. In brief, we are not and should not be dependent on a benevolent federal bureaucracy to solve every problem and bind every wound. To do so would harken back to serfdom.

Yet, I am called a racist.

If there remains a "boot on the neck of the black man, holding him down", it is not laced upon my foot. On the contrary, it steps, Gulliver-like, as a giant across the Potomac and into every community in the land. It is the jackboot of the liberal who assumes there are differences between citizens and is determined to right any and all chimeric inequity. This is the real racism that still rots America’s soul.

Yet, I am called a racist.