Re: Holder's Revenge

When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are
entitled?
---
slave mentality

On Apr 2, 4:16 pm, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ** **
>
>   ****
>
> Return to the Article<http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/04/holders_revenge.html>
> ****
>
> April 2, 2012 ****
> Holder's Revenge****
>
> *By* *John T. Bennett* <http://www.americanthinker.com/john_t_bennett/>****
>
> Reverse discrimination against whites has just begun, according to Attorney
> General Eric Holder. Now, the exploitation of Trayvon Martin's death has
> thrown the cycle of racial resentment and favoritism into overdrive.****
>
> There has been much poisonous rhetoric following Trayvon Martin's death,
> and more is sure to come. It is hard to imagine that any other current
> topic could result in racial madness exceeding that tragedy. Nonetheless,
> an exceptionally ominous and instructive remark was recently made by
> Attorney General Eric Holder -- a remark more outlandish than any heard so
> far in our national conversation about Martin.****
>
> Attorney General Holder recently addressed the question of affirmative
> action, and for how long it would be required. He answered, stunningly,
> that reverse discrimination has only just
> begun<http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2012/02/24/holder-talks-financial-cr...>:
> "Affirmative action has been an issue since segregation practices," Holder
> said. "The question is not when does it end, but when does it begin[.] ...
> When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are entitled?"*
> ***
>
> We see in these remarks the soil out of which rises the bitter fruit of
> racial resentment. Holder's attitude is best summed up as the elite victim
> mentality. The belief is one of perpetual entitlement, fueled by
> bitterness, and given the stamp of official approval by politicians at the
> highest levels of national office. The Trayvon Martin upheaval is made
> possible by this carefully cultivated attitude, which exists within all
> income levels. Whether it's under the guise of injustice, inequality,
> underrepresentation, or white
> supremacy<http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/03/critical_race_theory_a_cult_of...>,
> the effect of the attitude is the same: sheer resentment towards the
> majority and its institutions. ****
>
> Not all minorities share this attitude, while many non-minorities do. For
> instance, Professor William B. Eimicke of Columbia University supports a
> lawsuit<http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/nyregion/a-fire-department-under-pr...>against
> New York City because the city doesn't have enough black
> firefighters. Eimicke, who is
> white<http://www.sipa.columbia.edu/academics/directory/wbe1-fac.html>,
> says, "The reality is the [fire] department should look like the city it
> serves." In other words, the fire department has something wrong with it
> because there are not enough blacks employed. This is an example of an
> educated, mainstream leader promoting an arbitrary standard of
> underrepresentation. Such standards will only fuel more demands for special
> treatment, and more resentment when the arbitrary standard proves
> predictably impossible to meet.****
>
> Take the example of Eimicke's fellow Columbia faculty. Of the 70 core
> faculty members<http://www.sipa.columbia.edu/academics/directory/browse_core_faculty....>in
> Prof. Eimicke's department, there are 3 blacks. Seventy-five percent
> of
> the faculty is white, and 4% is black, whereas New York City is 45% white
> and 27% black. Presumably, the principle that a fire department "should
> look like the city it serves" also applies to the faculty of a tony
> university. If the faculty "should look like the city it serves," then
> Columbia needs to expedite the removal of white professors. Will Eimicke
> enlist in the righteous cause of minority representation and quit? Or is
> that a sacrifice he prefers to delegate to students or middle- and
> working-class whites? We all know the answer: elite liberal hypocrisy
> protects many academics and politicians from the application of their own
> dogmas. Columbia's faculty will never match the ethnic makeup of New York
> City because professors are typically protected from purported racial
> favoritism, while firemen are fair game.****
>
> As the attorney general's remark shows, the cycle of elite liberal
> hypocrisy and racial favoritism will never end, so long as liberals control
> racial discourse.****
>
> In the meantime, the results will become increasingly absurd. The attorney
> general's daughters, and each successive generation, will continue to
> benefit from affirmative action to the same degree as truly disadvantaged
> minorities. This incongruity grows more and more evident, as Democratic
> Senator James Webb pointed out in his famous *Wall Street Journal*
> editorial<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870372410457537963095230...>piece.
> Sen. Webb noted that affirmative action policies have "expanded so
> far beyond their original purpose that they now favor anyone who does not
> happen to be white." Racial preferences extend to business startups,
> prestigious academic admissions, job promotions, and expensive government
> contracts. Many of these preferences have no relationship to
> discrimination, oppression, or even socioeconomic class level; they even
> benefit recent immigrants whose ancestors never faced discrimination in
> America. Instead, we are actually creating a government-sanctioned nobility
> -- a favored class of citizens with officially endorsed, race-based
> hereditary privileges.****
>
> Under the sway of of identity politics and racial grievance, even the most
> privileged members of our society will hold onto petty gripes. In a 2009
> commencement address, the First Lady complained about her childhood
> experience with the University of Chicago. Recalling that she grew up right
> near the campus, she
> stated<http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2009/05/michelle_obamas_early_alienat...>
> :****
>
> [T]hat university never played a meaningful role in my academic
> development. The institution made no effort to reach out to me -- a bright
> and promising student in their midst -- and I had no reason to believe
> there was a place for me there.****
>
> That she felt entitled to be "reached out to" in the first place is
> astonishing. The egomaniacal sense of entitlement contained in her remarks
> will strike most people as utterly foreign. Yet this way of conceiving of
> one's own position in society is commonly shared. Amongst the lower class,
> this attitude takes the form of demands for "Obama
> money<http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/18/a-pelosi-maher-go-to-nyc-welfare-of...>"
> and other such hilarity <http://youtu.be/P36x8rTb3jI>. ****
>
> Perhaps Michelle Obama should have made an effort at some point to
> understand why young white students, many of whom were not from Chicago,
> would have been reticent about venturing out into the South Side of
> Chicago. The reasons are not hard to discover. Immediately after their
> report on the First Lady's address, CNN aired a segment on violent crime on
> the South Side. Chief Ernest Brown of Chicago's Organized Crime Division
> explained the high rate of youth violence by saying that "their
> behavior<http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0905/16/cnr.04.html>is
> just inconsistent with civility." With that in mind, many students --
> of
> all races -- may not feel that it is their place to step into another
> community and attempt to help its youth. In fact, not even Dr. Martin
> Luther King and his family stayed in urban Chicago for long after starting
> to work in the city in 1966. Cohen and Taylor write that Coretta Scott King
> was concerned about violence in the neighborhood, and the Kings spent
> little time there [1].****
>
> Our own attorney general, ostensibly committed to even-handed enforcement
> of the nation's laws, referred to blacks as "my
> people<http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/0311/Eric_Holder_Black_Pan...>."
> Strangely, it is socially acceptable for only certain groups to proudly
> claim ethnic group membership. If similar tribal loyalties were publicly
> boasted by a white ethnic, that would be seen as sinister. Just imagine the
> reaction if a President Bush had identified -- *on the basis of race -*-
> with a victim of minority-on-white crime by saying, "Channon
> Christian<http://www.wate.com/Global/story.asp?S=10968229>looks like
> my daughters."
> ****
>
> Identifying with an ethnic group as one's own "people" will lead in most
> cases to in-group favoritism. Cultural pride is one thing, but proclaiming
> exclusive ethnic group affiliation while occupying a position of public
> trust is another. This tendency is too often written off as a harmless
> cultural tic or a healthy form of therapeutic identity formation. The
> trouble is that there is a worldview lying beneath the "my people" language.
> ****
>
> In his remarks, the attorney general has provided the most explicit
> statement of ethnic favoritism and racial grievance by a high public
> official in American history. And the racket has just
> begun<http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2012/02/24/holder-talks-financial-cr...>:
> "When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are
> entitled?" asks Holder. The question is rhetorical, and his constituents
> know the answer.****
>
> In this liberal, racialized conception of society, minority groups are
> supposedly not getting "benefits to which they are entitled." The danger in
> this attitude is not just that people are asking for free stuff from the
> government. The danger is that minority group members are made to believe
> that society is purposefully withholding benefits from them due to their
> racial group membership. Hence the resentment and latent animosity lurking
> at the core of the welfare state, and its ever-expanding legion of
> dependents<http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-11-02/u-s-food-stamp-use-reache...>
> .****
>
> This menacing fact was once openly recognized by sociologists. Decades ago,
> Edward C. Banfield wrote that urban social problems will increasingly come
> to be regarded as the fault of "callousness or neglect by the 'white power
> structure'" [2]. Just as expected, we now have a cult of anti-white
> resentment<http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/03/critical_race_theory_a_cult_of...>named
> Critical Race Theory being taught in law schools around the nation.
> ****
>
> The constant use of physical metaphors like "white power structure" will
> guarantee that some people view themselves -- usually falsely -- as being
> intentionally excluded from that structure. Of course, structures comprise
> people, so real human beings will inevitably become targets of the
> resentment originally intended for abstract "power structures."****
>
> The victim mentality feeds off racial bitterness, which is constantly
> politicized and enflamed. We see this in the rhetoric of Congresswoman
> Frederica Wilson (D-Florida), who said that Trayvon Martin was "hunted
> down<http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/03/27/dem_congressman_tra...>like
> a dog." The attorney general and president are doing their part to sow
> the seeds of bitterness, entitlement, and racial favoritism. By
> acknowledging those seeds, one begins to understand why racial double
> standards and potential violence are so easily stirred up amidst
> controversies such as the current one involving Trayvon Martin.****
>
> *John T. Bennett (MA, University of Chicago, Master of Arts Program in the
> Social Sciences '07; JD, Emory University School of Law '11) is a writer
> living in Atlanta, GA.*****
>
> ** **

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.