They are motivated by a grievance based ideology and are just looking for a reason to set the whole country on fire and the events in Ferguson and New York have lit their match. They don’t want to change us. They want to destroy us.
The protest, looting, and violence in the name of anti-racism that has occurred since the tragic deaths of Michael Brown in Ferguson Missouri and Eric garner in New York City appear to have set back race relations by more than forty years.
Just six years ago we elected the first African American president and were told then that we had become a post racial country. We were proud. We had come a long way since the days of slavery and Jim Crow. Even if you didn't vote for Obama there was something in his win in which we could all be proud.
All of that seemed to have been lost in recent weeks. Perhaps, like Ebola or ISIS, the media is making more out of it than there really is but I think not. When two cops are executed as an act of revenge, there is real danger. Even since their funerals there have been calls by protesters to “put wings on pigs” - a reference to killing police. There are widespread reports of more cops being attacked and shot. That’s an indication to me of a real and present danger.
I like how Michelle Malkin characterizes the situation, “Birds of a lawless, bigoted feather bully together.”
This issue has white hot intensity on both sides. It’s the kind of deep division that starts revolutions and civil wars and that is what has got me so worried. The flames of hatred and strife are being fanned by some of our old enemies like communist and other radical leftist groups, as well as new enemies like militant Jihadists. But at the core of the trouble are the various race baiters, and those who make a profit from the anti-racism industrial complex that would rather give off more heat than light to the issue.
I think that most citizens of this country, black or white, are in somewhat of a state of shock. We are dumbfounded by what we are witnessing on the news. It’s simply unbelievable.
Consider these four things.
1. There are those who think being in the south automatically make one a bigot but these events did not happen in the south where the Civil Rights battles mostly took place forty years ago but rather happened in the mid-west and northeast.
2. There are those who think country folks are backward hicks. They think that these are mostly uneducated folks who bitterly cling to their guns and religion and that law enforcement in these areas are inherently racist. Yet these events did not occur in rural areas but instead in heavily populated urban and metropolitan areas.
So, if there is deep rooted racism that persists in the country perhaps it resides in areas of America long thought to be immune to such prejudice.
3. There are those who think Conservatives (i.e Republicans) and their policies are naturally prejudice toward minorities but Missouri and New York have Democratic Governors and the two cities have democratic majors. The police who did these things are their police who are under their supervision.
4. There are those who would argue that only big government can ensure the civil rights of all its citizens but these two events were done by the police, which is a primary function of government. If anything it was big government that led to these tragedies. Protesters in Ferguson are angry at local and state officials for the military equipment and tactics used by the police that heightened tensions and they claim made things worse. Eric garner died because he was resisting arrest for selling cigarettes that weren’t taxed. Of all the problems and concerns in New York, police are going after small time tax evaders? That’s a big government issue.
So, If there is still systemic racism in America it survives by different means and under different leadership than it did in times past. If the awful events that took place in Missouri and New York are the ugly results of racism then it is a different kind of racism, a type gone mostly undetected or ignored (until now).
Here's what I believe.
The police actions in these two cases may have been inappropriate but they were not acts of racism. The reaction to them, however, has been. Police are not immune to bigotry, hate, and prejudice but these uncivil attitudes were not the primary cause of what happened to Michael Brown and Eric Garner
However, the bitter group-think, the disregard for facts, the looting and lawlessness, and the limp response to it by governing officials, are evidence of a different brand of racism.
Let me be clear. I do believe that the old racism does still exists but it is rare, not pervasive, and certainly not deeply rooted. I am not naive. I know that there are are still individuals and groups of individuals in this country whose prejudice and bigotry flow from old notions of race. But I'm also convinced that the malevolent racism of the past is on the fast track to extinction.
Nevertheless, it's being replaced by a benevolent racism. It isn't the rancorous, vicious, out-in-the-open kind of racism we saw in the Jim Crow south but rather it's a nicer, more progressive, and largely disguised form of racism. It is racism of the reformist, the liberal, the activist. Because it's racism in the name of helping instead of hurting, it is a more insidious form of the same old monster. It's altruistic bigotry - a kind of elitist bias that can’t see the hypocrisy of it's own prejudice.
Here's some examples.
1. The federal government, who should see all people as equals, continues to insist that it count race on all its forms and applications, yet makes it illegal for businesses to do so.
2. Higher education, where all people should been seen as capable of competing and succeeding, continue to enforce quotas and affirmative action policies based on race.
3. Judges and public school officials, educated people who should know better, are administering different set of rules and standards for certain groups of minorities because they believe these groups need a break that others don’t.
These are a few examples of a more gentler and kinder form of racism. It has been called the soft bigotry of low expectations. It's still racism nonetheless and it is, like the old form of racism, influenced by a faulty notion that there is a such a thing as race.
As a Christian I could not disagree more. A biblical worldview informs me that nations exists. Cultures exists. Religions exists. Worldviews exists. Ideologies exists. Race does not! It never has. Race is a social and political construct - nothing more.
Human Beings are not different because of the melanin content of their skin, the features of their faces, or the texture of their hair. From a biological perspective these things are not significantly different. And, there are no significant differences physiologically to suggest we are or should be different socially. Biologist and geneticist agree that all humans are basically the same. What makes us different and divides us is not founded on any physical, emotional, or intellectual basis.
What segregates us are our thoughts, our ideas, our fears, and our desires. We are separated by languages, cultures, religion and the worldviews associated with those things. It's those nonmaterial things that are socially significant.
The only race that exists is the human race and it is divided by how various cultures think about themselves, and how they think about how the world works. Those very real distinctions somehow became connected to mythical concepts about blood, breeding, and appearance, probably as a way to morally justify colonialism and slavery.
The towering achievement of this fantasy was lived out in Germany during the early part of the last century and the end conclusion of such a bad idea was experienced by the six million victims of the Nazi’s racist social and political policies.
Prejudice certainly exists everywhere. Discrimination is very real. Anger, hatred, and bigotry are nasty actualities. But lets be certain on this truth - race does not exist, at least not in the mind of the Creator. Acts 17:26 says, “He made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the surface of the earth, having determined appointed seasons, and the boundaries of their dwellings.
This new kind of racism - this benevolent racism - is still based on the same unscientific theory that there are different races of people and that those differences are socially or even morally important. But now, added to this extremely faulty belief, is the exceptionally vile and dangerous Social Justice Warrior (SJW) and the wrongheaded notion of a perfect society.
I could easily outline the racists ideas behind Abortion, Affirmative Action, Welfare but for the sake of brevity and simplicity let's just look at one - Gun Control. With the events of Ferguson as a backdrop, this particular issue certainly needs closer scrutiny.
To give this argument a larger context, I’m borrowing the following content (with minor changes) from an article entitled Progressive Racism: The Hidden Motive Driving Modern Politics.
The official progressive position on gun control is to restrict access to guns as much as possible; ultimately ban and confiscate them all. The rationale is that gun violence is a scourge on society. Guns are easy accessible killing machines and unnecessarily facilitate murder and crime.
Many believe there is really another goal and that progressives have a hidden agenda. Many think that progressives want to disarm the populace to prevent armed resistance to the eventual imposition of a leftist totalitarian police state. But that is a wrong interpretation of their motives. I don’t think that even enters the mind of most gun control activists.
Instead, I believe there is a hidden racial component. White urbanites are deathly afraid of black gangbangers with guns, but are ashamed to admit this publicly, so to mask their racist fears they try to ban guns for everyone, as a way of warding off the perception that their real goal is to target blacks specifically.
The basic dividing line in American politics is not North vs. South, nor is it Coasts vs. Flyover Country, but rather Urban vs. Rural. We've all seen the election maps marking red and blue states. If you look at the 2012 election results by county (or any election of the past decade or more) with some notable exceptions, you will see a clear pattern - a division between urban and rural.
The new political divide is a stark division between cities and the countryside. Not just some cities and some rural areas, either — virtually every major city in the U.S. has a different outlook from the less populous areas. The difference is no longer about where people live, it’s about how people live. The only major cities that voted Republican in the 2012 presidential election were Phoenix, Fort Worth, and Salt Lake City.
To put more simply: In modern America, liberals live in cities; conservatives live in rural areas. Liberals generally want more government because they perceive a greater need for it in their daily lives.
But what else is concentrated in cities? African-Americans, and gun violence: The center cities of America’s 50 largest metro areas account for only 15 percent of the total population but nearly 40 percent of gun-related murders.
Putting all these statistics together, we see that large cities have high concentrations of white liberals alongside gun-using black criminals. And yet it is specifically in Democrat-voting big cities where most of the gun-control measures are proposed. And why is that? Are the progressive urban dwellers afraid of cowboys? Of backwoods deer hunters? Of hillbillies with shotguns? No: the average progressive has never even met a cowboy, a hunter or a hillbilly. And frankly, progressives couldn’t care less if rednecks own guns, because progressives aren’t physically afraid of rednecks on a daily basis. Instead, they are afraid of gun violence at the hands of their fellow city-dwellers, the urban African-Americans who commit a wildly disproportionate percentage of the gun crimes in America.
So to make the gun-control bans appear even-handed and race-neutral, progressives must try to ban guns for everyone, even though the bans are in reality aimed at one specific group. Rural gun-users are just collateral damage of a policy that actually targets inner-city blacks.