Anti-Racism Can Never Succeed

John Marshall Harlan, Thurgood Marshall, Martin Luther King, Jr. Earl Warren. Richard Delgado, Alicia Garza & Patrisse Cullors & Opal Tometi , Ibram X.Kendi.

Our constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among its citizens.

Thus wrote Supreme Court Justice John Marshall Harlan, in 1896, in his legendary dissent to the Court's Plessy v Ferguson ruling that created the doctrine of "separate but equal."

Thus repeatedly echoed Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, who described it 'his favorite sentence.'

I was reminded of these and more in reading Coleman Hughes' fabulous deconstruction of the historical revisionism being applied to the principle of color-blindness by the leading voices of the anti-racism movement:

Actually, Color-Blindness Isn’t Racist

Hold that bit about it being a movement. It has, as Eric Hoffer sagely warned us, departed from movement, moved past the "business" phase, and is now firmly in the "racket" stage of decay.

But, even discounting the 'racket' aspect of anti-racism, it's a fatally flawed idea that will make things worse rather than better.

First, a definition. Per one source,

Anti-racism is a process of actively identifying and opposing racism. The goal of anti-racism is to challenge racism and actively change the policies, behaviors, and beliefs that perpetuate racist ideas and actions.

Anti-racism is rooted in action. It is about taking steps to eliminate racism at the individual, institutional, and structural levels. It is not a new concept, but the Black Lives Matter movement has helped increase the focus on the importance of anti-racism.

Emphases are mine. Anti-racism requires you to discriminate based on skin color. Treating everyone equally is not enough. Judging people by the content of their character is not enough. In fact, both are deemed by the anti-racists as either cop-out or complicity, and therefore racist in themselves.

Yes indeed, not reacting to the color of others’ skin is racist, per this new idea. If you don't behave anti-racist, you're racist. The 'logic' is that since systemic racism is so deeply woven into the fabric of our society, the only way to achieve true racial parity is to act as a counterweight, to tip the scales toward those of non-white (hold that thought) skin tones. No matter individual circumstances, as we've seen in practice. And, for forever and a day. I’ve seen no mention or even suggestion as to when or under what circumstances such scale-tipping might end, might have been deemed to have done the job. Treating people differently based on their skin color is to be how society works from here to eternity, and I cannot imagine a more destructive societal “evolution” than diminishing our individuality in favor of our skin color or other identity markers.

Anti-racism won't work.

For a litany of reasons.

First, it runs contrary to humans' innate sense of fairness. If you aren't a racist, acting racist, even if it’s in the “right” direction feels wrong.

Second, it is at its heart a collectivist idea that subordinates the individual, and collectivism's track record is universally abysmal. Only the elites and the well-connected prosper (looking at you, Kendi, Coates, DiAngelo et al), while everyone else suffers.

Third, it presents too-good-to-resist opportunity for cynics, charlatans, con-artists, and the selfish (see above, plus the BLM real estate moguls) to prey on the well-intended and on society as a whole. The "racket" phase that we've already entered will only grow if anti-racism prevails.

Fourth, it stands the core premise of the most successful system of governance created to date - one rooted in equality and individual liberty - on its head. Indeed, Richard Delgado, the grand poobah of Critical Race Theory, wants to flush those principles down the toilet. `

Fifth, it cheapens the success of individuals of color, sows distrust in those who rise to positions of expertise or prestige, and corrodes societal harmony. Those who succeed on merit get conflated with those who were socially promoted, which encourages judgment based on skin color and makes it tougher for the meritorious to gain recognition and acceptance.

At its heart, anti-racism is a blend of soft and hard coercion. It's a cynical leveraging of people's good hearts and positive intents. It corners those who want a better America into complying with its demands, lest they be called racists. It's not about making the nation a better place for people of color, but rather about punishing some for the sins of others (see: collectivism), about Other People's Money (see: collectivism), and about power and ego-stroking for a select few (see: collectivism). It also echoes the ‘special revelation’ inherent in some religions, where we are told we’re unable to figure things out for ourselves and therefore need a high priest class to tell us what’s racist, what to do, and how to think.

Its nil chance of success - in the sense that you and I might consider (improving racial harmony and enabling traditionally oppressed segments of the populace a chance at success unhindered) - may actually be a feature. For it is beyond doubt that there are some in society who loathe the liberty of a free-enterprise system, who despise the masses' right to self-determination, and who insist that they and only they know how to order a society, and the discord and chaos sowed would benefit those freedom-haters. There are more than a few who want society in its current form to collapse, and have strategized as to how to bring that about. The goal? A new order, based on some form of Marxism and having dispensed of individual liberty in favor of a collective structure. With them or like-them at the top, of course.

I consider this anti-racism racket to be as big a risk to the Republic as the government's reckless spending and its growing disregard for our rights. This is the stuff that causes societies to unravel, and we're already seeing its fruits. A giant wedge is being sledge-hammered into our culture. Anti-social behaviors are excused, defended, and at times encouraged. The government dole has gone from a source of shame to one of aggressive entitlement. Criminals are excused or coddled, victims are dismissed. People stop caring about doing the right thing, acting civilly toward one another, or respecting the norms of a civilized society. Even the best, most liberty-minded government cannot benefit a society full of internal distrust and discord, and one that seems to be all about managing us when it's not taking our money to give to others certainly isn't of much use to anyone but the managers and the money-takers.

---

Thank you for reading! If you enjoy The Roots of Liberty, please subscribe (if you have already, thank you!), please hit that “like” button to let me know, please share any article you like wherever you roam the Internet, and  please recommend the blog to your friends.

If you really like The Roots of Liberty and want to help keep it rolling, please consider becoming a paying subscriber here at Substack, or at a lighter level as contributor to the blog via Patreon.

Thank you, again, for your support!

Peter.