Conservative-While-Black

Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it.

Thus wrote Jonathan Swift, more than 300 years ago. This aphorism, repeated in myriad variations across the ensuing centuries, has been most recently validated by a set of accusations leveled against Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. As I recently discussed, ProPublica, a left-wing weapon of messy destruction by some accounts, ran a hit piece on Thomas, alleging all sorts of disclosure improprieties, and extending one of the Left's favorite narratives, i.e. that Thomas is evil as well as stupid. And, by extension, continuing the efforts to undermine the reputation of the Court.

I am a big fan of Thomas as both a Justice and a societal commenter/critic, and while I don't always agree with his votes or opinions (I think he grants much too much deference to law enforcement, for one thing), I believe him to be one of the Court's biggest heavyweights, a friend of liberty and individual rights, and as sharp a mind as the Court has seen. So, obviously I'm biased in this matter, but I do think I gave the accusations enough attention to warrant my conclusion as to their weight or validity (gossamer and none). But, even if there's some "there" there, the matter is a really minor one. I've seen no substantive assertion that his time hanging out on a rich friend's property and yacht and whatever has had any impact on any case or on his judicial philosophy, so at best the nondisclosure would be a procedural infraction. That he discussed the disclosure matter with the other Justices is also strong evidence of the nothing-burger nature of this foofaraw.

What interests me most is why it's happening, and in particular why the story has legs. Over on Quora, where I dabble from time to time, there has been a deluge of tendentious, "begging," straw-man, and ad hominem questions (and 'questions') about Thomas since the ProPublica piece hit. I've seen several dozen, and I'm sure there have been more. The press on the Left is in full chummed-water frenzy over it, the press on the Right has written multiple deconstructions and rebuttals, and in general there's lots more noise than this warrants. To put up just a bit of whataboutism, this bit has generated orders of magnitude higher dudgeon than far more substantive matters such as legislators buying stocks ahead of new laws that affect those stocks, or the Biden family's international financial shenanigans.

Why?

The answer is in the headline. Thomas has the unmitigated audacity and impertinence to hold conservative beliefs despite being black, and has a seat in the hugest echelon of the government's judicial system from which to practice his conservatism. It's really that simple. Blacks are expected to stay on the political plantation, to think and vote their skin color rather than their minds. That it's white people telling them how they should think and vote is, of course, not in the least bit racist or condescending or parochial or paternalistic. Thomas's offense is wrong-think, and that combined with his skin color creates an intersectional abomination in the Left's eyes. It's bad enough that conservatives exist (leftists think them evil), but when one of "theirs" engages in heresy or apostasy, the Left loses its collectivist mind.

Thus, conservative-while-black.

CWB.

This ranks worse than conservative-while-woman, or conservative-while-gay, or conservative-while-trans, by the way. CWG and CWT are usually ignored, because attacking them would risk alienating the LGBT communities. There are too many CWWs out there, and while the likes of Amy Coney Barrett or Nikki Haley draw the Left's scorn, the demographic isn't as tilted to the Left, and therefore the potential loss isn't as huge.

Therein lies the real problem for the Left. If black Americans wake up to the massive disservice the Left has done them since LBJ's Great Society began, the loss of voting solidarity would be a huge blow. Thus, the incredible bile aimed at CWB individuals. They are a huge threat to the progressives' house of cards.