If You Want to Know Why We Aren’t a Post-Racial Society, Ask Liberals

Happy MLK day!

In case you were wondering, no I am not watching the inauguration of the “lord and savior”.

I would rather slit my own throat.

In fact, I wrote this post over the weekend, which means that while you are reading this I’m probably curled up in a chair at Starbucks, with a cappuccino and my copy of Les Miserables. I’m going to studiously avoid all television, news, and social networks today so that I don’t have an aneurysm.

It seems fitting to quote Dr. Martin Luther King on this day, it is his birthday after all. He once gave a speech, I’m sure you have all heard it before, but let me quote it for you again.

I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

– I Have A Dream transcript (ABC News)

King was looking for a post-racial society, one where we would not look at someone and judge them based on their race. Where we would not have politicians who feel the need to reference that the first African American president is “articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy” because they looked first at his race and not at his abilities or the content of his character.

Unfortunately we don’t live in a post-racial society.

We live in a society that looks, first and foremost, at the race, gender, and sexual orientation of a person, and then at their merit as an individual with thoughts, ideals, and beliefs of our own. Rather than collective ideas held by everyone in our minority.

Conservatives are commonly blamed for this, but that’s inaccurate. Liberals are the ones responsible for this inability to see past race or gender or sexuality.

I don’t care what you look like, the color of your skin, who you sleep with, or what’s between your legs. I care about your values and your ideals and the actions you take to uphold them.

Unfortunately liberals have shown that they have no ability to see past that.

We’ve seen no shortage of this in the past few months.

The people that voted for Obama because he’s black.

The liberals that classify any criticism of Obama as racism, because they are absolutely sure that conservatives are as unable to see past Obama’s race as they are.

The outrageous vitriol that Mia Love and Tim Scott and Allen West have been met with, because they dare to be both black (and a woman, in Love’s case) and Republicans. How dare they believe in small government and low taxes, which benefit the individual, when they ought to be supporting government subsidization of their own race, since black people clearly can’t make it without a government sugar daddy.

Or something like that.

How about the treatment that Richard Grenell and other gay conservatives receive from the supposedly “tolerant” left. We are called “House faggots” and any other number of slurs and insults, because we stepped off the gay plantation. Didn’t we know that as homosexuals we are genetically predetermined to be liberals? Didn’t was know that gay people can only have rights as a collective? Individual rights, schminidividual rights. Let us get married and to hell with government over regulation or the economy or following the constitution.

Women who are conservatives receive some of the worst vitriol imaginable. I may not like Sarah Palin overly much, politically, but she received some of the most disgusting treatment at the hands of liberals that I have ever seen. The same can be said with Mia Love, Michelle Bachmann, Ann Romney, Dana Loesch, Michelle Malkin, and pretty much every other outspoken conservative woman. Don’t women know that they can’t have individual thoughts or ideas? They have to live their life according to the collective wishes of “feminists” who insult and degrade them for being stay-at-home-moms or wildly successful political figures, who have succeeded with out the, rather ineffectual, liberal brand of help.

How do liberals help? They turn minorities into victims.

I am a woman, I am a lesbian, I am a conservative, I am not a victim. I can take care of myself and succeed under my own power and that is the sort of society that I want to live in. A place where we aren’t told that we only have value as part of a collective, but one that values us as individuals.

Martin Luther King jr. was, by all accounts, a Republican, but even if he had been a registered Democrat, as liberals would like to have us believe, (unlikely, as the Democratic party was the party of institutionalized racism [check out some of LBJ’s less savory commentary about African-Americans] before and at the time of MLK) he would deeply, deeply ashamed of the modern liberal.

We are not living in a post-racial society, but the people you need to look to for an explanation are the ones that play the victim card every day of their life, looking for a handout or defending their position, based on their race, gender, or sexual preference.

You are the problem here, not me.

Advertisements

27 Comments

  1. I loved this post! I wish I could explain this to liberal friends and them actually understand. I hate, hate, hate when people act like my race or gender or age should define who I vote for. I’m a young, half-black half-white, woman who votes based on what’s in my mind and heart and not based on the color of my skin when I look down. The whole “war on women” thing makes me so mad, but I won’t even go into that. Liberal keep shouting about equality, and such, but they’re the ones telling me I’m doing something wrong. It’s only okay to be different if I find everyone else like me and do exactly what they do. Great post.

      • Exactly! Isn’t the great part about all this freedom supposed to be that no matter what I believe or look like or am, that I get to decide what’s best for me without outside pressures. Even worse is when then people act like I’m being disrespectful to women before me or all of black people who fought to have these rights.

          • …You do know that the ideals of democrats and republicans have switched over time, right? In 1920 I would have been considered a republican. Also, I highly disagree with this article’s overall generalization of liberals. There will always be “phonies” within either political party. But I do know that I am a liberal independent who did not vote for Obama because he’s of a darker skin color, but because I AGREE with his ideas. And liberals DON’T all hate republicans, or believe they hate immigrants, or any of this. The modern liberal, to me, is someone who promotes change. I accept everyone because I am a human; I am not “white” and I am not “American”. I am a human living on this earth and I believe in what I believe in, whether you like it or not. I’m not saying your ideas are wrong in any way, because they are your opinions. They are just not mine. I don’t understand why we can’t just live peacefully and accept that we are all different and yet the same.

            • Frankly I don’t care if you are offended by my generalization. You are an exception, not a rule, by my experience and statistics.

              As for the rest of this, if you aren’t “American” please leave.
              Change for change sake is not necessary or necessarily good.

  2. Dear Meredith and Crisap,

    I’m sorry, I appear to have over-estimated your intelligence. Perhaps you need it explained in simpler terms. Let me know what part of this you do not understand.

    “As the leader of the SCLC, King maintained a policy of not publicly endorsing a U.S. political party or candidate: “I feel someone must remain in the position of non-alignment, so that he can look objectively at both parties and be the conscience of both—not the servant or master of either.” In a 1958 interview, he expressed his view that neither party was perfect, saying, “I don’t think the Republican party is a party full of the almighty God nor is the Democratic party. They both have weaknesses … And I’m not inextricably bound to either party.”
    King critiqued both parties’ performance on promoting racial equality:

    Actually, the Negro has been betrayed by both the Republican and the Democratic party. The Democrats have betrayed him by capitulating to the whims and caprices of the Southern Dixiecrats. The Republicans have betrayed him by capitulating to the blatant hypocrisy of reactionary right wing northern Republicans. And this coalition of southern Dixiecrats and right wing reactionary northern Republicans defeats every bill and every move towards liberal legislation in the area of civil rights.
    Although King never publicly supported a political party or candidate for president, in a letter to a civil rights supporter in October 1956 he said that he was undecided as to whether he would vote for Adlai Stevenson or Dwight Eisenhower, but that “In the past I always voted the Democratic ticket.” In his autobiography, King says that in 1960 he privately voted for Democratic candidate John F. Kennedy: “I felt that Kennedy would make the best president. I never came out with an endorsement. My father did, but I never made one.” King adds that he likely would have made an exception to his non-endorsement policy for a second Kennedy term, saying “Had President Kennedy lived, I would probably have endorsed him in 1964.”

      • I’m not sure how you get off coming off as intelligent when you just copied and pasted a wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr. see the section “Politics”).

        Also your argument, even though it’s hard to call plagiarism an argument, is flawed. You seem to be claiming that because he did not publicly endorse and publicly critiqued both parties that his private life may have been different. If for one regularly critique the GOP, but I’m a Republican. And his statement about not endorsing was an intelligent political move, when you’re looking for allies you don’t alienate people by associating with groups you don’t have to.

        You have yet in your grand ability to copy and paste to show us what he felt about politics in his PRIVATE life. Meredith however has given you a link to a quote from King’s niece, someone who would have known him in his private life and was at an age that would possibly care about this topic, that in his private life he was a Republican.

        There is a difference between people’s public and private lives. Now we admire King more for his public statements (which Meredith showed are the antithesis of everything modern liberals stand for…but rather deal with this central point you wanted to focus on a minor point), but while the private life molds our public life most of us tend to moderate our public life, so just because he pushed for more centrism in his public statements that doesn’t not prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that this was his personal belief.
        Any honest assessment would that on social issues King would be with in line with center of the Republican party (maybe not so much on economic and social issues). But more importantly, the key to this article was the idea that liberals look to irrelevant things like race more than character . And the sentiment of King’s statement about judging people by the content of their character is true whether King was a Republican, Democrat, or Communist, they’re true whether King was a saint or whether ever rumor about what’s in Hoover’s files on King is true. Like most liberals you seem to want to focus on things that aren’t relevant– you want to focus on the person (because Meredith put in a side note) rather than the message, you want to focus on skin color rather than character. So please don’t insult our intelligence unless you have some of your own to attack with .

  3. Now see, it’s that level of lame thinking that leads me to question your I.Q.

    1. I accidentally left off the source information, but the quote still had quote marks surrounding it, so clearly I was not passing it off as my own work. Clearly you KNEW I wasn’t passing it off as my own work, which is why you did your desperate google search on the words I posted. (Standard far-Right tactic, if you have no answers attack the source.)

    2. You have no evidence from MLK’s own words at all that he was a Repuglican, I have his words saying he had no love for either party, but he usually voted Democrat.

    3. ALL YOU HAVE is your arbitrary claim his uncle Tomassina niece, knew him better than anyone, even that she knew him better than his own son!!! You don;t think that his son has studied his Dad over the years? You don’t think he’s talked to other family members? You don’t think he’s talked to

  4. Sorry, my post got cut in half.

    …friends and colleagues?

    4. ” …so just because he pushed for more centrism in his public statements that doesn’t not prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that this was his personal belief.”

    So you’re saying he’s a hypocrite.

    5. “Any honest assessment would that on social issues King would be with in line with center of the Republican party”

    So you’re saying he hates immigrants, thinks Billionaires should be richer and the poor poorer. Mmmmmmmmm, colour me unconvinced by your arguments.

    6. “I never overestimated your intelligence, yay for me. JFK would also be ashamed of the modern Democrat party and liberals. Don’t kid yourself.”

    I think you’ve overestimated your own intelligence, nobody here is discussing JFK that I can see.

    Incidentally I’m ashamed of the modern Democratic party and Liberals as well

    • You brought up MLKsr. AND MLKjr. support of JFK as proof that they were Democrats/supported Democrats and would be part of the Democratic/liberal party now.

      They would not.
      Nor would JFK.

      I highly doubt you are, since you have all the mental capacity of the average liberal media shill.

    • Oh I’m so glad you have such a thoughtful nature as to say Republicans hate immigrants. Truly deep thinking not at all at sign of shallow talking point mentality. The same with your rich richer and poor poor comment.

      And I’m glad you show deep seated racism came out with your “Uncle Tomassina” I’m glad that you can so openly embrace that you are a closed minded bigot who believes that all people of African heritage must believe the same thing and independent thought will not be tolerated.

      And moderating your statements in public isn’t hypocrisy it’s often a sign of good judgement in that you understand that while you may want to move three or four steps you have get people to move one step at a time.

      And you repeat the same comment about his son who 9 when he died. It’s amazing, it’s like you don’t even know how to read and respond to arguments you just parrot talking points…oh wait that’s exactly what you do.

  5. Marvin,

    I’m curious about something. Why would an immigrant side with the Republican’s if they hated immigrants so much? I would like to know this so I can take it back to my wife and tell her how wrong she is. Maybe she needs to join the Liberals and be just as beat down by them as the rest of the minorities in this country.

    Please, keep siding with the ones that put you in the chains. That makes a hell of a lot of sense to me.

    Besides, When I was 9 years old I had no idea about my dad’s political views; however, once I got older I asked him about them. As a Native American he sided with the Conservatives… Wait a second, another minority.

    • Minority means nothing. I don’t believe in minorities. People are people. Not blacks, whites, aborigines, etc. And if being beat down meant I got my point across, then so be it. I would never strike back because it’s not my personal philosophy. People side with what they believe, ethnicity has little to do with it. The way a person was raised does.

Comments are closed.