|Amerians are Anti-intellectual Because...||2016: Obama's America or Romney's|
by Christopher Chantrill
August 21, 2012 at 12:00 am
THERE WAS SOMETHING charming about Vice President Joe Biden (D) playing the race card last week, singing the Theyll put yall in chains number with a great big stage wink. After all, when you play the race card you are supposed to inject real fear into your African-American audience, not do a soft-shoe routine.
But perhaps the Vice President, diligently discharging his duties, was merely seconding Walter Russell Meads motion for a new Race Compromise, although the presiding officer of the United States Senate is supposed to limit his activities to breaking a tie vote.
In the current American Interest, Mead leads us through the whole shabby history of race compromise in the United States, starting with the Compromise of 1787, a Constitution that effectively banned Congress from interfering with slavery in the states but balanced that by counting slaves as three-fifths of a person when apportioning seats in Congress.
Then it was on to the shabby Compromises of 1820, 1840, and 1854 that renegotiated the territorial limits of slavery. Unfortunately for the spirit of compromise the brilliant Sen. Stephen Douglas (D-IL) overreached in 1854 with the Kansas-Nebraska Act and provoked the creation of the Republican Party and the Civil War.
Twenty years later, the political establishment crafted the shabby Compromise of 1877. The South accepted the questionable election of Rutherford B. Hayes, and the north ended Reconstruction, setting up 80 years of southern segregation and Jim Crow.
Fast forward to the decade of civil rights, with Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights Acts. It ended, according to Mead, in the unofficial Compromise of 1977 when Southerner Jimmy Carter was elected president.
One can call the post-civil rights era that began in 1977 a settlement or a compromise because, once again, it balanced various claims and demands. At its core, the compromise offered blacks unprecedented economic opportunity and social equality, but it also allowed for the stern and unrelenting repression of inner-city lawlessness and crime.
So we got Affirmative Action and majority-minority congressional districts to increase minority numbers in Congress.
But now the Compromise of 1977 is dead. It was well intentioned, of course. It Affirmative Actioned blacks into the middle class with government jobs and into affordable housing with Fannie, Freddie, and the Community Reinvestment Act. It elected the nations first black president.
But it ended in failure. Blacks have suffered disproportionately from the housing bust, and the first generation of blacks in government jobs is getting its pension just as governments go broke. Foreign multinationals stay away from minority areas, and the decline of manufacturing is worst in areas where blacks live. Hello Detroit.
The Compromise of 1977 has failed, and so, Mead gently suggests, a new compromise is needed because the end of the blue social model means that given the special circumstances and unique history of black America, those who want to get past blue are going to have to reckon with black.
Lets see if I get this right. After the liberals screwed the working class by shoving them into unionized good jobs at good wages that priced themselves out of the market by the end of the 1970s, after liberals shoved blacks into the liberal Affirmative Action plantation that has now failed from general corruption and the law of unintended consequences, and after liberals shoved blacks into affordable housing that crashed around their ears, now we are supposed to pull the liberals chestnuts out the fire for them, with our money?
Forget it pal, because there is. No. More. Money.
Anyway, before we start compromising, what about all the other little darlings of the liberal welfare state? What about the government workers and their unfunded pensions? What about women and their right to own their own bodies with taxpayer-funded hormones and abortifacients? What about Hispanics and their DREAM? What about gays and marriage equality? What about the climate tipping point? What about the bundling crony capitalists? And what about grannie and Medicare as we know it? Dont they have a right to peacefully protest and present their demands before the next fix is in on race?
Its a little early to be counting on a compromise as the solution to our current troubles. The Compromises of 1877 and 1977 came when the political warriors were ready for a timeout after a decade or more of brutal political strife. Give us a decade of municipal bankruptcies, federal bailouts for California and Illinois, pitched battles on Medicare and ObamaCare, and a taste of sovereign debt default. Then people will be ready for the Compromise of 2027.
Meanwhile, dont despair. Slow Joe Biden will save yall from the chains of the next Jim Crow.
But I saw a man yesterday who knows a fellow who had it from a chappie
that said that Urquhart had been dipping himself a bit recklessly off the deep end.
Dorothy L. Sayers, Strong Poison
Civil Societya complex welter of intermediate institutions, including businesses, voluntary associations, educational institutions, clubs, unions, media, charities, and churchesbuilds, in turn, on the family, the primary instrument by which people are socialized into their culture and given the skills that allow them to live in broader society and through which the values and knowledge of that society are transmitted across the generations.
Francis Fukuyama, Trust
Tear down theory, poetic systems... No more rules, no more models... Genius conjures up
rather than learns... Victor Hugo
César Graña, Bohemian versus Bourgeois
We have met with families in which for weeks together, not an article of sustenance but potatoes had been used; yet for every child the hard-earned sum was provided to send them to school.
E. G. West, Education and the State
When we began first to preach these things, the people appeared as awakened from the sleep of agesthey seemed to see for the first time that they were responsible beings, and that a refusal to use the means appointed was a damning sin.
Finke, Stark, The Churching of America, 1776-1990
When we received Christ, Phil added, all of a sudden we now had a rule book to go by, and when we had problems the preacher was right there to give us the answers.
James M. Ault, Jr., Spirit and Flesh
A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is merely relative, is asking you not to believe him. So dont.
Roger Scruton, Modern Philosophy
As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable...
[1.] protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; [2.] recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family... [3.] the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.
Pope Benedict XVI, Speech to European Peoples Party, 2006
At first, we thought [the power of the West] was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next we focused on your economic system. But in the past twenty years, we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity.
David Aikman, Jesus in Beijing
But the only religions that have survived are those which support property and the family.
Thus the outlook for communism, which is both anti-property and anti-family, (and also anti-religion), is not promising.
F.A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit
Conservatism is the philosophy of society. Its ethic is fraternity and its characteristic is authority the non-coercive social persuasion which operates in a family or a community. It says we should....
Danny Kruger, On Fraternity
Families helped each other putting up homes and barns. Together, they built churches, schools, and common civic buildings. They collaborated to build roads and bridges. They took pride in being free persons, independent, and self-reliant; but the texture of their lives was cooperative and fraternal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism