Only for today's mainstream media is something illegitimate by virtue of being all-white. Needless to say, something that's all-black or all-Hispanic is vivid, authentic and inspiring; anything all-white is stultifying, boring and evil.
The New York Times' Frank Rich, a Jewish liberal, complains Sunday that of the Republican Party's 247 senators and representatives in the Congress, all are white. This, Rich says, is "the elephant in the room of our politics" and is "rarely acknowledged". More on that in a second.
Rich's piece begins with a lengthy and flaccid complaint that the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the black supremacist preacher and spiritual mentor to Barack Obama, gets far more attention than the anti-Catholic and fanatically Christian Zionist Rev. John Hagee, who has endorsed John McCain and whose antics are also caught on YouTube. (Hagee's anti-Catholic animosity seems directed at the Church for what he sees as the Church's misbehavior against the Jews.)
It's a sorry attempt at a comparison for reasons that are 1) almost too obvious to get into (McCain doesn't go to Hagee's church) and 2) blogged about already by countless liberals. It makes you wonder what justifies Frank Rich's paycheck.
The piece winds through to Rich's point, which is that the racial discord among Democrats revealed by the Clinton-Obama contest is better than the racial unity of Republicans. Naturally, because that unity is white, it's something to be ashamed of, "racial dysfunction in their own house."
(Whiteness as inherently "dysfunctional" is a favorite and sadly unchallenged theme of the liberals, the left, Jewish activists and other anti-white operatives. Conservatives are always on the run against this charge. Never do they confront it by asking what's wrong with being part of a predominately white group.)
Rich takes the standard MSM tack here, demanding to know why there aren't blacks and Hispanics among GOP ranks, and assuming that anything not graced with their presence must be flawed. But he's wrong to say that Republican whiteness is "rarely acknowledged"; in fact, Howard Dean has done just that, and it seems unlikely that many even casual observers of American politics would guess that the Republican Party is a black stronghold. Rich seems not to get that it's "rarely acknowledged" in the specific because it's so relentlessly acknowledged in the general: Our entire media is geared toward the idea that white is bad, anything else is good.
Rich concludes, "anyone who does the math knows that America is on track to become a white-minority nation in three to four decades. Yet if there's any coherent message to be gleaned from the hypocrisy whipped up by Hurricane Jeremiah, it's that this nation's perennially promised candid conversation on race has yet to begin."
Frank is on the precipice of truth here, but we know he isn't going to jump. Yes, America is plunging toward a white minority. Yet to Frank, this is a good thing, and whites should prepare by learning to genuflect to new minority power. To white advocates, it does not bode well.
And yes, there isn't any candid conversation on race. But what Rich means by "candid" is whites rending their garments over their collective guilt and shame and speaking frankly about what goodies should be doled out to other racial groups. What white advocates mean by "candid" is an acknowledgement of inherent racial differences, the unworkability of racial integration, and the legitimacy of white unity and political power.
Ultimately, the real elephant in the room isn't the evil of white dominance. It's the reality of racial differences.
Christopher Donovan is the pen name of an attorney and former journalist.
Permanent link: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Donovan-Rich.html