Showing posts with label Martin Luther King. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Martin Luther King. Show all posts

Thursday, October 23, 2014

Character Trumps Tribe, Part I

The attack on freedom of religion by Houston Mayor Annise Parker brought to mind a point about identity politics. Or, to frame it from a better position, character trumps tribe.

Martin Luther King, Jr., gave his speech on the steps of the Lincoln Monument.
His dream was that we would judge each other by the content of our character,
rather than the color of our skin.

I mentioned last week that, when Annise Parker was running for mayor, she downplayed her connection to the LGBT community. She ran as a sensible businessperson with skills the city needed. And she just happened to be a lesbian, but that didn’t affect her skills. That, however, was a lie to get elected. She did not have adequate skills to overcome her tribal connection.
She has reigned as the first openly homosexual mayor of a major American city. Ah, the glory! And she has used the power of her position, time and again, to press the agenda of her tribe, rather than the overall needs of all the citizens. She may even believe that putting forward her tribal agenda is best for all. But it isn’t. She’s blinded by that overriding agenda.
She can’t see that pressing her agenda at the risk of giving sexual predators legal, unquestioned access to women’s bathrooms is not good for the community as a whole. She can’t even hear the huge outcry from the community who see that obvious danger. And she’s so sure she’s right that she arbitrarily throws out the 55,000 signatures of the people who want to put the question on the ballot. When she’s called on that illegality and must defend her actions in a lawsuit, she uses that opportunity to intimidate churches for speaking on this moral issue.
So, now that we have had a first openly homosexual mayor of a major US city, what do we know? The agenda of the tribe trumps the character of the candidate. Will that always be true? Perhaps not, but she has given us reason to beware. If her actual goal was to move members of her tribe into acceptance among the broader community, she set back that work a generation or more.
We have a similar situation with our first black president. [Style note: I do not know which changing term is best to use for the race previously referred to as black. Referring to it as African-American is inaccurate, since not all Africans are of the black race, nor are all blacks from Africa, nor are all people of that race Americans. So, for simplicity, I use the term black, meaning no disrespect or offense.]
He ran as post-racial. Many people succumbed to that. It’s a positive thing to show what so many of us already felt—race doesn’t matter; character and capability matter. Unfortunately, he was voted in because of his race, regardless of lack of character and capability. And, six years in I think it’s safe to say that his is the most racist administration we have had since Woodrow Wilson (who separated blacks serving in the military and encouraged eugenics that have led to a higher percentage of blacks being aborted than any other race—possibly more being aborted than being born).
Almost immediately after his election, he appointed a racist Attorney General, Eric Holder, who refused to prosecute Black Panthers for voter intimidation, because they were black. And it was his policy that anything racist that blacks do is fair, and only non-blacks will be prosecuted for racist (or perceived racist) offenses. See J. Christian Adams’s book Injustice.
The president has tried to construe disagreement with him and his policies as racism—just as Mayor Parker has tried to construe disagreement with her as being homophobic. He uses his tribalism as a power tool against numerous other segments of the people: Constitution respecters, religious people, people who assert their second amendment rights, people who respect the military….
Now that we have had a first black president, what do we know? The agenda of the tribe trumps the character of the candidate. With blacks, this may set things back even further than you might think. We have the additional data that more than 9 out of 10 blacks voted for this man—because of his race. In other words, we have clear evidence that an overwhelming majority of the black “tribe” identify with the tribal connection more than with the American connection. This is where stereotypes come from—a probable truth. Most of the blacks we meet failed to vote in favor of American freedom and constitution, because they had a chance to vote for someone of their color. Most blacks, we can conclude safely from the overwhelming data, are racist. Tribal.
This means racism is a bigger issue than before the Obama elections. I’m expanding this discussion to “tribalism,” because race isn’t the only group with an agenda. Tribalism isn’t a good thing.
Think back to high school. Your school had a cross-town rival. Were all the people in your school better than all the people in the rival school? No. Was your school better than theirs because you had a better football team? Or even because you had more graduates go on to college? There might be some useful measures, but chances are you rooted for your school team out of loyalty. You went there; you belonged. And that’s all that matters.
But in grown-up world, loyalty by happenstance isn’t a good enough reason for supporting a person or policy.
There’s more to cover here, to fully understand our divisions, and possibly to find some way out. So we’ll continue this in part II.

Monday, January 21, 2013

The Dreamer


Back when I was in elementary school, the federal government hadn’t gotten involved in moving dates to the nearest Monday and deciding which days we would all stop working or going to school. So in those ancient days, we were in school learning about our 16th President, Abraham Lincoln, on February 12th. And then, ten days later we’d be in class learning about our 1st President, George Washington. There are certain things about that world that made sense.
Martin Luther King, Jr., giving "I Have a Dream Speech"
photo found here
Eventually these were combined as a federal day off called Presidents’ Day, on the Monday closest to Washington’s birthday. The only other holiday related to a person was Columbus Day (which also was a day for historical study back in my childhood, rather than a day off). So I felt some natural resistance to making a special federal holiday to honor the birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr., a man from my lifetime, who was somehow deemed more significant than all our presidents and other historical figures. We had no practices to fill the day, no cultural festivals, no family feasts. So, while I could see noting the day, it seemed to me to make a lot more sense to use school time to cover the significant historical details.
Nevertheless, there has been a day off in mid-January since 1986, mostly used for shopping, as far as I can tell. But last week I drove past a neighborhood school that had on their marquee that school would be held this Monday. So students will actually be in class where they can learn about the man the day is meant to honor. That makes more sense to me.
Some historic details are probably worth noting. MLK, like Gandhi, valued non-violence as a strategy toward change. He stood up for what he believed and was willing to spend time in jail to show his seriousness. That willingness to stand up for principle no matter the unpleasant consequences is something to admire.
MLK was a conservative in many ways that I am. Our Constitution says it guarantees the rights God has given to all human beings. It was not the Constitution that was wrong, but the people in the country who hadn’t opened their eyes to the validity of human rights for all races. So the Constitution was worth conserving. MLK was a Republican, because that party was (and has been, since Lincoln or before) the party ideologically aligned with applying the Constitution to all citizens. Conservatives, half a century ago as well as today, look at MLK’s words, and find resonating truth.
His “I Have a Dream” speech was given 50 years ago this coming August 28th. I hope schools will take the opportunity to share the speech again at that time. I hope our young people can hear or read the words for themselves and understand them without any rewriting of history.
For today I thought I’d quote a few words from that speech, plus a few other favorites phrases from this man who was able to speak so clearly and convincingly.

I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."
I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.
I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.
I have a dream that my four little 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.
 

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

 
Faith is taking the first step, even when you don’t see
the whole staircase.

 
Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that. 
 
There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right. 
 
Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal. 
 
Intelligence plus character-that is the goal of true education.