White Racism - Part 2|
February 6, 2010
Although I didn't vote for Barack Obama, I welcomed the election of
a black man to America's highest office. I assumed his election signaled that white
America had finally atoned for the sin of slavery. I assumed that Martin Luther
King's dream of judging a man by the content of his character instead of the color
of his skin had become a reality.
No more would I have to spend my life proving a negative, as in 'I
am not a racist.' No more would I have to automatically
lower my voice when issues of race entered the conversation. No more would I have
to censor my thoughts and actions when dealing with people whose skin color differed
from my own. Alas, I was wrong.
America's elites seem intent on continuing to identify citizens by
their skin color instead of their character or achievements. Case in point: This
February has been designated by President Obama as National African American History Month, sending the clear
message that black history is separate from the history of everyone else.
Hispanics also have their own Hispanic Heritage Month (Sept. 15 to
Oct. 15) in which they focus on their own cultural achievements, as distinct from
American culture. Even American Indians have
their own Native American Heritage Month.
With all this focus on celebrating multiculturalism, whites, especially
white Christians have gotten a bum rap. For the last 40 years white Americans have
been blamed for all of the world's ills. Possessing white skin is automatically
associated with oppression, slavery, paternalism and colonialism. And everyone knows
that's bad stuff.
No-one has dared point out the absolutely phenomenal achievements of White Americans.
That would be considered racist, under the faulty assumption that any white achievement
necessarily demeans or excludes black achievements. This premise, however, doesn't
apply when touting black progress, or Hispanic progress, or progress of any group
not burdened with white skin.
Last week, the city of Farmington, New Mexico, unanimously voted not to participate
in any event celebrating a proposed "white history month." As a white American,
this tells me that whites are still not allowed to celebrate their own achievements.
The media backed, self anointed race hustlers have decreed that whites are still
the oppressors and blacks are still the victims, despite all the evidence to the
contrary. Whites must still atone for the sin of being white.
NBC is currently being lambasted for the sin of offering fried chicken
on the menu of a special NBC Black History Month lunch spread. How dare they point
out that blacks like fried chicken! I guess its a good thing they didn't offer watermelon
on the menu, as that might have triggered a national boycott.
No-one, however, is questioning the overt paternalism and outright
racism evidenced by billionaire Bill Gates. His Millennium Scholarship Project specifically excludes whites
from participating. I guess that kind of racism is OK. After all, it perpetuates
the myth that whites are the ones with all the power. Tell that to the increasing
number of whites displaced under the racial spoils system that operates under the
benignly named 'affirmative action.'
If Obama were truly a 'post-racial' president, I would be allowed
to comment on the fact that blacks dominate the NBA. I wouldn't give a thought to
mentioning the overwhelming percentage of blacks working for the postal service.
I could, without fear, comment on the fact that most blacks dance a heck of
a lot better than whites.
But no, for a white to dare mention cultural differences between blacks
and whites is verboten. But when blacks set aside a whole month to celebrate these
very differences, it is somehow acceptable.What's wrong with this picture? And how
much longer will whites have to atone for the sins of their ancestors? Inquiring
minds want to know.
White Racism: Part
Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for
She lives in South Carolina
Article may be reprinted, with attribution