There’s been a bit of a dust-up of late regarding certain commentators who have had the unmitigated gall to be both members of a minority group and conservative. Michelle Malkin, La Shawn Barber, Condoleezza Rice, and Armstrong Williams have all come under attack for the above offense. (In Williams’ case, though, it must be pointed out that he did an incredibly unethical, underhanded, slimy, and potentially illegal thing in accepting government money to plug a program, and being dumped by every media outlet that previously paid him is a good start on settling the score.) Some of the sheer venom and hatred and outright vile terms and epithets being hurled at these people (terms such as “house nigger,” “house slave,” “race traitor,” “whore,” “Uncle Tom/Aunt Jemima,” and “sellout” are among the milder ones I’ve seen) appalls me, and should likewise bother all of good conscience.
My instinct was to hurl myself into the fray and defend these worthies (Williams, obviously, excluded). But I set that aside in favor of striving not to be a warrior, but a peacemaker. With that in mind, I have prepared the following proposal.
I suggest that some of the leading liberal voices of the day (such as Kos, Atrios, and a few others — I’m not “up” on leading liberals) should get together and assemble a list of positions that minorities can and can not support. Once they have a list that they can all agree on, then it can be distributed to all minority commentators so they can see exactly what they can and cannot say, as spelled out in this “profile” of acceptable positions.
Of course, what’s fair for one side is fair for the other. Likewise, we should assemble some of the leading voices of conservatism to kick around just where all white men should stand on issues, and appropriate sanctions for those who violate it. For example, I am curious just what sort of penalties Ted Kennedy would be in for.
This could be quite a challenge, but luckily we have a valuable resource available for us, and he’s already in public service. It might be difficult to get him to cross party lines and help Republicans, but Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) might still have some materials left over from his days as a leader in the Ku Klux Klan, or perhaps we can contact the NAACP, who won the Klan’s headquarters in a lawsuit back in the 80’s — they might have found some stuff that had fallen behind a desk or something.
So, once we get everything hammered out, we can set aside this “traitor to your race” stuff and get people to behave exactly as they’re supposed to, with everyone’s politics clearly categorized by their race, sex, national origin, sexual orientation, or whatever else criteria people want to draw up.
It’ll certainly make it a lot easier to judge someone’s beliefs based simply on their appearance. In fact, this “pre-judging” could be a huge time-saver. I see great potential in the whole concept of “prejudice” in tidying up political discourse, and I have the above-mentioned liberals to thank for bringing it to my attention.