blackwards; how black leadership is returning america to the days of separate but equal

7/31/2019 Blackwards; How Black Leadership Is Returning America to the Days of Separate but Equal

1/13


2/13

THOMAS DUNNE BOOKS.

An imprint of St. Martins Press.

BLACKWARDS. Copyright 2012 by Ron Christie. All rights reserved. Printed in theUnited States of America. For information, address St. Martins Press, 175 FifthAvenue, New York, N.Y. 10010.

www.thomasdunnebooks.comwww.stmartins.com

Design by Steven Seighman

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Christie, Ron, 1969 Blackwards : how Black leadership is returning America to the days ofseparate but equal / Ron Christie. 1st ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-312-59147-2 (hardcover) ISBN 978-1-250-01352-1 (e-book) 1. African AmericansHistory1964 2. African AmericansCivilrightsa History. 3. African AmericansSocial conditions20094. African AmericansPolitics and government. 5. African Americanleadership. 6. United StatesRace relationsHistory. 7. UnitedStatesSocial conditions21st century. 8. United StatesPolitics andgovernment2009 I. Title. E185.615.C577 2012

323.1196'073dc23 2012024019

First Edition: September 2012

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1


3/13

B

would seek to lead America back to the days of separate, rather than

equal rights for African Americans, we must first grapple with a dif-

ficult threshold question: What does it mean to be an American citizen

today? Tis question is perhaps more vexing now in the twenty-first

century than in the early days of American history, even taking into

account that it was only in the latter half of the nineteenth century

that blacks were guaranteed citizenship rights and the protections af-

forded under the Constitution.

In the infamous Dred ScottSupreme Court decision of 1857, the

chief justice of the United States offered his rather stark assessment ofthe rights and liberties of African Americans in the United States in

general as well as his particular belief that blacks were not American

citizenswhether they were born on American soil or brought to the

country involuntarily through slavery. In the relevant section of the

opinion, Chief Justice Roger aney asserted:

Te words people of the United States and citizens are syn-onymous terms, and mean the same thing. Tey both describe

the political body who, according to our republican institutions,

form the sovereignty, and who hold the power and conduct the

1. THE GENESIS OF HEADING BLACKWARDS

When Did America Stray from Equality Under the Law to a Push forSpecial, Rather than Equal, Rights?


4/13

T H E G E N E S I S O F H E A D I N G B L A C K W A R D S | 7

Government through their representatives. Tey are what we

familiarly call the sovereign people, and every citizen is one

of this people, and a constituent member of this sovereignty.

Te question before us is, whether the class of persons de-

scribed in the plea [black people] . . . compose a portion of this

people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We

think they are not, and that they are not included, and were

not intended to be included, under the word citizens in the

Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and

privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to

citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that

time considered as a subordinate . . . and inferior class of be-

ings, who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and,

whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their au-

thority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who

held the power and the Government might choose to grant

them.1

Only in the aftermath of the Civil War would Congress act to clarify

the legal status of blacks to preserve both their legal status as citizens

as well as their liberties and protections under the Constitution while

explicitly rejecting the Dred Scottdecisionone which constitutional

and legal scholars consider the worst decision ever rendered by the

Supreme Court.2

First Congress formally abolished slavery by adopting the Tir-teenth Amendment to the Constitution on December 6, 1865. Next

Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1866, making it federal law

that everyone born in the United States and not subject to any foreign

power was an American citizen without regard to his or her race, color,

or previous condition of either slavery or involuntary servitude. Fi-

nally, Congress adopted the Fourteenth Amendment on July 9, 1868,

to explicitly overrule the Dred Scottdecision by declaring: All personsborn or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdic-

tion thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein

they reside.3


5/13

8 | B L A C K W A R D S

Congress took this explicit step of including what came to be

known as the Citizenship Clause within the Fourteenth Amendment

to quell efforts by opponents who sought to invalidate the Civil Rights

Act of 1866 as being unconstitutional. Te journey to full equality as

citizens of the United States for blacks and other people of color began

in the years following the Civil War; some would argue this struggle

persists to the present day.

Te civil rights era remains one of the brightest reminders of the

fulfillment of the promises enshrined in the Declaration of Indepen-

dence that all men and women are equal and that as American citizens

they are guaranteed the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happi-

ness. Utilizing the power of words rather than the threat of violence,

leaders and supporters of the civil rights movement sought to rebuild

an American society in which its citizens were to be treated equally

without regard to the color of their skin, ethnicity, or country of origin.

And yet, after fighting for so long to be free from the chains of slavery

and the oppression endured decade by decade via separate and inher-

ently unequal treatment before the law, a new form of self-segregation

began in the days following the civil rights era that has emerged as a

potential threat to the stability of our societal fabric todaythe desire

by some to identify themselves as members of a particular racial and/or

ethnic group rather than treasuring the privileges, rights, and respon-

sibilities of being an individual American citizen.

Noted historian and Pulitzer Prize winner Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr.

likened this new trend that gathered momentum in the 1970s and the1980s as the cult of ethnicity, an abandonment of the vision of Amer-

ica as a melting pot of opportunity in which people set aside their racial

or ethnic allegiance to honor their special status of being American citi-

zens. Elaborating on this troubling phenomenon, Schlesinger noted:

But pressed too far, the cult of ethnicity has had bad conse-

quences, too. Te new ethnic gospel rejects the unifying visionof individuals from all nations melted into a new race. Its un-

derlying philosophy is that America is not a nation of individu-

als at all but a nation of groups, that ethnicity is the defining


6/13

T H E G E N E S I S O F H E A D I N G B L A C K W A R D S | 9

experience for Americans, that ethnic ties are permanent and

indelible, and that division into ethnic communities establishes

the structure of American society and the basic meaning of

American history.4

Before delving into the substance of Schlesingers remarks, it should

be noted that far from being a conservative or rightward-leaning com-

mentator, Schlesingers political ideology was decidedly liberal. For

one, Schlesinger had served as a special assistant to President John F.

Kennedy from 1961 to 1963 and he wrote a definitive account of the

Kennedy presidency entitledA Tousand Days,for which he received

his second Pulitzer Prize in 1968. Instead, Schlesingers opinion can

be said to have been wrought from his front-row seat to power in poli-

tics in Washington, D.C., as well as his vocation as an author and so-

cial critichis concern over an evolving cult of ethnicity was one

that was informed from decades of observation of the American

psyche.

o this end, I concur with Schlesingers assessmentthat a cult of

ethnicity has manifested itself in the manner in which people of color

in general, and blacks in particular, have identified themselves over the

past quarter century. Te Negro from the 1950s and 1960s later gave

way to the nomenclature of black as the black power movement

took hold in the 1970s. Singer/songwriter James Browns song, Say It

LoudIm Black and Im Proud, released in 1968, was a popular an-

them of the black power movement during its epoch. Tis form of self-identification continued into the 1980s and 1990s but suddenly the

term black American gave way to African Americana develop-

ment, I believe, that has had more negative than positive developments.

Black Americans fought for more than a hundred years to be

treated as equals by their fellow citizens, regardless of the color of their

skin and/or ethnicity. And yet, as America has moved from the late

days of the twentieth century into the twenty-first, there appears to bea disturbing new trend of self-identification based on race that runs

counter to all of the blood, sweat, and tears the pioneers of the civil

rights era had shed in their hope that one day Americans would be


7/13

1 0 | B L A C K W A R D S

equal under the color of law without regard to the color of their skin

or ethnicitytying us all together in the phrase Dr. Martin Luther

King Jr. once made famous: a single garment of destiny. Instead, the

relatively new push for diversity and multiculturalism sensitivity has

led more to the garment of destinythe essence of the fabric of the

United Statesto fray, rather than knit us more closely together as a

society.

Why? Because I agree with Schlesingers assessment that certain

people of color are placing a premium first and foremost on their iden-

tification as members of a specific group rather than accepting the

premise that American citizens are comprised of people from a myriad

of races that come together to form one individual entitythat of be-

ing an American citizen. Furthermore, they seem to regard the term

American as synonymous with being white rather than denoting an

entire group of people brought together by their very diversity. Under

this logic, America is not a nation comprised of individual citizens, but

rather of people who belong to competing groups with differing goals,

beliefs, and ideologies.

Tis is not a theoretical exercise or conjecture on my partthis is

a conflicting reality which I encounter on a daily basisa twenty-first

century embodiment of W. E. B. DuBoiss term double conscious-

ness, that is, caught between a self-conception of what it means to be

an American as well as being a person of African descent. People in

general and blacks in particular are often amazed that I subscribe to

the former theory and cringe at my lack of desire to self-identify withthe latter. Let me take a moment to explain.

Unequivocally I believe the United States of America is the great-

est country on the face of the Earth. Each year, more people try to

immigrate to the United States, both legally and illegally, than any

other country on the globe. Our democratic principles enshrined in

both the Declaration of Independence from English tyranny as well

as the Constitution of the United States have served as our guidingmoral compass, allowing Americans to live their lives among a demo-

cratic government of enumerated powers. Our elections and transi-

tions to and from power are peaceful and conducted with the force of


8/13

T H E G E N E S I S O F H E A D I N G B L A C K W A R D S | 1 1

law through the ballot box rather than the force of arms that plague

many Tird World countries. Millions of people from around the world

seek precious few slots to become American citizens every year.

And yet, as I cherish my American citizenship as well as the soli-

darity shared by millions of my fellow native Californians, I am re-

peatedly criticized for identifying myself as an American as opposed

to an African American. Many of my detractors accuse me of being

ashamed of my heritage or seeking to deny my African roots. o them

I say I can trace my roots to a former slave plantation just outside of

Valdosta, Georgia, that is owned by my family members to this very

day. Generations ago, the same plantation was worked by my relatives,

relatives who toiled under the whip and inhumane system of slavery. I

am very well aware of my roots, both African and American, and I

treasure rather than shun them both.

At the same time, slavery ended with the Tirteenth Amendment

in 1865 and the United States has compiled nearly 150 years of history

since then. While the stain of slavery will forever be a dark legacy of

our history, I daresay that I do not have any immediate ties to Africa

why then would I seek to identify myself with a continent comprised

of some forty-seven sovereign nations when I am proud of the very na-

tion I live in? Moreover, I marvel at those who believe I have denied

my cultural heritage in favor of Anglocentric styles of culture, speech,

and dress.

I yearn for someone to explain to me exactly what African cul-

ture is said to comprise when we would grapple with such a definitionto explain American culture other than our rights and liberties that

are enshrined in our Constitution. It is not without irony that many

who question my denial of African culture and heritage cannot

place a country in Africa correctly on the map; I often ask such detrac-

tors to locate Cameroon, Ghana, and Angola in geographical relation-

ship to anzania, Ethiopia, or Mozambique. If my detractors dont

know the history and culture or location of the continent they ascribeto have such strong ties to, how can they be taken seriously? Is it just

that they seek to belong to a specific group, feel a special connection or

kinship to others who are members of said group due to the color of


9/13


their skin or ethnicity rather than evaluating their fellow citizens as

individuals?

I believe this self-segregation and balkanization has taken race

relations in America from a state of empowerment embodying Dr.

Kings ideals for a color-blind society to one of exclusion, where people

are evaluated based on their skin color or ethnicityexplicitly reject-

ing the notion that America is comprised of numerous races that blend

together to form a more perfect union of citizens. Accordingly, I assert

that such calls for diversity and multiculturalism have helped drive us

further apart rather than closer together both as a people and as a society.

Moving forward, then, how does one best describe the term mul-

ticulturalism? Does multiculturalism imply that America has made

good on its promise to form a true melting pot of cultural and ethnic

diversity that is blended together to represent the very best of Ameri-

can society? Or does the expression underscore the reality that 225

years following our founding, not only do we remain balkanized by

race, but that the ancestors of some who were once cruelly oppressed

due to the color of their skin now feel most comfortable with self-

segregation and the further desire to identify with a culture that is not

truly their own rather than embrace the special privilege it is to be a

citizen of the United States of America?

While there is no universally accepted definition as to what consti-

tutes multiculturalism today, I believe the Stanford Encyclopedia of

Philosophyoffers a revealing insight:

Multiculturalism is a body of thought in political philosophy

about the proper way to respond to cultural and religious diver-

sity. Mere toleration of group differences is said to fall short of

treating members of minority groups as equal citizens; recogni-

tion and positive accommodation of group differences are re-

quired through group-differentiated rights, a term coined by

Will Kymlicka (1995). Some group-differentiated rights areheld by individual members of minority groups, as in the case of

individuals who are granted exemptions from generally appli-

cable laws in virtue of their religious beliefs or individuals who


10/13


seek language accommodations in schools or in voting. Other

group-differentiated rights are held by the group qua group

rather [than] by its members severally; such rights are properly

called group rights, as in the case of indigenous groups and mi-

nority nations, who claim the right of self-determination. In the

latter respect, multiculturalism is closely allied with nationalism.5

On its face, the term appears innocuous: multiculturalism adherents

look for a proper manner to treat members of minority groups as full

and equal citizens while seeking positive accommodation of group-

differentiated rights. Upon closer reflection, how can basic toleration of

ones fellow citizens fail to be suffi cient when one is talking about a

member of a minority group? I believe this is precisely the warning Ar-

thur Schlesinger referred to when he feared a cult of ethnicity had ap-

peared on the American social landscape that began to pervade our

political and sociological landscapes. Suddenly, equal rights and tolera-

tion of our fellow citizens were no longer suffi cientnow minority

group members needed specialrecognition and positive identification of

group differences to fully assimilate in American society?

For one, I do not believe for a moment that Dr. Martin Luther

King and the brave pioneers of the civil rights era who fought tirelessly

but peacefully for equal rights under the color of law in the 1950s and

1960s would have approved turning back the clock on the momentous

direction they had set for the country by allowing ethnic minorities to

be treated more favorably due to the color of their skin at the dawnof the twenty-first century. Recognizing that racism still exists in

America and we have yet to fully actualize Dr. Kings dream, pressing

for special rights in the early twenty-first century as some form of cul-

tural sensitivity when it took some 350 years for blacks to receive equal

rights and opportunity after their arrival in chains on American soil

is a distressing step blackwards for the assimilation of her citizens to

full participation in the American dream.While I pondered the wisdom proponents of multiculturalism

sought to offer with an open mind, I grappled with what the terms

special recognition and positive identification were supposed to


11/13


mean, precisely. Is it the invention of a special holiday during the

Christmas season for blacks (Kwanzaa) to identify their religious be-

liefs based on their ethnicity, rather than the tenets of their faith? I

was shocked to discover that Kwanzaa is not a traditional religious-based

holiday, but the creation of Maulana Karenga (born Ronald McKinley

Everett), a former member of the United Slaves Organizationa black

militant nationalist group. Karengas original goal in creating Kwan-

zaa was to politicize Christmas as a Western holiday and offer black

Americans a Pan-African equivalent.

Is it the creation of offi ces of multicultural affairs across our college

and university campuses and the encouragement of self-segregation

by dormitory, fraternity/sororities, and graduation ceremonies? While

these questions will be considered in greater detail in chapter 2, I

remain perplexed at how far we have regressed as a nation from the

call to service offered by President John F. Kennedy in his inaugural

address, when he charged his fellow citizens:

Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do

for your country . . . Finally, whether you are citizens of Amer-

ica or citizens of the world, ask of us here the same high stan-

dards of strength and sacrifice which we ask of you. With a good

conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of

our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His

blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth Gods

work must truly be our own.6

Just fifty years removed from President Kennedys call to serve a cause

and a calling higher than ourselves by putting national rather than

individual self-interests at the forefront, how can it possibly be that we

now find many in America who advocate just the opposite? A new so-

ciety predicated on special recognition and rights for a preferred, select

class at the expense of their fellow citizens? Not only does this runcounter to the message presented to the nation by the thirty-fifth

president of the United States some fifty years ago, but also contrary

to the vision of what the United States of America would be in the


12/13


mind of one of our most influential Founding Fathers and first presi-

dent of the United States over two hundred years ago.

In a letter to newly arrived immigrants from Ireland to New York

City written in 1783, George Washington famously opined:

Te bosom of America is open to receive not only the Opulent

and respectable Stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of

all Nations And Religions; whom we shall wellcome to a par-

ticipation of all our rights and previleges, if by decency and

propriety of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment.7

Unfortunately, the push for group-differentiated rights has led to a

deterioration of racial and ethnic relations in the United States rather

than strengthening them. As we shall see in the chapters to follow, the

drive for exclusive racial and ethnic dormitories and graduation cere-

monies has fractured many of our college communities while black

politicians in the era of Obama decry racism rather than their indi-

vidual underlying transgressions as the source of their angst. Some-

how, the president who was sworn in on the sweeping promise of hope

and change soon gave way to political strife and a swift decline in his

overall approval ratings.

Rather than focusing on the issues and the policies pursued during

President Obamas term in offi ce, many of his supporters instead blamed

racism and alleged racist sentiments expressed by the ea Party as the

root of the presidents decline in stature. During the summer of 2011,members of the Congressional Black Caucus asserted that African

American lawmakers had been verbally harassed due to their ethnicity

by ea Party participants during a rally on Capitol Hill; yet no evi-

dence emerged in the era of the cellular videophone in which incidents

were captured on film. Nonetheless, Representative Andr Carson

(D-IN), a senior member of the Congressional Black Caucus, would

further charge, Some [members of the ea Party] would love to see ushanging from a tree.8


13/13

!"# %&' !(() *(+

,-./01

!.2134 5 *0673

819:3!0;19

blackwards; how black leadership is returning america to the days of separate but equal

Documents