They Think You're Stupid (6 page)

Warren's court was certainly correct in overturning the
Plessy
decision. His broad, liberal justification, however, laid the groundwork for future court rulings and laws that viewed citizens not as equal individuals, but as members of various racial groups in need of special protections.

Indeed, Congress passed a number of landmark laws in the years following the
Brown
decision that addressed many of the inequities and discriminations racial minorities faced. The Civil Rights Act of 1957, passed during the Eisenhower administration, established the Civil Rights Section of the U.S. Justice Department and allowed federal prosecutors to obtain court injunctions against individuals who interfered with others' voting rights.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964, passed during President Lyndon Johnson's administration, prohibited discrimination in public facilities, in government, in employment, and created the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission. The act made it illegal to compel racial segregation in schools, housing, or in hiring practices.

The act not only opened many doors for Blacks and other racial minorities, it also provided the impetus for the feminist movement and later programs such as affirmative action. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was of course controversial at the time of its passage, and many Southern Democrats in Congress opposed it. Its passage, however, brought the nation closer to the Founders' vision of "equal protection of the laws" for all citizens.

Unfortunately, President Johnson was not content with legislation that, to him, merely made discriminatory practices illegal and sought to treat all citizens equally regardless of race or ethnicity. In his 1965 commencement address at Howard University, Johnson permanently muddied the waters of race relations and treatment of racial minorities by the courts, the law, and government and private institutions. In the section of his remarks titled "Freedom Is Not Enough," President Johnson stated,

It is not enough just to open the gates of opportunity. All our citizens must have the ability to walk through those gates. This is the next and the more profound stage of the battle for civil rights. We seek not just freedom but opportunity. We seek not just legal equity but human ability, not just equality as a right and a theory but equality as a fact and equality as a result. To this end equal opportunity is essential, but not enough.

President Johnson went on to say, "Perhaps most important--its influence radiating to every part of life--is the breakdown of the Negro family structure. For this, most of all, White America must accept responsibility."

With his speech to Howard University, and the affirmative action and quota laws that were subsequently passed, Blacks were no longer viewed as individuals in the eyes of federal and state courts, nor in the eyes of Congress, nor in the eyes of the White Democrat elites, nor in the eyes of the soon-to-emerge, self-appointed Black leaders.

The question central to an examination of the opinions in
Plessy
and
Brown
, of the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1964, and of President Johnson's Howard University commencement speech is "Do Constitutional rights and guarantees belong to classes and races, or to individuals?" Chief Justice Warren stated in his opinion in
Brown
that the intentions of the Founding Fathers "are inconclusive." Yet the language of the Fourteenth Amendment could not be clearer. What part of "No state shall . . . deny to
any person
within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws" did Warren and others not understand? Our Founding Founders knew a nation that viewed and treated its citizens as individuals would be constrained from dividing them and treating them inequitably. The emergence of Black groupthink is the unfortunate product of our courts and laws treating Blacks as a monolithic group instead of as individual citizens.

Another factor responsible for perpetuating Black groupthink was the subsequent emergence of the so-called Black leaders who successfully convinced the majority of Blacks that their economic prosperity and survival was dependent upon their support of the Democratic Party and its liberal economic and social policy agendas. The so-called Black leaders are activists like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Joseph Lowery, along with NAACP Chairman Julian Bond and numerous Black elected officials across the country. These "leaders" have for decades preached to the Black electorate the myth that their prospects for success are wholly contingent on Blacks voting as a bloc for Democrat candidates, regardless of the candidates' race, and on their active support for liberal policies. I refer to these individuals as the "so-called Black leaders" because I do not in my lifetime recall an election in which Blacks got together to select
our
leaders. Nor do I recall anyone appointing them leaders of all Blacks. The last time I checked, I am a citizen of the United States, and the Black citizens have not seceded from the Union.

The so-called Black leaders rose to prominence in the political arena due to their activism in the 1960s on behalf of the civil rights and voting rights struggles. Many were schooled under the tutelage of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. No one can deny them the honor in fighting for and securing basic civil and voting rights for all citizens. Unfortunately, many of those, like Jesse Jackson and Joseph Lowery, who fought so long and hard to achieve a society and system of laws blind to the color of one's skin, have fought even harder in the years since to keep Blacks on the Democrat plantation and make race a key component of discussion on virtually all political issues.

The so-called Black leaders want to remain atop the lofty perch of notoriety and success, but to do so they must have support from a majority of the Black electorate. The formula for maintaining their prominence and power is quite simple: Convince the White Democratic Party leaders that they can deliver a majority of votes from Blacks, and the Democratic establishment rewards them monetarily and publicly. Because the "leaders" have their entire lives invested in maintaining power and influence over the Black electorate, while at the same time reaping vast financial rewards, they seek to impose harsh and public sanctions on any African-American who dares leave or criticize their Democratic plantation.

We have all heard the terms used to vilify Black Republicans: "token Black," "Uncle Tom," "sellout," and some that cannot even be printed here. Yes, I have been called some of these labels, but I am unfazed by anyone who would deny my Constitutional and God-given right to
think
and
decide
for myself. Prominent African-Americans in President Bush's cabinet, including former Secretary of State Colin Powell, current Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and former Secretary of Education Rod Paige, as well as Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, have all been criticized simply because they worked for or were nominated by a Republican administration.

I was criticized by a so-called Black leader in 2004 for running in the Georgia Senate Primary race as a Republican (see text box on following page). I was not surprised or disturbed by the criticism. Rev. Joseph Lowery, former president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, criticized the fact that I was running as a Republican for U.S. Senate at a lunch hosted by the Georgia Association of Black Elected Officials.

Lowery used the phrases "colored people" and "black people" in his speech to attack me and attempt to scare other Blacks who may be conservative and Republican from leaving the Democratic plantation. He used this racially divisive language to remind Black people in the audience of the days of segregation--the days when coloreds had to eat, drink, and sleep in separate facilities. To Lowery and the other so-called Black leaders, "colored"
is a derogatory term that equates conservative Blacks with the whites responsible for segregation.

It is sad that the same people who literally poured their blood, sweat, and tears into the fight for equal opportunity for all races now lead the most vociferous attacks against Blacks who dare rise to the most respected levels of government or achieve success in the business world as members of the Republican Party. It is at the same time illustrative of the fact that today's so-called Black leaders do not work to provide better futures for those they claim to represent. Rather, their goal is to control as many of the votes from the Black electorate as possible, which ensures that their positions of power and influence remain safe.

Followers of the so-called Black leaders and advocates of their social policies should take a close look at the statistics on Black economic and social performance. According to Census 2002, home ownership among Whites was 71 percent, 5 percent higher than the national rate of 66 percent. In contrast, homeownership among Blacks was 46 percent, 20 percent below the national average. At the same time, the national poverty rate was 11.7 percent. The poverty rate for Blacks, however, was 22.7 percent, while only 7.8 percent of Whites were below the poverty level.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP), the abortion ratio for Black women (503 per 1,000 live births) is three times the ratio for white women (167 per 1,000 live births), and Black women have 32 percent of all abortions while the Black population is only 12 percent of this nation. In addition, the CDCP reports that in 2002,
68.6 percent of Black children were
born out of wedlock
. Yes! Nearly 70 percent, and this is not a typing error.

These statistics illustrate the hollowness in forty years of promises by the so-called Black leaders that the policies of the Democratic Party would lift all Blacks from poverty and oppression. In following these pied pipers, Blacks have severely limited their opportunities for economic success because for too long they have looked at themselves as a group first and individuals second.

Not all prominent Black leaders have followed the negative and divisive groupthink model employed by the likes of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Joseph Lowery. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., whom many consider a Founding Father in the struggle to end discrimination and ensure equal opportunities for all citizens, inspired people and led with the idea that change could occur through grassroots mobilization and positive negotiation with political and business leaders. Dr. King's positive leadership created the impetus for aggressive social change and is the reason why Americans of every racial background revere him today.

Another positive leader is Washington, D.C. mayor Anthony Williams. Mayor Williams in 2003 helped initiate a system to provide more than one thousand vouchers per year to poor children in the failing Washington, D.C. public school system. The voucher system is called the "District of Columbia Opportunity Scholarship Program," and it allows students from financially troubled homes to attend private schools in the D.C. area. Mayor Williams has of course received the expected outrage and criticism from the teachers' unions and so-called Black leaders like D.C. congressional delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, but he knows that education and doing all he can to provide a better future for D.C.'s children is more important than politics.

I also must mention Andrew Young, a pioneer with Dr. King in the fight for civil rights and equal opportunities and a former mayor of Atlanta, U.S. congressman, and U.S. ambassador. Mr. Young has told me more than once, "Black people have to learn how to be bipartisan. We don't have a permanent party. We have permanent issues and interests."

Fortunately, encouraging trends are emerging in the Black electorate. More and more Blacks are realizing that the road to personal economic security does not go through the Democratic Party or another big government social program. The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies found in its 2004 National Opinion Poll that more Blacks than ever are indicating a desire to support Republican candidates and identify themselves as Independent or Republican.

The statistics listed in the text box on the following page show that a significant percentage of Blacks are beginning to see past the decades-old negative perceptions about the Republican Party and the conservative political ideology. They are moving from
rhetoric
to
reality
; from
groupthink
to
you think
. Individual Blacks are questioning the logic behind continuing to believe in the same leaders, lawmakers, and policies when conditions for many Blacks have stayed the same for years or become even worse.