Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Patched together thoughts on culture war issues Previous entry: Louisiana: unarmed, black, 73-year-old cancer survivor shot dead by police

Did You Know There’s Another Embarrassing Black Republican Named Steele?

imageShelby Steele, most famous for being the guy who tells conservatives that they’re right about everything relating to race, tells conservatives that they’re wrong about race because they’re so right about race.

Essentially, he argues that the “left”, in the 1960s, claimed the mantle of redemptive moral authority through activism, and then lays the blame for conservatism’s utter (and decreasing) lack of appeal to minorities on conservatism’s lack of a mechanism to convince and redeem the American populace for its prior - and now dead - bigotry.  If you want me to translate this to “I’m not a dick who constantly references Hayek”, he’s saying that Democrats managed to come up with a policy platform that addressed minority needs, however imperfectly, and Republicans sat back and reveled in the superiority of their ideology.

Oh, and they’re a party that openly embraces racism while simultaneously denying it. 

Steele’s solution?  Well, first, conservatives should revel in the superiority of their ideology:

What drew me to conservatism years ago was the fact that it gave discipline a slightly higher status than virtue. This meant it could not be subverted by passing notions of the good. It could be above moral vanity.

And then it should embrace racism while simultaneously denying it:

And so it made no special promises to me as a minority. It neglected me in every way except as a human being who wanted freedom. Until my encounter with conservatism I had only known the racial determinism of segregation on the one hand and of white liberalism on the other—two varieties of white supremacy in which I could only be dependent and inferior.

The problem with conservative minorities is their conservatism, yes, but there’s a deeper issue on vivid display with Steele: conservative minorites sound like fucking cultists.

Conservatism has painted itself into a terrible corner.  It exists by contradicting itself - it harbors and favors racism while denying that racism exists at all.  Note that Steele doesn’t address the racial history of American conservatism, he simply recasts it as an inherent and undeniable good, and then talks about his psuedo-religious rebirth as a right-wing Negro. 

The appeal of conservatism is the mutuality it asserts between individual and political freedom, its beautiful idea of a free man in a free society. And it offers minorities the one thing they can never get from liberalism: human rather than racial dignity. I always secretly loved Malcolm X more than Martin Luther King Jr. because Malcolm wanted a fuller human dignity for blacks—one independent of white moral wrestling. In a liberalism that wants to redeem the nation of its past, minorities can only be ciphers in white struggles of conscience.

This is a prime example of conservative racial denialism as equality: the important factor for conservatives is not that we are all equal, but instead that the discourse on race not involve them in any way, shape or form.  Conservatism absolves white people of responsibility and burdens minorities with a white/conservative-approved delusion: I am a full human being because I am willing to blame other minorities for the history of their skin color.  The only reason that Steele believes that liberalism is a form of “white supremacy” is because of his inherent belief that whites are, in fact, superior, and the only way to avoid such a terrible specter is to avoid provoking or involving white people altogether.  It’s better to be “free” than pursue actual freedom.

Liberalism’s glamour follows from its promise of a new American innocence. But the appeal of conservatism is relief from this supercilious idea. Innocence is not possible for America. This nation did what it did. And conservatism’s appeal is that it does not bank on the recovery of lost innocence. It seeks the discipline of ordinary people rather than the virtuousness of extraordinary people. The challenge for conservatives today is simply self-acceptance, and even a little pride in the way we flail away at problems with an invisible hand.

Liberalism, frequently criticized for its overemphasis on blame, is now apparently in search of a cleansing innocence.  Conservatism, which rewrites and restarts history at the point most convenient for the entrenched and powerful, is actually facing down our past and asking us to all take responsibility. 

I suppose in Shelby Steele’s world, black literally is white.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Jesse Taylor on 04:34 PM • (45) Comments

They only beat you because they love you.  These aren’t shackles meant to hold you down, they’re meant to make you free.  I’m assigning you a space at the back of the bus, because I respect you just that much.  This shit sandwhich will taste delicious, if you only learn to give it a chance.

Oh, sweet simple beautiful GOP.  Know that you are only wrong because you are just too right.

Comment #1: Zifnab  on  03/16  at  05:17 PM

Some friends just got back from a trip down south, and they took a plantation tour while they were there, and after hearing the guides talk about how well-treated the slaves were (they were given free time, during which time they were allowed to go and work on other plantations for money so that they could buy their freedom! Even though there was no record of freedom-buying ever happening at this plantation! And that families were only split up when the masters didn’t have ANY OTHER CHOICE when disciplining a rebellious slave!) my friend, who is usually really soft spoken had to interrupt to ask “So, what exactly IS your opinion on slavery, here?”

Comment #2: Mighty Ponygirl  on  03/16  at  05:23 PM

It exists by contradicting itself - it harbors and favors racism while denying that racism exists at all.

The contradiction belongs to those who support differing college admissions standards based on skin color, then call those who refuse to agree with that position racist.  Conservatism is where a lack of racism is found, as it favors treating everybody equally.  Looking through the DNC and RNC planks, you will find only the former supports different treatment based on race.

Comment #3: Allen  on  03/16  at  05:23 PM

The contradiction belongs to those who support differing college admissions standards based on skin color, then call those who refuse to agree with that position racist.

You can do better than that.

Comment #4: gwangung  on  03/16  at  05:26 PM

gwangung - no, he can’t.

I’m sure Allen flips his shit every time he’s stopped at a red light because of all the damn negros getting through the green and yellow ahead of him when if they just had the consideration to not be out on the damn road, he wouldn’t be impeded.

Comment #5: Mighty Ponygirl  on  03/16  at  05:29 PM

Conservatism is where a lack of racism is found, as it favors treating everybody equally.

Conservatism is where a lack of understanding of the effects of racism and history is found, as it favors allowing the privileged to feel that they got that privilege by their own merits with no outside or historical help.

Comment #6: Jake Squid  on  03/16  at  05:29 PM

But the appeal of conservatism is relief from this supercilious idea. Innocence is not possible for America. This nation did what it did. And conservatism’s appeal is that it does not bank on the recovery of lost innocence.

Just we shouldn’t investigate the Bush Administration, right? It’s in the past, the administration did what it did, and punishing any crimes committed won’t recover our lost innocence, so what’s the point?

Funny how that logic only applies to Republicans and their supporters, but they’re “law and order” and “the party of personal responsibility” when it comes to lecturing the wrong sort of people.

Comment #7: Redshift  on  03/16  at  05:52 PM

The contradiction belongs to those who support differing college admissions standards based on skin color, then call those who refuse to agree with that position racist.

Again - the conservative position on race, a construct that is as deeply ingrained in the American tradition as mom and apple pie, is to say that any mention of race is inherently racist.  Therefore, the only nonracist way of dealing with race is to deny everything about it, and assume that any different outcome for people of different races is because of their flawed adherence to racial grievance-mongering. 

It’s a nice way of never, ever having to deal with the issue.

Comment #8: Jesse Taylor  on  03/16  at  05:58 PM

<blcokquote>Conservatism absolves white people of responsibility and burdens minorities with a white/conservative-approved delusion: I am a full human being because I am willing to blame other minorities for the history of their skin color.  The only reason that Steele believes that liberalism is a form of “white supremacy” is because of his inherent belief that whites are, in fact, superior, and the only way to avoid such a terrible specter is to avoid provoking or involving white people altogether.  It’s better to be “free” than pursue actual freedom.
</blockquote>

Nothing more to add- I just wanted to say well said.

Comment #9: Danica Lefse Queen  on  03/16  at  05:58 PM

“Looking through the DNC and RNC planks, you will find only the former supports different treatment based on race.”

Yes, because there is a race based differential in power in America.  Combating racial inequality is not racist, but sitting there and letting the inequality continue, much of it a result of the legacy of slavery, continue appears to be racist.  This sitting back and allowing the problems of racism to go unchecked requires simply silence on race matters, a silence that you have attributed to the RNC.

Comment #10: Fatman  on  03/16  at  05:59 PM

I love teaching Steele’s “Affirmative Action as Reverse Discrimination” in an ethics course, coupled with George Sher’s “Justifying Reverse Discrimination in the Employment.”  Sher blows Steele out of the water in such a way that the students need little guidance to see how screwed up Steele is.  Such fun.

Comment #11: phylosopher  on  03/16  at  06:23 PM

I suppose in Shelby Steele’s world, black literally is white.

That guy is totally going to get killed in the next zebra crossing.

Comment #12: dbt  on  03/16  at  06:32 PM

“In a liberalism that wants to redeem the nation of its past, minorities can only be ciphers in white struggles of conscience.”

Um, yeah. Somehow I have a hard time seeing, say, for example, Barack Obama as a cipher. I tend to see him more as the President of the United States.

Comment #13: Stephen Stralka  on  03/16  at  06:33 PM

ut the appeal of conservatism is relief from this supercilious idea. Innocence is not possible for America. This nation did what it did. And conservatism’s appeal is that it does not bank on the recovery of lost innocence. It seeks the discipline of ordinary people rather than the virtuousness of extraordinary people. The challenge for conservatives today is simply self-acceptance, and even a little pride in the way we flail away at problems with an invisible hand.

Just what the ever loving fuck?

The discipline of ordinary people to do what?  To pretend that history is irrelevent?  To accept themselves—more of a ‘I’ve got mine; fuck all y’all b/c history is in the PAST, man’?  To flail away at problems with an invisible hand????  Free Market RULES!!!

How about solving problems?  How about respecting extraordinary people of virtue (seriously, should we just shuck MLK day?  Is that his problem?) and expecting better than the current fucked up situation?


Can this guy please go Galt?

Comment #14: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  03/16  at  07:36 PM

“Innocence is not possible for America. This nation did what it did. And conservatism’s appeal is that it does not bank on the recovery of lost innocence.”

...except in its worship of an innocent America, where there is no racial strife, where there is no class warfare, where mom stays home and bakes cookies while the kids go to school, the boys learning to be men of action, and the girls learn to be subservient, and everyone goes to the Christian church of their choosing, and we all do our part in the pivotal struggle between Capitalism (good!) and Communism (BAD!).  Oh, I forgot, there’s a white picket fence around your front yard…

(...and everybody is white…look at the Andy Griffith Show, and combine it with healthy doses of Ozzie and Harriet, Leave it to Beaver, I Love Lucy — except for that whole Lucy is married to the brown guy thing…)

Comment #15: MikeEss  on  03/16  at  07:37 PM

I’m reminded of http://conservativesarealwayswrong.googlepages.com/

Conservatives depend on everyone forgetting their past positions because those positions consistently come to look worse as time goes on. We find this happening in every generation and every century. Whatever the issue, a new consensus on it eventually develops around some view that conservatives once opposed, and the old conservative ideas are so discredited that even conservatives themselves no longer try to defend them. ...

Precisely because they lose, however, it’s forgotten that conservatives have repeatedly taken positions that no one but a crank would even try to defend today. Conservatism perversely benefits from its own failures: Because its past arguments were beaten back and its fierce resistance overcome, we don’t hear those arguments anymore. They’ve faded into history, and we have to study history even to know they were once made.

This is crucial to the conservatism of today. If the public recognized the American conservative movement as the latest growth of the same tangled weeds that previously tried to choke off science, democracy and civil rights, today’s conservatives would have a much tougher time. Like the friend who’s always wrong, they’d be asked to explain why the rest of us should put any stock in the typical conservative arguments of today.

Comment #16: asdf  on  03/16  at  08:01 PM

And yet the Republicans aren’t against legacy admissions to colleges, and jobs are often based not on what you know, but who you know. Clearly any de facto discrimination isn’t the fault of the system or anything, just that those silly blacks (and others) didn’t have the good sense to have rich ancestors.

Comment #17: Samantha Vimes  on  03/16  at  08:02 PM

The man is the definition of the word tool.  He simply needs to get on the bus, and accept is flava flav award for stupidity.

Comment #18: womanistmusings  on  03/16  at  09:02 PM

Samantha Vimes, you are so right.

My husband and I laughed the other night as the TV news ran a program on how to get jobs in this new economy.  Same old bullshit about how to make your resume stand out.

My husband’s resume was in his current company’s database for years.  Didn’t do shit until he was recommended for an interview by someone at the firm.  He had two companies bidding for him, which was awesome, but having your resume with all the correct buzzwords doesn’t mean shit.

It is who you know.  The best place to make friends is college, which is why legacy admits and resistance to affirmative action while protecting legacy admits is so insidious.

Comment #19: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  03/16  at  09:27 PM

This guy is absolutely pathetic. I’m glad he’s just a commentator and not in a position to do real harm, like, say, Clarence Thomas.

Comment #20: Bitter Scribe  on  03/16  at  10:03 PM

Womanistmusings: Did you know today was Flava Flav’s birthday?

Comment #21: Mighty Ponygirl  on  03/16  at  10:47 PM

This guy is absolutely pathetic. I’m glad he’s just a commentator and not in a position to do real harm, like, say, Clarence Thomas.

Bitter Scribe on 03/16 at 08:03 PM

I’m going to have to disagree on that one, Scribe.  Unfortunately, Steele’s article is included in many applied ethics course anthologies at the college level.  Read alone, or without some guidance from a prof to point out the obvious holes in it, many an anti-affirmative action individual viewpoint is created.  So yeah, he continues to do damage by dissing affirmative action, but that is of course, after he benefits from it.  Typical, I’ve got mine, the hell with thine attitude.

Comment #22: phylosopher  on  03/16  at  11:47 PM

As soon as he hit “it gave discipline a slightly higher status than virtue” that was really all I needed to hear. That way lie “I was just following orders” and a long list of other crocks. Also, for somebody all het up about how ilberalism makes black people mere actors in white people’s play of guilt and redemption, he sure doesn’t seem to have ever heard the word “token”.

Comment #23: paul  on  03/16  at  11:53 PM

paul:

There’s the fundamental problem right there. I remember reading some of Peter Kreeft’s books in high school (the rather hubristic Socrates books, “The Best Things In Life” and “The Unaborted Socrates”) and based on where I was at that point, the idea that compassion (towards the mother) wasn’t as important as Doing The Right Thing actually sort of made sense to me. I grew out of it though, especially realizing that Kreeft didn’t really do anything to justify his assertion; he merely threw it out there as something to be taken for granted. (I’m rather glad that during my time at Boston College I never cleared out any schedule space for one of Kreeft’s classes. In retrospect, the propaganda aspects of his books—to say nothing of the idiocy of putting words in Socrates’ mouth when only Plato ever got to do that—indicate to me that he’s taking up a tenure spot that someone in the arts department could be using.)

As for why any marginalized person would be conservative… well, homophobia, knee-jerk moralism, authoritarian thinking, and greed know no color.

Comment #24: BrianX  on  03/17  at  12:26 AM

What drew me to conservatism years ago was the fact that it gave discipline a slightly higher status than virtue. This meant it could not be subverted by passing notions of the good.

I.e. doing what your superiors say is more moral than trying to figure out what the right thing to do is.

(I tried to find a more charitable translation for that passage. And failed.)

Conservatism is where a lack of racism is found, as it favors treating everybody equally.

A rebuttal.

Comment #25: Sophist FCD  on  03/17  at  02:36 AM

the thing is, on the SURFACE, he sounds like he might understand how it feels…

i used to HATE affirmitive action. never did i get anything in high school without someone starting a rumor that i got the award because i was the “token injun”
didn’t matter that i have above a 4.0 (because AP classes work on a 5 point scale). didn’t matter that i ALWAYS literally aced every test that i was given in AP Bio, AP Trig (and the Calc) AP Physics, AP American and World Histories, or that when i was taking AP Bio (as the ONLY freshman in a class that was supposed to only be taken by juniors and seniors) i literally set the curve of the class (and some people failed who might not have otherwise… but i don’t know why i should feel bad that, because i got 100% on every test, the curve wasn’t lowered and so people who got 60% got Ds instead of Cs). DID NOT MATTER that i had been in GATE since 2nd grade, that i won every academic contest, that i was on all the math teams, Science Olympiad - the only reason i got the awards, the scholarships, the grants that i did was BECAUSE I WAS CHEROKEE.

one jackass even said that my goddamned SAT scores were merely based on my “bastard heritage”

so i hated the THOUGHT of affirmative action, because all it had done for *me* was allow people to gossip that i didn’t earn the goddamned awards that i fucking sweated BLOOD to earn.

then, after high school, and marriage and dropping out of college because i lost my scholarships because i got married, then i got divorced… then i had a roommate.
he, like me, was Cherokee. he was also black. we would joke about this - i could pass for white, he could pass for black, but we were both majority Cherokee.
he had a GREAT job. nice up there salary, working 35 hours but counted as 40, wonderful benefits. and he used to brag that they couldn’t fire him - that he “filled two affirmative action slots, they’s have to hire a black man and an indian man to replace him”. ALL THE TIME he said this. he said this to his boss. then he would make doctors appointments for in the morning, and not tell anyone he was going to miss work, because he *knew* they couldn’t fire him.
when they started lay-offs, i suggested he send out his resume, that he fix the attendence, that he work the mandatory overtime he was refusing to work. he did nothing - they wouldn’t fire him because he “filled two slots”, they couldn’t fire him because his appointments were at the VA.
but they could lay him off. he was the FIRST person laid off in his department, because EVERYONE that had contact with him hated him, and his bragging. he was in absolute SHOCK that they would lay him off - even me telling him that they SHOULD have fired him years before because he didn’t, wouldn’t work and wouldn’t even follow BASIC policy rules, even being that blunt and bitchy didn’t help. he sued.
he lost.

so i continued to hate affirmative action.

then i went back to school.

i was, literally, starting over. it had been over a decade since i had last stepped into a classroom, i was placed in everything by test. none of my AP classes applied anymore. it was as if i had never gone to school, never gotten a year and a half of college under my belt before people realized i was married. (i was an accidental liar, there. my last name is Barnett. my exhusbands last name is Barrett. NOT ONE PERSON NOTICED THE CHANGE. hell, when i went to get my military ID changed from dependent child to dependent spouse, it took the guys THREE TRIES to realize, despite my telling him. he was convinced i was keeping my maiden name). i was starting from 0, only more so. like everyother minority person, i was actually starting at a bit below 0. the long hiatus, the marriage/divorce, the lost scholarships (which were neither unethically or unlawfully lost - no one told me that i would lost them if i married, i didn’t know, i had all the school paperwork changed to reflect my married status within a week; it took them a year to realize)

i had, effectively, 3 strikes against me. and the only reason that i was allowed to test (placement testing, which is used as an admitance test when someone has been so long out of the education system that everything that was recorded on them no longer applies) THE ONLY REASON I WAS ALLOWED TO TEST is because i am Cherokee. that, right there all alone, allowed me to go back to school.

Comment #26: denelian  on  03/17  at  05:59 AM

in so many fucking cases, that IS ALL that happens. a person who has so many fucking strikes against them, for things that are not their fault (a messed up education, or a broken education pattern, children, abuse, drug issues [which i guess ARE their fault but 90% of them, in Ohio at lest, are POT. so the whole thing is dumb, do you know how many people there are who really dont *understand* that pot is illegal?] all the problems that come with being a minority and not have the same support systems, or any support system…) a person of color, what ever that color, has a negative score, BECAUSE OF ALL THE ILLS THAT COME OF BEING A MINORITY - and colleges are required to “balancce” that score, find ways to help them get into school. its not a quota (was it ever?) its just a little help to partially offset all the disabilities. and there are still so many who can’t get ENOUGH help, kids with a lot of brains but no history, few willing to speak to them, for them. THAT is affirmative action - helping a kid who can do it, who is smart and ambitious and self-motivatong, helping him or her get to a place where their actual traits - not the traits of their minority, but their actual traits as an individual - can be brought into play (or work, i suppose the phrase should be now). Affirmitive action is about GETTING THOSE KIDS WHO HAVE THE ABILITIES TO DO SOMETHING WITH THEIR LIVES SOMEWHERE WHERE THEY CAN LEARN *HOW* TO DO IT

i haven’t used affirmative action for myself once i was granted testing. that was, literally, all i needed. i think i could have gotten my AA on the strength of my test scorse alone, but i wanted to start over, take the core classes again, it had been a DECADE. and, until my hip went on strike and i had to have 4 surgeries on it, by GPA was STILL a 3.90 (i got an A-, so sue me smile

now i volunteer to help other people find that one thing, that one little things, that one teeny affirmitive action, that allows them to move on, to get into a good school and then PROVE that they belong there.

i do. i guess i have a different affirmative action going on with me these day, becaise i do so much through the Office of Disability Services.
but, just a point here. i miss over half my classes. almost two thirds. and i STILL carry above a B average. the only way ODS helps me is i can take tests in their office, so i can type answer instead of write them.

i realize now that what i thought was affirmative action was really the poisoned propoganda spread about AA. and that propoganda is EVIL

and so is THIS Steele. maybe just the name alone is a curse of evil?

Comment #27: denelian  on  03/17  at  05:59 AM

My first reaction was: My Gods, someone is still printing Steele? 2nd reaction: Oh, Wall Street Journal! (slaps forehead).
Believe it or not, there was a time when you could find intelligent discourse on the WSJ editorial page. I know, it sounds crazy, but it’s true. Obviously, those days are gone. Unleash the ridicule!

“Yet there is now the feeling that without an appeal to minorities, conservatism is at risk of marginalization.”

Truly? Well, knock me down with a feather. For the life of me I can’t understand why whole electoral armies of dark-skinned folks aren’t climbing over each other to register as Republicans. Ah, the endless perversity of human nature.

“And, given the fact that blacks and Hispanics often poll more conservatively than whites on most social issues, shouldn’t there be an easy simpatico between these minorities and political conservatism?”

You’d think so, huh? Were I in a dickish mood, I’d suggest that, just perhaps, 30+ years of using anyone with darker skin than Halle Berry as a scapegoat/boogeyman for all the ills of American public life might have something to do with that little demographic aberration.  Luckily, we’ve only scratched the surface. Mr. Steele has an answer for this horrible, and wholly unintended, misapprehension of the Republican Cultural Mission-

“I think it began in a very specific cultural circumstance: the dramatic loss of moral authority that America suffered in the 1960s after openly acknowledging its long mistreatment of blacks and other minorities. Societies have moral accountability, and they cannot admit to persecuting a race of people for four centuries without losing considerable moral legitimacy. Such a confession—honorable as it may be—virtually calls out challenges to authority.”

See? The “loss of moral authority” didn’t happen as a result of one particular group of humans treating another group of humans as cattle. That was cool. All of the bad shit came down when the “owners” decided to admit that they were ginormous cockmongers. If they’d had the testicular fortitude to just keep pretending they lived in the 16th Century, all would still be well. And, I tremble to add, Shelby Steele would still be polishing boots and picking cotton for The Man, as opposed to his current gig…

But I’m just another Librul vulture. Conservatives were totally forced into this dilemma-

“And here is conservatism’s great problem with minorities. In an era when even failed moral activism is redemptive—and thus a source of moral authority and power—conservatism stands flat-footed with only discipline to offer. It has only an invisible hand to compete with the activism of the left. So conservatism has no way to show itself redeemed of America’s bigoted past, no way like the Great Society to engineer a grand display of its innocence, and no way to show deference to minorities for the oppression they endured. Thus it seems to be in league with that oppression.”

You see the problem, surely. Conservatism (which term is merely a cheap dodge of the words “Republican Party”) is hogtied by it’s own inviolable principles. They (ie-Republicans) would just love to shower the American public with displays of it’s fuzzy love for the neglected and downtrodden among us, but are prevented from such displays due to their Samurai-like devotion to a set God-approved moral strictures. Let us all weep for pity as a great good goes undone…

There follows some lackadaisical moral gymnastics, which the reader may judge for themselves. Some readers might suspect me of an idealogical bias at this point, that I have perhaps allowed my personal political inclinations to flavor my assessment of Mr. Steele’s column. I stand guilty. I’ve disliked this ass-clown since his “white people are responsible for every bad thing that has ever happened, ever” phase. Beleive it or not, Mr. Steele actually takes a shot at self-examination-

“So here stands contemporary American conservatism amidst its cultural liabilities and, now, its electoral failures—with no mechanism to redeem America of its shames, atavistically resisted by minorities, and vulnerable to stigmatization as a bigoted and imperialistic political orientation. Today’s liberalism may stand on decades of failed ideas, but it is failure in the name of American redemption. It remains competitive with—even ascendant over—conservatism because it addresses America’s moral accountability to its past with moral activism. This is the left’s great power, and a good part of the reason Barack Obama is now the president of the United States. No matter his failures—or the fruitlessness of his extravagant and scatter-gun governmental activism—he redeems America of an ugly past. How does conservatism compete with this?”

How, indeed?

Comment #28: Kordo  on  03/17  at  06:04 AM

“What drew me to conservatism years ago was the fact that it gave discipline a slightly higher status than virtue.”

Huh? This makes no sense whatsoever. Discipline having “a slightly higher status” translates to: “Discipline was the highest virtue”. Which is logically coherent, if morally dubious. But you can’t say that discipline was the highest virtue and then claim to be immune to “passing notions of the good”. That is a passing notion of the good.

Comment #29: Ginger Yellow  on  03/17  at  08:50 AM

it gave discipline a slightly higher status than virtue

Funny. I regard it as a marker in my maturation process when I realized that discipline and talent does not automatically translate to virtue and that being a good person is the most important thing of all.

No doubt Steele might have had discipline and talent. The problem is, he wants to be socially rewarded for that now that he’s graduated college.

You know who else is disciplined? Investment bankers. Are they virtuous? Eh, not so much.

Comment #30: Tyro  on  03/17  at  09:33 AM

I object to affirmative action in principle - because it is, in the end, a feel-good, band-aid sort of policy.

Its bad by-products:

1. Excellently qualified people *are* displaced from positions they they arguably deserve, whether they are beneficiaries of historic/cultural privilege or not.

2. Beneficiaries of A.A. bear the psychological burden of wondering whether their color or heritage was the primary reason for their selection.

3. Non-beneficiaries of A.A.—even good earnest liberal ones—get resentful (don’t say you haven’t had such dark thoughts, my fellow white males). This breeds reaction.

I support A.A. in practice. Because it’s better than nothing, I guess.

What would be better than A.A.:

Comprehensive reform of primary and secondary education. Federalize education (no more shitty local schoolboards inevitably staffed by psychos and morons). Standardize the curriculum (with real science,  history that isn’t the worship of war, serious expectations for the mastery of English grammar and basic composition). TRIPLE TEACHER SALARIES (then maybe bright, capable people will want to be teachers). And mandate the equitable spending real money on public schools (which seems like it can’t happen unless we federalize education).

Until this happens - until we’re serious about offering equality of opportunity to people early and often in life—we limp along unhappily with well-intentioned but lame gestures like affirmative action.

Comment #31: wapsie  on  03/17  at  01:12 PM

The contradiction belongs to those who support differing college admissions standards based on skin color, then call those who refuse to agree with that position racist.

I’m going to piss everyone else off here (as per usual) by saying I’m not a big fan of race-based affirmative action.  Given the context of the plan, it was noble.  The idea was that black individuals had a higher rate of poverty and that by targeting blacks with special status, you could quickly integrate them into higher paying positions at larger firms without going through a sort of second-string racism that allowed colleges or businesses from excluding blacks on every other ground they could find besides skin color (oh, you’re not educated enough… oh, you’re not connected enough… oh, you’re not dressed well enough… oh, you’re not from the right side of town…).  Outlawing segregation at the civic level is somewhat meaningless if conservatives can just outsource the process to the private sector.

But what a lot of black civil rights leaders missed was the fact that they weren’t as unique as they imagined.  You didn’t have to be black skinned to be black listed.  You could just as easily be an immigrant or a Native American or of a minority religion or a suspected communist or just plan old impoverished.  So when the federal government stepped in and started giving African Americans in particular a leg up, it set off a wave of envy and indignation among all the other working classes.  That is, at its root, the problem with race-based affirmative action.  It doesn’t go far enough.

Unionization and social safety nets like the EITC and Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security go a long way towards assisting minorities (as conservative race-baiters love to point out) while still maintaining wide populist support.  There are a variety of ways to benefit the African-American community that don’t involve singling out just black people.  And (strangely enough) they generally all enjoy wide spread support in the black community.

It would be good for the liberals and Democrats to keep harping on these points.  The Dems rising tide will buoy all ships.  Demonstrating how initiatives like universal health care and improving domestic infrastructure can generate profit for rich and poor, black and white alike can win the kind of permanent Democratic Majority enjoyed throughout the 30s, 40s and 50s.  And they’ll make it easier to demonstrate why guys like Allen don’t know shit.

Comment #32: Zifnab  on  03/17  at  01:41 PM

For those who suggest that Affirmative Action is no longer needed, and that everyone is just judged on their merits now, I refer you to this study (and there are many that lead to the same conclusions):
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3495/is_2_48/ai_97873146

In the study, sets of resumes were created that differed only by the name at the top - either a “black-sounding” name like Lakisha or Jamal, or a “white-sounding” name like Emily or Greg.  5000 resumes were sent out for about 1300 jobs, and the results were pretty clear: The white-sounding resumes were 50 percent more likely to receive a contact for an interview than the black-sounding names.  Equal education, equal experience, but unequal perception in the hands of employers.

Now, white folks who’ve had those “dark thoughts” as waspie called them above, that you are harmed by AA, I ask you: when you ARE called for the interview, do you acknowledge and feel grateful for the fact that you may well have been called over an equally-qualified black person, because of just such bias as this study uncovered so clearly?  Of course not, you just ASSUME that you were indeed the most qualified applicant and your race had nothing to do with it.  Why does the “unfairness” cut only one way, when you’re the disadvantaged one (which also is often just an assumption, not a fact, btw)?  Never when you’re the advantaged one?  When study after study shows you do indeed benefit from that advantage over and over and over again? 

Note that this isn’t even considering facts like the black-white equivalence of schools or economic opportunities or any of that, it shows that even if all that were fixed there’s still just flat-out racial bias.  And I would bet that the vast majority of the employers contacted in that study would say they are not racist and do not discriminate.  Most of these biases are subtle and unconscious and exist even for people motivated to be non-racist (TONS of research to support that); there’s just a little bit lower pre-existing expectation of “qualified applicant” when the name at the top of the resume is Jamal rather than Greg, and that influences the perception of everything that follows. 
And “Greg” denies he benefits from that, claims he got everything in life through his merit alone… sigh….

Comment #33: CalliopeJane  on  03/17  at  02:05 PM

Racism ended the day the Cosby Show became the number one program in the country, duh.  If America was racist, a show with black people would never have been so popular.  And also?  Eddie Murphy.  Check and mate!

Comment #34: Mireille  on  03/17  at  02:09 PM

CalliopeJane:

It’s worse than that. Some other folks did a similar study where they varied the data on the resumes. A white high school graduate with a prison record had the same callback rate as a black person who had finished college.

Comment #35: paul  on  03/17  at  04:17 PM

For those who suggest that Affirmative Action is no longer needed, and that everyone is just judged on their merits now, I refer you to this study (and there are many that lead to the same conclusions):

But you can’t legislate a solution to that kind of racism.  If you were told, “As a small business owner, you are legally required to have at least one in ten of your staff be bible thumping evangelical Christians” you wouldn’t suddenly become welcoming of said minority because the individuals were on your staff.

Recognizing the problem exists is one thing.  But simply waving your hands and announcing Affirmative Action is the solution… I’d like to see the data that shows it works.

Comment #36: Zifnab  on  03/17  at  05:24 PM

Zifnab, when there’s been centuries of institutionalized prejudice against Bible-thumping evangelical Christians, then we can talk about affirmative action for them.  Until that day comes, they wouldn’t benefit from programs meant to help remediate said centuries of institutionalized prejudice.

Comment #37: kaninchen  on  03/17  at  05:30 PM

I’d like to see the data that shows it works.

Bown and Bok. The Shape of the River.

Comment #38: MAJeff, the God of Biscuits  on  03/17  at  05:38 PM

There’s not enough booze in the world to make sense of Shelby Steele.

Comment #39: Just a Singer in a Rock 'n' Roll Band  on  03/17  at  05:44 PM

I’d like to see the data that shows it works.

You are assuming that AA doesn’t “work” because it doesn’t make white people less racst towards blacks.

First of all, that’s not true - working with blacks does, in fact, make white people less racist against them. Exposure to reality tends to hurt stereotypical thinking.

However, even if it didn’t remove racism, removing racism isn’t the point of AA. The point is correcting the fact that qualified black applicants need a leg up over unqualified white applicants. Whether or not their bosses are still racist at the end of the day isn’t the point of AA.

Comment #40: Essie Elephant  on  03/17  at  06:51 PM

allen, are the KKK liberal? please advise.

Comment #41: chibi  on  03/17  at  11:01 PM

Liberalism’s glamour follows from its promise of a new American innocence. But the appeal of conservatism is relief from this supercilious idea. Innocence is not possible for America. This nation did what it did. And conservatism’s appeal is that it does not bank on the recovery of lost innocence. It seeks the discipline of ordinary people rather than the virtuousness of extraordinary people. The challenge for conservatives today is simply self-acceptance, and even a little pride in the way we flail away at problems with an invisible hand.

Holy revisionist history Batman!  Until today I thought it was conservatives who longed for simpler times and lost innocence.  I thought they disdained mediocrity and valorized the extraordinary.  Hellooo….bootstraps?  Self-acceptance??!?

Comment #42: DonnaDiva  on  03/18  at  01:23 AM

I’d like to see affirmative action become class based rather than race based.

The reason AA is still needed, however, is because without it, a lot of companies simply wouldn’t hire black people at all, no matter what their qualifications. I suspect this is less true now than it was true thirty years ago.

Comment #43: Norsecats  on  03/18  at  02:36 PM

It seeks the discipline of ordinary people rather than the virtuousness of extraordinary people

“Every time I hear the words ‘Shut up and do as you’re told,’ I get a thrill thinking that one day I’ll be the one saying them.”

Comment #44: jackd  on  03/18  at  03:24 PM

I don’t know, I have to respectully disagree with the feedback here. First, Republicans really are not more racist than Democrats - that is a big myth about Republicans. And I like the way Steele explains the message, and it appeals to those of us in poor minority communites who have been looking for real solutions for a long time. The problem is that conservatives and liberals fundamentally disagree on what causes modern problems in minority communities in the first place, and this is what causes so much misunderstanding. Liberals chock most of it up to consequences of white racism and the slave legacy, even today. But, conservatives blame (based on quite a bit of studies and reports out there, by the way) many of the problems in the black community (poverty, crime, poor education, and all the numerous problems that result from those) on misguided government policies since the 70s. And the facts hold up to this. For example, the black community was more upwardly mobile in the 1950s than they were in the 1970s and beyond. What changed? There were certainly more civil rights and laws put into place, so it should have gotten better. But it got worse. And many blame all of the misguided government programs that went into place, which have produced so many problems that have now become part of American black culture.

Also, responsiblity is important. The biggest cause of poverty and crime? Absentee fathers. And that is a fact proven many times over as well. Anyway, I don’t think we should be so quick to write off Steele and the many minority conservatives who agree with him. It is time for real solutions instead of constantly blaming white people. This is exactly why nothing gets better.

Comment #45: NMSC  on  03/18  at  07:24 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.