Race and Racism

President Lyndon B. Johnson once said,
"If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket.
Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."

Race is an emotionally-, historically- and intellectually-charged topic.
It blinds otherwise pleasant, sensitive, intelligent people to the value of all types of persons.

Even educated experts disagree about the definition of race, species, or sub-species in Hono sapiens sapiens (modern man).
Stephen Jay Gould in Natural History stated how man was one species and then went on to say how different they all could be.
How African roots were as old as hundreds of thousands of years (our founding fathers),
while Cro-Magnons might be but 30,000 to 60,000 years old (newbies).
(Role reversal- black cop pats down white suspect.)

And now it is found that Neanderthals, which are a separate species, interbred with Cro-Magnons, but not with Africans.
(Trump's Neanderthal adviser, Roger Stone. All dressed up and no place to go- except prison- stripes are appropriate.)
This alone exonerates people of African-American roots from blame in the Russiagate treasonous endeavor.
Plus they would never wear a suit that ugly which should also be a criminal offense.

And Asian variants bred with Denisovans and in there somewhere may be traces of Homo erectus from relict island pockets.
(Tibetan Women's Soccer team- denied visa by USA under Trump.)

As humans left Africa in one particular wave, they followed the southern coast of Asia utilizing available shellfish protein.
They arrived approximately 80,000 years ago in the first wave into Australia.
And these Australians are closely related to Andaman Islanders way back over in India.
And Kalahari Bushmen are related to no one. Genetically distinct. Kind of like the Basques.
So race gets bogged down in geography and mixing.

It has been stated there are seven sub-species of humans from the Equator to the Arctic Circle.
Granted, there are marked differences between a Watusi and an Inuit.
But they can marry and have children. They are not sterile crosses like horses and donkeys.
(What happens when a Corgi meets a Collie? Sigh- true love.... This author had both.)
Often the best features are pronounced. (A tall, long-haired Corgi?)
So, these appear to be questions as to how well a Watusi might metabolize whale blubber
versus how easily an Inuit might pursue a gazelle across the Serengeti.
That is, these points are not necessarily germaine as to whom might deserve school funding,
be a better marksman in the Army or win the local spelling bee.
And yet these distinctions and worse persist, often unspoken, in the current dialogue.
And they do not belong there.

Just as the Constitution guarantees "separation of church and state", so too does it (in albeit different phraseology)
guarantee the separation of race and state.
Race cannot define what laws do and don't do. They cannot limit or enhance anyone's rights.
In a separate discussion, there are suggestions the law should favor race as a means of restitution.
The counter to that argument is that the Russian serfs were freed the year after the African slaves in America.
Russians would argue it was worse there.
In Russia there were two types of serfs.
The first type of serf was bound to the land and produced and paid a portion of the output to the noble.
The second type of serf was pure chattel and could have the dogs set on him for the amusement of onlookers without repercussions.
And it was cold in Russia. Few slaves froze in Alabama.
Doesn't make either right or lessen the treachery.
Interesting point as presented in an outstanding article in The Nation (citations later).
American slaves had value.
The value of the American slaves exceeded the value of the capitalization of all the northern banks combined.
And the next day they had no value. A stroke of a pen (and a horrible war) eliminated virtually the entire capital of the South.
How to create "value-added" for human capital adrift?
How about education, fair laws, fair application of the laws and some dignity? Throw in some love too.

In the final analysis, it is a complex problem with answers that will satisfy no one.
(And there were probably more Chinese in servitude than the rest of the world combined.)
Men can be cruel to each other regardless of race, creed or culture. No one has a monopoly on abuse and suffering.
How genetically different were the French Catholics from the French Protestants? Infinitesmally or at most normal variation.
In the Albighensian Crusade of 1209, Arnaud d'Amalric put 20,000 citizens of Beziers in south France to the sword-
Catholics & heretics alike- stating “Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius - Kill them all for the Lord knoweth them that are His”.
This is undoubtedly an error-proof method and should be submitted to the Republican Congress for consideration.

What to do? Leave race (and religion) out of it, like the Constitution says.

What's the difference between a person from the Ivory Coast versus a person from Estonia?
Zero to a blind man (until they order a hamburger or their garlic overwhelms the kitchen).
Justice should be blind as well. Period. (Easy on the garlic.)

Return to Home.