Finding Your Hidden Racist

I recently purchased conservative columnist, Michelle Malkin's book, Unhinged, a scathing and shockingly true account of liberal hypocrisy and lunacy (before you condemn me for casting a value judgment, just read the book first). I didn't buy it because I was a fan of Mrs. Malkin. Indeed, I had a passing familiarity with her. I had read a column or two, rued it for a bit, agreed with her (probably immensely) but that was it. No, my purchase had more to with the jacket than fandom. She had on the jacket "praise" gotten from blogs and e-mails, slurs of such vitrolity that they won't be typed up here (but you can view them here). She has been accused, principally because of her views, of "selling out" or being some kind of traitor (or much, much worse). She writes:

"Of course, the allegation that I am a self-hating Asian-American is nothing new. I do find it interesting, however, that my critics are simultaneously accusing me of playing up my ethnic heritage and trying to conceal it. Atrios, on the other hand, has acknowledged that it is my critics--not me--who have an unhealthy preoccupation with my race."

Therein lies a rather duplicitous rub. For as much as the liberal masses like to proclaim racial and sexual equality, they leave stone unturned when attacking one, resorting to childish and disgusting name-calling and threats. Even the so-called liberal media does not refrain from playing the race card when it should be completely irrelevant. Malkin writes of a Congressman Bobby Jindal, an American of East Indian descent, who was constantly written up as "dark-skinned" or as a son of East Indian immigrants by the press. I didn't realise that being of East Indian heritage was relevant or imperative to being taken seriously, unless you're a victim of Air India Flight 182. And, naturally, if one is of the same ethnicity or country they must have the same ideas on everything, which must make Mrs. Malkin a real outsider. Whatever.

But what is racism?

Is it listing the thousands of unlisted immigrants hiding in the United States? To be practical, one cannot have just anyone run around in the country. They could be anybody, even unsavoury types with a penchant for crime. Yet there are the good, honest masses who do labour no one else will touch with a ten-foot barge pole for a dollar an hour. Why shouldn't they be allowed to stay? Is there anyone else to sweep streets, scrub out toilets or babysit obnoxious children? The New World is filled with immigrants. "Strangers shall not be injured or oppressed; "for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt" (Exodus: xxii. 20, xxiii. 9)" Or New York or Los Angeles, as the case may be.

Is it racial profiling? Well, the hijackers on September 11th were all from the Middle East, the suicide-bombers who murdered their compatriots in Great Britain were diseffected members of Pakistani or Middle Eastern descent (let's not forget the IRA was at it long before they were but received far more scathing and a lot less apologetics) and the fanatics who burned, trashed, killed and threatened anything Danish after the Muhommed/ cartoon scandal were of the Middle Eastern/Islamic variety. Not everyone from the Middle East is unhinged (to put it delicately). But there are many who ruin things for everyone else, so, thanks, you jihadist morons.

Is it the failure to hire minorities? Should someone be hired as corporate eye-candy or is real skill good enough? It is quite possible that one might not be hired because one cannot perform the necessary tasks, just as it is possible that someone is hired because he is the nephew of someone high up the ladder. Welcome to the world of being screwed-over where no one is ever alone.

Is it the pandering of minorities so as not to offend? What guilt, shame or angst does one possess that sentencing circles or sympathy for suicide-bombers becomes pragmatically, if not morally, acceptable? Has anyone ever heard of sentencing circles before? Should a society within a society have their own (ineffective) brand of justice? What degree of understanding must one possess to see past carnage and pieces of someone's body pasted on a wall somewhere because a militant group paid a suicidal individual to make the ultimate- and futile- sacrifice? I can't make myself understand why someone would sacrifice their children, but I guess I'm not enlightened enough.

No matter in what age or region we live, we will always have inequalities. Someone will not like someone's skin colour, a man will not take orders from a woman, someone will always be without. I don't think this will ever change, no matter how noble or determined our efforts. However, we will be no nearer to these lofty ideals if our only way to attack difference of opinion is to resort to the same things we claim to despise.