WHY WE SHOULD SUPPORT BLACK LIVES MATTER

In December of 2016, I submitted the following commentary to the Observer Reporter.  It did not surprise me that the OR declined to publish. The Black Lives Matter movement and white privlege were seen as radical concepts by white America at the time. Much has changed in four years, and what I wrote then, including the 50^th anniversary of the Kent State killings, have new meaning today.

WHY WE SHOULD SUPPORT BLACK LIVES MATTER

Recent newspaper commentaries and discussions with black friends have focused my attention on the issue of “white privilege” and compelled me to take a fresh look at the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement.  I am convinced that white privilege colors the way many whites view BLM.  Moreover, BLM is in many ways a direct attack against white privilege by those who understand that the killing of blacks through institutional violence was not eliciting the same response as the killing of whites

White privilege is a term for societal privileges that benefit white people.  These privileges have been defined as “an invisible package of unearned assets.”  Many of the advantages that whites enjoy are passive and not obvious, which is why white privilege is not necessarily overt bias or prejudice.

While there are not many examples of institutional violence against whites, the Kent State killings on May 4, 1970 is considered a major event in our nation’s history. On that date, national guardsmen fired 67 rounds into a crowd of white students killing four and wounding nine, one of whom suffered permanent paralysis.

In the aftermath of the killings, the largest student strike in American history involved two and one half million students on seven hundred campuses. Many refused to go to classes or take final exams. Thirty ROTC buildings were firebombed.  The governors from 16 states ordered the occupation of 21 campuses.  Almost all the protesters were white.  Their parents could not understand how organized National Guard could kill white students.  Many parents reconsidered their position on the Vietnam War and turned against it.

Following Kent State on May 15, 1970 at Jackson State College, an African American school in Jackson Mississippi, state police, breaking up an anti war rally, randomly shoot up a college dorm killing two and wounding 12 others.  Few remember this incident and it provoked little outcry when compared to Kent State.

In 1970, white privilege determined which killings would draw the attention of the public and shape the anti-war movement until Nixon was forced to resign. Today, white privilege minimizes police killings of African Americans and ignores the broader issue of institutional racism in the criminal justice system.  

What is to be done? First, BLM deserves the vocal and financial support of all those who care about social equality and justice in America.  It has morphed from its early growing pains as an idea/slogan protesting against the killing of young black men by police and developed into a strong and vibrant movement that can make a difference in this year’s elections and beyond. 

Second, it is important to understand what BLM is not. The title was never intended to degrade the lives of police officers or non blacks.  Such an interpretation was always an easy cop out for whites, exercising privilege, who do not take the time to understand black activism in light of institutional racism in America.  

Third, the movement has expanded and now seeks to insure that people of color be given the same respectful tolerance as the rest of us in all stages of the criminal justice process.  For those families that have lost a young man in a police shooting, a life matters. Equally, for those families that have lost a young man because of drug abuse, incarceration, or a gang shooting, a life matters.  The movement encompasses all of this and more.

Fourth, BLM is not the reincarnation of the Black Panthers.  Its black liberation message is about ideas, not armed violence. One of its posters shows a young black man with fist in the air holding a flower not a weapon.  Neither is it about Black Nationalism, supporting “blackness” for its own sake and encouraging isolation from society.  It is about:  “…broadening the conversation around state violence to include all the ways in which Black people are intentionally left powerless at the hands of the state.  We are talking about the ways in which Black lives are deprived of our basic human rights and dignity.” This is a powerful and worthy call to action to unite Black America.

Fifth, if BLM can motivate young African Americans to get politically involved in urban areas, college campuses and local politics across the country, they can become a motivated interest group with real power to facilitate change.

In a recent address at Howard University, President Obama’s remarks included his impressions on BLM: “It’s thanks in large part to the activism of young people like many of you, from ‘Black Twitter’ to Black Lives Matter, that America’s eyes have been opened — white, black, Democrat, Republican — to the real problems, for example, in our criminal-justice system,” But to bring about structural change, lasting change, awareness is not enough. It requires changes in law, changes in custom.”

Much more needs to be done regarding racism and BLM will be a potent, positive force going forward.  It has earned the support of white Americans who care about social justice and equality.

THE DEATH KNELL OF REPUBLICAN CONSERVATISM

 I miss the conservative political ideology I spent most of my life opposing.  I miss the principles of conservatism that I vigorously argued against.  I miss framing responses to the commentaries of conservative journalists. I miss debating the policies of past conservative Republican Presidents.  To the detriment of the American polity, classic conservatism, which was such a formidable opponent to any opinionated liberal, no longer exists.

According to George Will in his new book, The Conservative Sensibility, the fundamental principle of conservatism is deceptively simple: to conserve the “American founding”.  Traditionally it achieved this by emphasizing the authority of family, church, tradition and local association.  The intent was to control change and slow it down.

There is a “new right” in America. However, with Donald Trump at the helm, it is not an evolution of traditional conservatism, it is a full-throated repudiation.  What was once pragmatic and measured is now a zealous populism mired in white nativism.   What once protected foundational institutions now attacks them. What once valued experts and well-researched facts now trades in images and slogans designed to stir up outrage and tribal prejudices.  What once saw change as something to avoid, now seeks a headlong rush toward illiberal democracy.

 Why do I mourn the loss of my sworn opponents? Traditional Republicans came at you from solid ground, fortified with long-standing positions.  They believed in the integrity of their elected representatives. Politics was about judgment and reason.  While Ronald Reagan had charisma, no one accused him of forming a personality cult that was above Congress and the courts. 

The Republican conservatives of the past supported positions based on principle and did not bow to partisan politics. In the 1960s, Republican Senator Everett Dirksen could help write the Civil Rights Act while supporting the Vietnam War. Republican Senator John Tower supported legalized abortion. Republican leaders could go to the White House in 1974 and advise President Nixon to resign from office.

Old-line conservative patriotism was about the nation-state, not about the state of a nativist nation that shunned immigrants.  The key to commerce was viewed as free trade with sound trade agreements that fostered international economic harmony, not trade wars.  The key to good governance was getting on with the business of keeping the ship of state on a steady course, not seeking out storms and running the ship aground.

My battles were fought against a proud coalition of foreign policy hawks, libertarians, cultural advocates of family-first and pro-business Republicans. My view of the American dream differed from theirs in significant respects.  I believed conservative positions to be lacking in imagination and forward thinking.

I argued that economic and racial equality was as important a goal as liberty and that government regulation was required to dampen the ill effects of market capitalism.  However, no one could claim that there was not a democratic and constitutional basis supporting conservative views that saw the world differently than I did.

Donald Trump is the result of the destruction of traditional conservative values and not the cause. One must first look to the defection of the Dixiecrats from the Democratic to the Republican Party from 1948 through 1970. The baggage of states’ rights and white supremacy they brought with them placed the dark cloud of “the politics of exclusion” over the conservative movement that has only gotten more ominous over time.

The next great challenge to conservatism was the tea party movement that began as a response to the 2008 recession. The initial goals were to encourage lower taxes, a reduction in the national debt and smaller government.   Overtime, the tea party gained more political clout and morphed into the antithesis of traditional conservatism by becoming more populist and activist.  Mainstream elected officials were forced out of the Republican Party during tea party primary challenges across the country.

As the complexion of the Republican Congress became more radical, the freedom caucus in the House of Representatives replaced the tea party as the champion of right wing activism. The caucus made it impossible to compromise on legislation and forced moderate conservative, John Boehner, to retire as Speaker of the House.

Today, the Trump Republicans have largely abandoned the original tea party policies of debt reduction and shrinking the federal budget.  The freedom caucus has become the President’s “Pretorian guard.” Tea party populism has been transformed into a movement of “America First” and its activism into a vocal tribal outrage that mistrusts government with the exception of the anointed leader.

 I believe that the death knell of conservatism has placed the American experiment in danger of falling apart.  In an age of pandemic and national protest centered on systemic racism, politics has become a scorched earth affair with little room for compromise. Few rational politicians are left to draw up a truce and negotiate a path forward.

I nevertheless have hope that a significant number of younger Americans will rediscover the conservative ideology as envisioned by many of our founders and great political thinkers. This event could occur as they grow into adult roles that are consistent with conservative values. While I continue to believe conservative principles are on the wrong side of history in America, I would welcome them back to the national debate stage with open arms.