Reverse Racism in the Race for Boston City Council

When non-white (majority-minority in PC parlance) candidates appeal to the voters using the race card is that reverse racism? The only candidate of Asian background in the City council election doesn’t think so. At the recent ‘New Majority’ candidate debate in Dorchester (to which this write-in candidate was first invited and then not), that candidate announced his belief that its just plain normal for people to associate with their own kind and he was proud to do so.

Wow! It was almost Strom Thurmond-ish sounding . What a relief to know that minority people in Boston (read ‘white’) can also finally say publicly they support one another because, simply, they are of the same race. And, best of all, they will not be called racists for doing so. This kind of thinking would be enough to make Judge Garrity (if he were still alive) issue an order for injunctive relief. Think of the havoc in Boston politics!

Of course, the open secret is that this nice warm and fuzzy camaraderie proposed by non-white candidates only applies to them. Their behavior, in fact, is simply opportunistic reverse-racism, intrinsically self-serving and dishonest. It is no coincidence that the majority –minority candidate and New Majority-like organization calls for racial solidarity are loudest during election time. The sad part is that not a few liberals agree with the double standard.

Aside from the good, human reason to be color blind when it comes to race we have had the unfortunate history of a heavyhanded judiciary forcing the elite's vision of diversity down the country's throat. There are set asides in many, if not most, colleges for minorities so that the diversity of different racial experiences will supposedly benefit all our citizens. Even US Supreme Court Justice Douglas, though, who set us down this forced diversity road had a few things right. [A person] who is white is entitled to no advantage by reason of that fact, nor is he subject to any disability, no matter what his race or color. Whatever his race, [a person] has a constitutional right to have his application considered on its individual merits." So too should a candidate for public office disavow in the strongest terms the use of race in order to improve his electoral chances. To not do so widens the already yawning gap between the races and is a disservice to all, not least the candidate himself.

This question of reverse racism brings to mind the recent election for sheriff in Suffolk County. I live in a ‘majority minority’ neighborhood but perhaps the campaign staff of the soon to be elected Sheriff didn’t realize that ‘non-majority minority’ people still lived thereabouts. It certainly looks and feels fully majority minority so they can be excused for their mistake. Anyway, the sheriff’s sound truck making the rounds on election afternoon announced that ‘our people’, a reference I took to mean ‘non-white’ because the candidate for sheriff was ‘majority minority’, should be sure to vote that day. I wondered why my vote should be diminished in the electoral equation because of race especially when this same candidate, like many liberals, will continually sound off about equal opportunity in a multi-cultural society. As the author George Orwell said, some animals are more equal than others. Oh, what a bleak future for America!

Returning to the candidate forum sponsored by New Majority organiation in Dorchester on October 6, 2005, aside from being uninvited, it felt a rather discouraging event. There was no opportunity for questions from the audience as only pre-selected sponsoring organization representatives were each allowed to ask a question. It reminded me of the show trials in the Soviet Union where the outcome was predetermined. Such overt simple-minded political orchestrations in Boston's council race should not be welcomed by anyone.

Just a few thoughts on an increasingly disjointed political panorama in this one small part of the United States.