Is Rand Paul a racist?

Is Rand Paul,  a: prejudiced,  b: a chauvinist,  c: a racist?

First we should define these three words in context with the discussion.

Chauvinism - unreasoning devotion to ones race, sex, etc. with contempt for other races, sex, etc.

Prejudices - suspicion, intolerance, or irrational hatred of other races, sex, creeds, regions, occupations, etc.

Racism - any programs or practices of discrimination and segregation that uphold the political or economic domination of one race over another or others.

(definitions from Webster's New world College Dictionary)

Now lets consider the question(s) at hand considering recent comments of Rand Paul.

a. Is Rand Paul a chauvinist?

He says he is not. Absent any defining "macaque" moment, the question, in and of itself, will stand answered by his denial: for now.

b. Is Rand Paul prejudiced?

He says he is not. Ditto the "macaque" statement above.

c. Is Rand Paul a racist?

Yes. He is. His statements concerning his opposition to Federal laws that protect African Americans against "programs or practices that uphold political or economic domination of one race over another or others" brands him.

Racist Jim Crow laws and culture - "program or practice" - existed throughout the country before the passage of the Civil Rights Law. The consequences their existence amounted to the uninterrupted "economic or political" domination over African Americans, going back to the earliest days of our nation.

Racist "programs or practices", first and foremost, are sources of power and profit - "political or economic" - and those who support them have been the most ardent and consistent opponents of Federal laws that put those sources out of reach. Here is where we may revisit questions a and b above and challenge Rand Paul's denial of chauvinism and prejudice. How else can his opposition to laws that provide relief and protection from "political or economic" super-exploitation for millions of African-American citizens be viewed?

One of the great setbacks of the discourse over equality and justice that has taken place since the passage of the Civil Rights Law is the success those who benefit from racist "programs or practices" have had in redefining racism as a prejudice and/or chauvinism. A subjective state of mind rather than one of design represented by "program or practice."

These days we hear talk of black racism, even among some who should know better, as if the African-American community as a whole is or has ever been in any position to institute any "program or practice" that would lead to any level of "political or economic domination" of the white population. It is akin to saying a round square is a geometric figure. It is a lie created to hide the truth and the facts of the consequences of racism. Consequences that do harm to all except the seekers of ever more power and profit. Those who, like Rand Paul, lurk under the mantle of respectability while planning the return of "programs or practices of discrimination and segregation that uphold the political or economic domination of one race over another or others."

Rand Paul is a racist. We as a nation trying to move forward risk much if we shy from the challenge his ilk presents. Although the danger of what he represents is great, he can be dealt with easily. Simply toss him onto history's trash heap of other aberrant individuals, as we pass it in November, and don't look back!

 

Post your comment

Comments are moderated. See guidelines here.

Comments

  • Good points! Racism is an objective fact, not an attitude. African Americans are routinely charged more for food, appliances, cars, housing, insurance; denied job opportunities; provided inferior education; arrested and jailed. All these can and often do take place with absolutely no visible or conscious prejudice involved. But the effects are very real and perpetuate inequality.

    There is a problem, though, with the dictionary definition. It speaks of domination of one race by another. This seems to imply that all white people benefit from "their" domination of others. In fact, racism is used to divide and divert working people of all backgrounds, allowing big corporate interests and their political fronts (like Rand Paul) to profit at the expense of all of us.

    Posted by Art Perlo, 05/24/2010 9:36am (5 years ago)

  • You obviously have difficulty understanding what Dr. Paul said on the issue of the Civil Rights Act. He is 100% supportive of making discrimination against African-Americans by government (ie, public transportation, education, public grounds, etc). He doesn't support heavy-handed government telling private business owners who they can and can't allow in their stores. He understands the free market will eliminate most if not all racism from the private sector. Racist business owners who post signs banning black people are likely to offend a lot of white people who will not patronize their establishment and they will lose business and eventually have to change their ways or go out of business. Consumer's get to make personal decisions, no nanny government involved and everyone wins.

    Posted by Steve, 05/24/2010 9:05am (5 years ago)

  • You obviously have difficulty understanding what Dr. Paul said on the issue of the Civil Rights Act. He is 100% supportive of making discrimination against African-Americans by government (ie, public transportation, education, public grounds, etc). He doesn't support heavy-handed government telling private business owners who they can and can't allow in their stores. He understands the free market will eliminate most if not all racism from the private sector. Racist business owners who post signs banning black people are likely to offend a lot of white people who will not patronize their establishment and they will lose business and eventually have to change their ways or go out of business. Consumer's get to make personal decisions, no nanny government involved and everyone wins.

    Posted by Steve, 05/24/2010 9:04am (5 years ago)

RSS feed for comments on this page | RSS feed for all comments