Previously, I wrote about elements of the Biden Administration’s Covid Relief bill, which contained racially discriminatory programs, including a five $billion program brazenly titled the Emergency Relief for Farmers of Color Act. That act explicitly excludes farmers based on skin color, and has been struck down in court. Another program, the Restaurant Revitalization Fund, was also struck down on racial discrimination grounds.
This is good news for champions of equal protection of the law. But, sadly, not everyone is happy about it.
Washington Post reports Beth Reinhard and Josh Dawsey have a rather biased, but encouraging, report on the progress of those lawsuits. How a Trump-allied group fighting ‘anti-white bigotry’ beats Biden in court: America First Legal was founded last year by Stephen Miller, the architect of Trump’s immigrant family separation policy.
These Biden laws relate not to specific, provable wrongs committed against actual victims, which belong in a court of law,* but relate to so-called "historically disadvantaged" groups. These laws are rooted in a primitive, blatantly anti-justice collectivist premise: They target people by tribal lineage. Individualism is the only proper basis for justice. A person should be judged by his own individual ideas, character, and actions, not his genetic, cultural, economic, or other tribal lineage. No one is responsible for the actions or troubles of a collection of ancestors. These racist laws that discriminate based on skin cells, gender, or other immutable unchosen characteristics are a reversion to savagery. It is despicable that these racist laws are mentioned in even loose association to the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which is based on an exact antipode. Civilization and justice are products of The Enlightenment. Biden's laws are clearly not just or civil.
You cannot "right historical wrongs against marginalized communities'' by disadvantaging modern communities made up of individuals who weren’t around when the alleged injustices occurred. Historical wrongs are settled history. You cannot "right '' settled history, because you can't change history. You cannot remedy historical wrongs by creating new historical wrongs any more than you can defeat racism with new versions of racism. That is just a reversion to the perpetual cycles of tribal revenge of primitive savage cultures. The only just way to "correct '' historical wrongs is by upholding the individualist Enlightenment principles of America's Founding, the universal practice of individual rights and equality before the law under a government limited to protecting those rights equally and at all times.
Miller's prior association with Trump is irrelevant. While I can't say I necessarily agree with AFL on all of its legal initiatives or reasoning, I could offer up an emphatic kudos to Miller, America First Legal, and their staff for their courageous fight against the Biden Administration's primitive, unjust, tribal laws. It's a laugh that proponents of Biden's laws charge that Trump "stoked racial divisions." Maybe so. But Trump's antics pale in comparison to Biden's explicitly racist laws. The Biden Administration is the most racist administration since the Jim Crow era.
Reinhard and Dawsey attempt to tarnish and dilute Miller's and AFL's case, and polish Biden's agenda, by repeated references to Trump. But objectively, the Trumpists are on the right side of this issue. And you can't cloak the evil, enduring vampire of racism in collectivist sloganeering or rationalization. The grossly mis-named "equity agenda" is "one of the single greatest threats to the survival of our constitutional system"—a revolutionary system that, whatever its flaws, is rooted in the moral ideal of individualism. Collectivism is not civil. It is not just. It is not moral. It is a remnant of humanity's savage past, which The Enlightenment, civilization, and Americanism left behind. Tragically, that project is not yet complete—not by a long shot, it seems.
* [E.G., the Pigford cases. Whether this settlement is good or not is beside the point here. My point is, the court system, which prioritizes facts and objectively balancing of competing arguments, is the proper venue for discrimination complaints.]
Related Reading:
Biden’s Racist Education Trial Balloon
‘Anti-Racism’, or the re-Mainstreaming of Racism
Ketanji Brown Jackson’s Inspiring Climb to Supreme Court Nominee
The Racism of the ‘Anti-Racists’
No comments:
Post a Comment