Joe Biden and the entire woke leftist narrative of resolving alleged systemic injustices with their own brand of actual overt systemic injustices portends a dark future. There can be no other outcome; so long as immutable and ostensibly meaningless physical attributes are prioritized over veritably important character traits, the only outcome is societal dissolution.
After pressuring the aging Supreme Court Associate Justice Stephen Breyer to step down (for the obvious reason that Democrats are likely to lose both the Senate and the House in 2022 midterm elections), Biden quickly announced his intention to seat a black woman on the highest court. In and of itself, this is a nonissue. However, there is the critical distinction that the left intentionally evades and conservatives can’t pithily articulate in everyday conversations: It is not a problem that a black woman is on the court – it is a problem that a black woman is on the court solely because she is a black woman without consideration to her or anyone else’s qualification.
To capture the idiocy of this narrative, I have often borrowed a thought experiment from longtime radio host and author Dennis Prager. He likes to use the question of whether or not a conservative would prefer to have nine black transgender women who held conservative, constitutional, and limited government principles on the court or nine white men who did not. For a conservative, that answer is a no brainer. We will take the former every time. For a committed leftist to the cause of diversity and inclusion, however, there is no clear response. The imagined concern over skin color and genitals comes to a head when positioned against deeply-held convictions. Ask your confused left-leaning friends this question next time and watch how they navigate the conundrum.
Simply put, conservative do not care that a black woman will be on the Supreme Court. As with the two-time electoral victory of Barack Obama or the eventual electoral victory of a woman for the presidency, the nomination and ascension of a black woman (or Asian, Hispanic, whatever) to the highest court or office of the country only makes sense. This will all happen. And, if anything, it only reinforces the greatness of our multi-racial, multi-ethnic country in that everyone has a chance to realize their fullest dreams and ambitions.
That being said, and in relation to this hollow pledge, conservatives do care that these inevitable occurrences are foisted with prejudice against the American people before their time and in contempt of other equally-deserving human beings. Conservatives have a strong sense of right and wrong, fair and unfair, and the answer to past injustices is not further division and injustice along leftist-engendered racial and gender lines.
Other obvious rhetorical questions come into play. Why just black women? Why stop at just two totems of identity politics? Where is the push for a person of American Indian descent? A self-identifying cat pronoun person? Low functioning? Combat veteran? Someone unvaccinated? Stay-at-home mom? All of the above at once?
The lesson should be obvious. It is not about being black or female; it is merely about consolidating power around leftist worldviews. Joe Biden is the most blatant example in the other direction – despite incessant harking around white systemic racism, he was nevertheless handpicked by the very harpies denouncing whiteness, for no other reason than he was the best vehicle in the presidential election to carry Democrats to victory.
More than anything else, the entire process is demeaning to black women. Are they unable to rise to the occasion themselves? Tell that to Condoleeza Rice, who overcame actual racism in the pre-Civil Rights South and rose to some of the highest positions in both government and academia. Does anyone care or remember that she was the first black female to hold the position of Secretary of State? More recently, tell that to Kamala Harris. She has embarrassed herself beyond salvation – which is a good – but has any of her failing inspired or uplifted other black women? Tell that to the eventual nominee and justice, who will forever be seen as an affirmative action hire. Every utterance and every decision will be marred by rightful critique. How is this good for her? Or of us?
The real exposure to this fake pledge for diversity is revealed in the constant character assassination of strong black American voices belonging to the likes of Clarence Thomas. Despite being black, he isn’t really black according to the narrative. For thirty years, then, he has endured daily vitriol maligning his ideological split from the mainstream’s accepted position of what a black should think, do, and say. Just the other day, the toxic daytime program The View featured multiple hosts suggesting he wasn’t an authentic black. As stated previously, the nomination of a black woman is only a front. The end goal is to nominate a leftist. If that leftist is a black female, then all the better to push the guise of equity while furtively realigning the values of the justices.
Ultimately, all of this work will unravel every gain beyond real and imagined sins of America’s past. For every nomination, promotion, hiring, or acceptance of a person for only their outwardly and unchangeable physical traits, we reduce both an individual and society to measures beyond their control. It is unavoidable that the focus on these traits precludes the focus on more meaningful inner personality traits like hard work, personal responsibility, motivation, and the like. We kill the individual for the sake of their group identity.
Is this good for anyone? Is this good for society? Only a fool would affirm those answers. Unfortunately, there is no shortage of dangerous fools doing just that.