P.C./D.C.

P.C./D.C.

By R.J. Godlewski
© December 1, 2008, All Rights Reserved

 Image, as they say, is everything. In its other popular format, a picture is worth a thousand words. Normally, I hate clichés.  Their simple repetitive nature leaves out the creative element that is so important within my life. Still, there are times when their use does come into play. One of these times is when addressing the subject of political correctness, which, to me, is the ultimate cliché and nowhere is this cliché more “cliché” then when addressing the subject of the U.S. Government. If it were not my particular government in question, I could care less about it being so clichéd.

 Most of you understand by now that one of my “things” is my personal crusade against terrorism. Islamic, Left Wing, Right Wing – it makes no difference. Many years ago, I decided that it was innocent human lives that needed to be protected and that has been my focus since. The “cliché” of late, however, has been that focused upon our current stable of Islamic extremist enemies to the exclusion of more traditional terrorists. Like I said, I hate clichés but they often do come in handy when trying to illustrate a particular point. What does bug me is when I consider the combination of all three subjects: the federal government, fighting terrorism, and the cliché of political correctness. Now, I do not mean the under-used version of “hunt terrorists, find terrorists, eliminate terrorists.” That, I could handle.

 What irks me is how our federal government “packages” itself in the war against these extremists. Take, for example, the recruiting Web pages of your favorite agency (FBI, CIA, etc.). Chances are, you will find a carefully crafted page denoting minorities and women. Nothing wrong with that, if you do not involve statistical data. What I mean is that the “citizens” I see promoted often do not resemble the character of the country  through which I travel. Like it or not, we are still a very much segregated nation. I travel thirty miles north of here and all I see are whites. I travel thirty miles south of here and all I see are blacks. Out West, strangely, I had more friends who were black and American Indian than I had who were white though, statistically, I should have experienced the same lopsided “culture” that I witness here within my native state. However, whenever I visit a governmental Web site I see “everyone” represented. Again, nothing wrong with that, but it is statistically not quite accurate. Not within a nation of 44 million blacks and 199 million whites.

 Nevertheless, people are not the subject of this article. I take them as they come and if I am forced to make a judgment, I make one based solely upon one’s actions. It is as simple as that. However, I would like to take this opportunity to pick on the “system” of political correctness, if I may, and discuss its overbearing idiocy. That is, I have no personal qualms against anyone serving our government. We need them all irrespective of whether my compatriots are white, red, black, or plaid. That is not the issue. What is, is going out of our way to ensure that every photograph or brochure is racially neutral, as it were. To me, this is just as bad as condemning a person because of their skin color.

 Before we harp on Uncle Sam, let us diverge a moment and use the television news organizations to illustrate this obvious infraction. If you were to turn on your evening news – cable networks included – I am almost willing to bet that you would witness one of the following pairings:

• A white male anchor matched with a white female anchor;
• A white anchor matched with a black (or other minority race) anchor;
• Two women anchors.

 

I have rarely witnessed a news broadcast where there were two white males in the
lead unless you consider Hannity and Colmes on Fox News and therein lays the classic distinction of Conservative versus Liberal. ;o) I do understand that the “beauty” element is involved – no one wants to watch ugly people relaying the news – but why must the programs be “packaged” so damn precisely? It seems to me, if my statistical figures are accurate, that if there are 4.5 times as many whites as blacks in this country, then it should translate into, for example, 4.5 times as many whites on television as blacks. Considered another way, I should be able to turn on my television and witness 4.5 news programs before I come across a black news anchor. Of course, life is not nearly so “statistical”. I mean, for example, nearly 100% of the people driving upon the roads have gone through some form of vehicle operator training and yet just the other day I figured out that only about 30% of the people were driving “textbook legally”. But I digress…

 Like I said, I am not writing this to trash any particular person. I just notice a few things that are seemingly out of whack with common sense reality and I, for one, believe that  any official practice for preferential treatment – either way – of a person based upon their skin color is morally wrong. Now, let’s get back to your favorite disaster and mine, the U.S. Government. As you read these words, you will have probably heard about the official selection of Ms. Hillary Clinton as President-elect Barack Obama’s Secretary of State. Congratulations to her. However, did you notice the run of the last four Secretaries of State? Madeleine Albright, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, and now Hillary Clinton. Three women and a black male. That is impressive if you get right down to the numbers. If Ms. Clinton remains as Secretary of State until 2012, that means that from 1993 (when political correctness came to the political forefront) to at least 2012 not a single white male has held a position which they held uninterruptedly from the formation of our country until 1993! If we were so “culturally insensitive” for about 216 years, why then have we become so exclusionary progressive today?

 Let us chew the thought from a different perspective. Geraldine Ferraro ran as the Democratic Party Vice-Presidential candidate in 1984. Sarah Palin ran as the Republican V.P. in 2008. Both lost in their bid which means that it takes at least three women to run for V.P. before one is successful. However, the very first black man to win his party’s nomination gets elected in a landslide. What are the odds? Did you also know that the first time that a black actor won the top Academy Award the top actress was also the first black female to win? Again, what are the odds? I cannot tell you how many times I have bought a lottery ticket and never won. I cannot tell you how many times that I went hunting for a particular “first time” prey and never bagged anything. I think, statistically, things should focus on the potentialities and not the desires.

 I could see how some people could make claims to racism within certain sectors of our society. After all, how could you explain how a junior senator with absolutely no experience whatsoever could defeat a seasoned leader who also happened to be a bona fide war hero for our nation’s ultimate office during a period of war? Statistically, this should not happen. There are hundreds if not thousands of black businessmen, military commanders, and politicians who have far more years’ experience than Barack Obama has had birthdays. Yet, he was elected. Why?

 Now that I have soured your stomach – one way or the other – let us return to the primary subject of this article: the U.S. Government’s allegiance to political correctness and the cliché that it represents. On September 11th, 2001, nineteen Muslims backed by untold thousands unleashed the most devastating attack upon American soil. Statistically, the vast majority of the terrorists that we target and kill in retaliation should be, therefore, Muslims. This is the same thing as saying that the vast majority of Japanese that we killed in World War Two were Japanese and the vast majority of Germans were Germans. Nationality or Religion, if the shoe…damn, here comes another cliché. So,  the vast majority of the terrorists who want us dead are therefore Muslim.  Yet, the vast majority of government documents training people for the fight of our life make very little mention of this particular fact.

 

Last time  I checked, however, the Irish Republican Army, the Red Brigades, and a host of “other” terrorist organizations were not out trying to kill Americans en masse. Aum Shinrikyo, which heretofore had made Al-Qaeda look like child’s play in terms of global organization and capability, concentrated their efforts primarily against their Japanese homeland. Even Colombia’s FARC, which both aids and combats rival drug kingpins, does not “officially” target Americans or American interests as a matter of policy in the way that Al-Qaeda would. There are no FARC franchises out there in distant lands carrying posters of Osama Bin Laden, at least any legitimate ones. No, a quick visit to the FBI’s Most Wanted terrorist list shows a broad pantheon of Muslims.

 Now, here’s where political correctness comes into play. We cannot fight the war on terrorism by singling out Arabs or other Muslims. We must consciously give “equal consideration” to that old lady in the wheelchair during airport screenings. We must conclude that openly hostile and questionably patriotic Dearborn, Michigan does not engage in terrorist recruitment or support. We must always address the “Palestinian Question” whenever we seek reasons why some people are quite prepared to blow themselves up in order to kill us. And, the grand finale, we cannot undertake diplomacy without somehow laying the blame for world destruction squarely upon the Israelis. Do you detect a trend here?

 Granted, I am a strange character. I believe that we should do either one of two things whenever we come across a terrorist. Either we make them talk – through whichever method works the best – or we send them packing to that Great Judgment in the sky. I have absolutely no qualms about dehumanizing anyone who wants to blow up, behead, or otherwise butcher innocent men, women, and children (often at the same time). They are not humans in my book and I will gladly face God as to my actions towards their defeat. My government should be as equally effective.

 The fundamental purpose of the United States Government is to protect its citizenry from outside attack. To protect our borders and that sphere of sovereignty that envelopes each one of us whenever we travel abroad. It is not supposed to elevate each one of us to a diety based upon what we are. God has already granted us equality, we just need to become better humans in return. My personal treatment of all races and religions as equal suits me pretty well. I therefore do not need Big Brother to shower me with messages that everyone is created equal – I know that already. However, I demand the right to disassociate with anyone who does not profess to this same level of personal dignity. 

 If, for example, 9/11 was perpetrated by Muslims and the greater Muslim community does not voice their opposition over such attacks then they should not question why I do not trust a large majority of Muslims in return.  Likewise if a vast majority of black Americans voted for Barack Obama simply because he was black and not the best leader for our nation or the most capable military commander-in-chief then they cannot question why I regard their intentions with suspicion. For thousands of years what has worked was that it was the individual’s actions – not who or what they are – that ensured civilization’s evolution.

 When I hire someone, for example, I concentrate on their merits alone. I hire the most capable applicant. Yes, sometimes, I consider a particular candidate’s background for one who has weathered great personal hardships often shows great accomplishments. I do not, however, use any particular characteristic as a screening ploy. I would not, for example, go out of my way to produce images where there five people in the photograph – a white woman, a black male, an Indian male, an Asian woman, and in the background, a white male. I would prefer that everyone know already that I do not provide preferential treatment.uld not question why I do not trust a large percentage of Muslims in return. Likewise, if a

 Our government “of the people, by the people, and for the people” should not be subject to clichés. We are diverse enough that there is no stereotypical “American”. We consist of all races, all creeds, all religions, all political persuasions, and just about every other characteristic. To arbitrarily mandate that “everyone” be always represented to the public merely distracts attention away from proper action. I do not care if the analyst in the government who discovers a plot to nuke New York City off of the map is white or black, male or female, Christian or Muslim. I just want them to be the best in the business. Political correctness has absolutely no business being official doctrine. Once we decide to lower expectations in order to elevate compliance, then we have lost the will to survive.

 

Comments

[jes]

While most of the post is very intelligent and interesting, I have one question that , to me, undermines your seemingly even handed approach. How are blacks that may have voted for Obama because he was black any different from the many whites that voted for McCain because he was white.

[Debbie]

The term war on terror is not really appropriate, but it's what was used originally after September 11, and I think it has stuck in most people's minds.

I'm not sure what the most appropriate name would be. I suppose it's not what we call it, but how we win it. Being united in the fight and determination TO win is something the US needs to work on.

[Keith]

Very nice post!! Bravo! As a Black man, and a conservative (it is a way of life, not a political affiliation) I took tremendous issue with other people (of varying levels of "Black Blood") indicating their undying support for this man, simply because "the media" said he "looked" like them. Is that not perpetuating the identical travesties that have haunted this great nation for the past 437 years?

[Aoi]

Great post. I take it you've read "The Terrorism Trap" and related material. The whole concept of a "war on terror" is flawed at best. On a separate note of P.C./D.C., blacks are statistically over-represented on the Supreme Court. But 9/10s of a person is probably a practical impossibility.