Posted on 09/27/2003 7:23:29 AM PDT by Alia
California is a racist state.
That's not my opinion. That's the implicit view of those who oppose a ballot measure that aims to end the odious practice in the Golden State of classifying people by their "race." Proposition 54 would forbid state and local government agencies in California from identifying individuals by their skin color for purposes of public education, public contracting, public employment and other government operations.
Foes of the measure, from Jesse Jackson to Cruz Bustamante, fret that California's nonwhite population somehow will be irreparably harmed if it is approved by the voters.
They insinuate that California's white population cannot be trusted to treat nonwhites with fairness, without prejudice.
They suggest that, unless the Golden State continues to keep score on the races of those enrolled in its public schools and colleges, awarded its public contracts, hired to its government jobs, whites in charge will reflexively discriminate.
What astounds is that race demagogues like Jackson and Bustamante are hardly the only ones who hold this view. Many whites in California also share this view, particularly those who consider themselves enlightened on matters of race.
The "enlightened" whites think themselves above race prejudice, beyond race discrimination. But they think the rest of California's white population is less colorblind than they.
So they oppose Proposition 54 ostensibly to keep other whites honest. And to affirm their solidarity with blacks, browns, yellows and reds in the continuing struggle of those "minorities" for race equality.
The perverse irony is that the white and nonwhite foes of Proposition 54 find themselves supporting public policy classifying individuals according to their skin color that has a long and racist tradition.
Indeed, one of the most reviled pillars of South Africa's apartheid system was its so-called Population Registration Act.
The law, which Nelson Mandela's African National Congress described as "inhuman," required that each and every person be classified as either white, colored or Bantu (black).
America's equivalent of the Population Registration Act was the Old South's Jim Crow laws. It classified individuals by race for purposes of preserving divisions between whites and nonwhites. It gave us the infamous "one-drop" rule if a person had as little one drop of black blood coursing through his or her veins, he or she was classified as black.
The early leaders of the civil rights movement in this country made a persuasive case against the race-conscious public policy that California now practices; that foes of Proposition 54 would maintain in perpetuity.
As far backs as 1949, Thurgood Marshall argued on behalf of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund that "classifications and distinctions based on race or color have no moral or legal validity in our society." Is there anyone among Proposition 54's white and nonwhite opponents who would dismiss Marshall's words?
Who would defend Jim Crow? Who would condone the Population Registration Act?
Of course not. Yet, they advocate that California continue to classify its residents according to their skin color. And they employ the most dubious arguments to justify their support for public policy that has no moral or legal validity.
Like the claim that, if California health care providers stop collecting race data, the state's nonwhite population will not receive proper medical treatment.
That does not jibe with the scientific findings of J. Craig Venter, who founded Celera Genomics, the biotechnology firm that shares credit for decoding the human genome.
In a recent issue of Science, Venter says that collection of race and ethnicity data for clinical drug trials could lead to "misleading and biologically meaningless conclusions." That's because "race" is a social, rather than scientific construct.
"Instead of applying social categories," he wrote, we should be promoting obtaining scientific data. Color of skin does not work as a surrogate."
In fact, he noted, several scientific studies have shown that there are more differences in drug responses within racial and ethnic groups than among them.
Then there's the implication made most recently by the three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that tried unsuccessfully to stop the recall election that if California law enforcement agencies stop collecting race data, the state will see a rise in both hate crimes and racial profiling.
Yet, the state government's nonpartisan legislative analyst attests that Proposition 54 allows the collection and use of relevant race-related data for purposes of law enforcement.
The foes of Proposition 54 should stop hiding behind excuses for voting against the measure. They should just come out and acknowledge that they think California an inherently racist state.
Perkins can be reached via e-mail at joseph.perkins@uniontrib.com
In weird ways, yes, I think so. The blue-line (coast) is definitely into hard-core punishment and rewards. The rest of us, just sing songs of the Alamo to each other, I guess.
Another one: "their comrade" Tom McClintock (vis a vis Indian Casino Money).
Quick, Roscoe! Let's head em off at the pass!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.