Integration is a curse
Those are not my words. They are the words of Alabama state representative John Rogers, Jr. from the 52nd district – and he wasn’t talking about calculus. He also said that he is “not opposed to separate but equal.” Frankly, I would not believe it if I hadn’t heard him utter those very words with my own two ears this afternoon on the Matt Murphy Radio Program.
I picked up on the conversation with Murphy asking Rogers to explain why it was acceptable to have an exclusively black legislative caucus that refused to admit people based solely on the color of their skin (a topic I blogged just yesterday). Rogers’ only defense was that “those are the rules” – you must be black.
Murphy asked Rogers to explain the purpose of the Alabama Black Legislative Caucus (ABLC), to which Rogers replied that it existed to promote the causes of the black community. If that really is the case, then why wouldn’t Patricia Todd, a white woman who represents Alabama’s heavily black 54th district, be allowed to join the ABLC? Certainly she could better serve her constituents by caucusing with others who share similar legislative agendas. Rogers said no way because she is not black.
At this point in the conversation Rogers was on very shaky ground since it was readily apparent that his primary concern wasn’t helping black citizens, but simply maintaining and defending the racial exclusivity of the ABLC. That position cheapens the hard fought victories of the 20th century civil rights leaders by abandoning the notion of equality and unification in favor of voluntary segregation. That is when Rogers said that “integration” was “a curse.” He went on to say that he was “not opposed to separate but equal” laws and that blacks were (would be?) better off under that system. Murphy paused the conversation out of sheer surprise and asked Rogers to reiterate his assertions, which he did.
As I understand it the ABLC holds meetings in publicly owned buildings. I suppose it’s OK to allow a segregationist organization use government facilities without the slightest bit of objection, but Boy Scouts have been banned from using publicly owned schools due to the organization’s religious foundation.
What will come of Rogers’ remarks? Probably nothing. If he were a white politician he would be crucified in the media for merely suggesting that the races should be kept apart (remember Trent Lott’s complement to Strom Thurmond?). As a black politician, though, he is granted immunity to persecution for bone headed, pro-segregation remarks.
Rogers represents an old guard of politicians, one that gains its power through division of the races and constantly telling people that their plight – perceived or real – is solely the result of actions taken against them due to the color of their skin. I hope that as their generation moves on to greener pastures that new politicians can fill the void with more constructive actions and rhetoric. The main issue facing many of those communities isn’t race relations, it’s poverty – a color blind affliction.
On whole, I don’t think that the human race has the ability to survive as a unified body in a utopian society. It’s not that we don’t desire to live and be happy but it’s those things that give us pleasure that are also the determining factors in our many divisions.
When the former Soviet Union finally crumbled under its own weight, America as well as the rest of the west was finally free to pursue its dreams. We could turn inward and work on completing the task of eliminating prejudice, poverty and homelessness, assure that everyone had adequate access to healthcare and that no one would enter old age with nothing but a can of dog food for the evening meal. But it didn’t happen that way. We missed the enemy we had grown dependent upon and so we turned our need for that foe inward upon ourselves. From there, we divided and subdivided our nation between the neocon and liberal, the Christian and the atheist, the straight and the gay and of course, black and white. Our efforts begat domestic propaganda machines the likes of which Stalin or Goebbels would truly envy. We found comfort once again in our polarizations, happily pronouncing our neighbors worthy of the noose over shallow notions of race, lifestyle, religion and politics.
We’re not slaves to these things because we are bound by any clanking, ghostly chains. We are slaves because we choose to be.