June 14, 2006

Racism as a Democratic Talking Point (Part 184)

When Democrats run out of logical, constructive arguments – which occurs on a fairly regular basis – they often resort to empty rhetoric, naïve appeals to emotion and even flat-out hysteria. The beauty of “racism” as a talking point is that it fits all three of these irrational modes of liberal argumentation. For Democrats, it is pure gold.

While once a serious matter, racism today is used by members of the Left to back their stances on many of the nation’s greatest debates. They play the racism card when supporting affirmative action, welfare and criminals, as well as when they oppose capital punishment, standardized testing and free trade. Conveniently, they suddenly forget about race when celebrating their favorite surgical operation, which results in overwhelmingly higher deaths for black and Hispanic babies.

Most recently, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid introduced a new topic for which to make use of the “racism” strategy. After Oklahoma Republican Senator James Inhofe put forth a proposal to make English America’s official language, Reid eloquently articulated that he opposed it because he felt it was “racist.”

That’s right. Reid’s problem with making English the official language of the United States is that doing so would be racist. Do liberals, even high-ranking Democrats, know what they are saying anymore? Does anyone keep a check on them? Does the top Democrat in the United States Senate understand that he said that making English the country’s official language promotes the idea, according to Merriam-Webster, that “race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities?”

While the loose use of the term “racism” among self-victimizing minorities and leftist pseudo-intellectuals in academic circles has become widespread and expected these days, this irresponsible behavior has made it to the upper echelons of our government’s Democratic leadership. How can the average American still treat the Democratic Party like a normal, ideologically respectable institution?

Reid brilliantly added that Inhofe’s proposal was targeted at “people who speak Spanish.” No, you don’t say? Our country has been overrun by over 10 million Spanish-speaking illegal immigrants who have bypassed English tests required in the immigration process. Millions more are discouraged from assimilating by their local governments, which provide schools, street signs, documents and even ballots in Spanish, as well as countless businesses’ “Press two for Spanish” options. The fact that you can live comfortably in many areas of the U.S. without uttering a word of the English language would, to the normal U.S. senator, be a sign that we do indeed have a bit of a problem.

In fact, according to Zogby International, 84% of Americans, including 77% of Hispanics, believe that English should be the official language. Even 82% of Democrats, a surprisingly high number, disagree with the rest of their ideological comrades about whether English, Spanish, Spanglish or even Ebonics should be the official language.

Despite Americans’ overwhelming support for the English language, however, only 11 Democratic Senators – precisely one-fourth of the entire Democratic delegation to the Senate – joined almost all of the Republicans in supporting Inhofe’s proposal. Who are they trying to please, the nuts of Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan (which wants to “liberate” portions of the United States and make them part of Mexico)? Illegals who can’t (yet) vote? Or the diversity elites of the nation’s colleges and universities?

Whatever the reason that Democratic senators so strongly oppose making English the official national language, their behavior will certainly not resonate well with the majority of Americans, and even, as demonstrated, Hispanic Americans. As such, there are not many possible explanations for their actions.

It could be that most of the Democratic senators genuinely believe that making English, already America’s overwhelmingly dominant language, official would be racist. In this case, little can be said other than “They’re nuts, I told you so.” Is it really so difficult for them to swallow the concept of a people’s designating their own language as official? If the Japanese and the French designated the Japanese and French languages official, would they be labeled racist?

Of course, the more plausible explanation is that Congressional Democrats are on a campaign to obstruct Republican efforts no matter what the reason – even concerning issues that should be uncontroversial – like agreeing on a national language.

For this battle, the “racism” label is perfect. In the last few months, Reid and his Democratic colleagues watched as hundreds of thousands protested efforts against illegal immigration. As such, massaging Hispanic self-victimization, they think, could potentially help them with that demographic. Once again, it looks like Democrats are willing to devalue the meaning of racism by using it for political gain. Only this time, it just might backfire with about 77 percent of their target audience, and even more of the rest. Let November decide.