Is liberalism inherently racist?
I don’t mean, “are all liberals racist,” because individuals can, and often do, fail to take their worldview, their foundational beliefs, all the way to their logical conclusion. What I mean is, “is the logical end, the final resting spot, of liberalism always racist?”
Take, for instance, this story from the last week:
On Tuesday, the board passed a revised strategic plan that says that by 2018, it wants 90 percent of Asian students, 88 percent of white students, 81 percent of Hispanics and 74 percent of black students to be reading at or above grade level. For math, the goals are 92 percent of Asian kids to be proficient, whites at 86 percent, Hispanics at 80 percent and blacks at 74 percent. It also measures by other groupings, such as poverty and disabilities, reported the Palm Beach Post. -CBS Tampa
Why would a school board pass a set of standards, or goals, that are so clearly racist? Given this school board is extremely liberal, why would a group that proclaims itself the enemy of racism support what is, in fact, racism?
The only possible explanation is that liberals don’t see setting different goals based on race as actually being racist. From “affirmative action,” to “social justice,” liberals sometimes see treating people differently based on the color of their skin as racist, and other times as not racist.
How can this be?
The answer lies in perceived intent. If the perceived intent is to “bolster an oppressed people,” then the result isn’t racism, no matter how the law is actually written. If the intent is anything else, then the liberal will consider the result racism.
Since there is always some “oppressed people,” who need “bolstering,” and there is always some racial group who hasn’t been treated fairly sometime in history, or someplace in the world, then any attempt to simply treat people equally before the law is, in the liberal mind, racist. People must always be divided by the color of their skin, their origin, and the history of their “people group,” and treated differently based on these factors —anything less, to a liberal, is racism.
And now we can see the problem.
In order to make certain we have the right intent, there must be someone who can measure current intent against past treatment. There must be someone who can say, “I can judge how horribly those people were treated between these dates in that specific location by a specific law, and I can judge how much extra stuff they should get to make up for it, to make them equal again.” It takes a special kind of person to look at the world, break people down based on the color of their skin, and determine how people of different skin colors have been treated in the past, and how they must be treated in order to “make up for past crimes.” In fact, it takes someone who sees the world through the lens of skin color.
In other words, it takes a racist.
And here we find the inescapable racism of liberalism. You must be a racist to see people based on the color of their skin; to determine if they should be treated differently because of their skin color. This breeds in a permanent racism in the constant search for the “oppressed,” never letting us see a person as a person, but always and only as a person of a specific color skin. Liberalism can’t let go of racism because racism is foundational to the liberal project.
So yes, liberal thought is, in fact, inherently racist.