I’ve talked before about how all the focus on the racism of the past is helping us miss the newer and equally dumb racism of the present. This editorial about Tim Scott printed in the New York Times is a good example of that. Like look at this section:
But [Tim Scott's] politics, like those of the archconservative Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas, are utterly at odds with the preferences of most black Americans. Mr. Scott has been staunchly anti-tax, anti-union and anti-abortion.
Yes, the love the idea that if you have a certain amount of melanin in your skin, then you can only think one way on taxes. That’s totally a smart idea a newspaper should print and not the ranting of a moron racist.
You see, this new racism isn’t really any different than the old — it attempts to define everyone and put limitations on them based on their skin color — but just goes about it differently, usually from the angle that these people are the ones enlightened on race and everyone else is the racist. It’s pretty Orwellian. But if we are to advance as a society, a newspaper would no more consider printing an editorial by Adolph L. Reed than they would that of a KKK member.
Hey, you know who else was named Adolph…