Tag Archives: Clarence Thomas

POLITICS

Not Totally Clarence’s Fault: Why There Is More Blame To Go Around Regarding The Ending of Affirmative Action than Justice Thomas

Leave a comment

I am unsure if anyone with an ounce of common sense is surprised that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the use of Race in student admissions. In a 6-3 majority ruling, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the use of Race in school admissions “violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” Most progressives understood long ago that this ruling was inevitable.

It was a foregone conclusion that Clarence Thomas would vote against using Race in school admissions. There is no need to rehash that Affirmative Action was a prerequisite to Thomas’ access to higher education that positioned him for an opportunistic climb to the Supreme Court. Once he arrived on the Court, Thomas displayed an insatiable desire to block the path he traveled for fellow Blacks in a legendary manner. Simply put, Thomas has repeatedly proven to be no friend of Black America.

The most troubling aspect of Clarence Thomas’ position as a Supreme Court Justice flows from his uncanny yet reliable penchant to operate without considering historical context. On the surface, Thomas’s place in the recent decisions that “the color of a person’s skin is irrelevant to that individual’s equal status as a citizen of this nation” is a reasonable interpretation of the 14th Amendment. Unfortunately, his position flounders when placed within a larger context of racial conflict that began in 1619 when the first “half-free” persons of African descent arrived in the Jamestown Colony.

The level of historical illiteracy one must be constrained by to ignore Race as the most influential determining factor in a citizen’s fortunes in this land is astonishing. While it is theoretically correct that “the color of a person’s skin is irrelevant to that individual’s equal status as a citizen…” everything, and I do mean everything, about this discussion changes when the descendants of enslaved Africans enter the conversation. I fear that the present emotional furor regarding the Affirmative Action decision will cause my people to unwisely place total responsibility for the ruling on Clarence Thomas’ puny shoulders because he is not solely to blame for the ending of Affirmative Action.

In many ways, this regretful moment began when Civil Rights Leaders allowed the narrative surrounding Affirmative Action, a non-monetary reparations program intended to repair Black injury caused by institutionalized state-sponsored racial discrimination (Jim Crow, Black Codes, Racial Discrimination, Prejudice, etc.), to expand inexplicably and needlessly cover non-Black “minority groups.” One can attribute this unwise decision to political naivete or an astounding inability to advance Black rights with the necessary seriousness.

During the identity-politic-driven 1960s, multiple groups, from the LGBTQ+ to Feminist groups trained within the Civil Rights Movement, branched off and advanced their political agendas. The historical record shows that they successfully applied lessons learned during the Civil Rights Movement. Regardless of non-Black groups’ propagation of suffering and marginalization, their suffering pales compared to Blacks, the foremost victims of state-sanctioned discrimination from America’s founding.

Black political leaders have often refused to emphasize that Blacks were the only intended beneficiaries of the government initiative during Affirmative Action’s creation. Instead of demanding that the programs remain focused on Blacks and explaining why this must occur, they inexplicably worked to include other groups with no claim to the program. Maybe Black political leaders thought they were being politically savvy by forming alliances with other “minority” groups and collecting political currency to use later. I am bewildered that the above political leaders would vacate one of the few advantageous political positions Blacks have ever possessed. In hindsight, it is evident that this move to include others was a miscalculation as it is a “minority” group that led the charge to dismantle Affirmative Action when it served their interests.

In the end, the narrative that the blame for the decline of Affirmative Action must be solely laid at the feet of Clarence Thomas is a false one that allows a host of other culprits to be acknowledged for their role in dismantling Affirmative Action. This was not a good day for Black America as it once again displayed Black political leaders’ comprehensive ineptitude. Yet, Blacks will again fail to hold their political leaders accountable for their failings due to a stupefying political illiteracy that guarantees their marginalized status for yet another generation.

James Thomas Jones III, Ph.D.

©Manhood, Race, and Culture, 2023

 

Please remember to subscribe to the Manhood, Race, and Culture YouTube Channel.

Uncategorized

The Education of Kyle Larson: Reflections on a Racially Inclusive NASCAR Community and the Fall of a Superstar

1 Comment

When Senator Joe Biden questioned Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas on October 11, 1991, regarding Anita Hill’s allegation of sexual harassment, the current Presidential hopeful asked Thomas “Do you have anything you’d like to say?” It was at this moment that Thomas tapped into an often overlooked aspect of the White male psyche that I am sure Nascar driver Kyle Larson wishes that he’d mastered. Thomas slyly responded to Biden’s question by likening the hearing to determine his fitness to serve as a U.S. Supreme Court Justice as a “high-tech lynching.”

Thomas’ strategy was brilliant for so many reasons. The most notable reason was because it allowed him to tap into a weakness in the psyche of many powerful White males; a weakness that appears when racial matters conflict with bottom-line financial realities. Clarence Thomas knew that those questioning him, many of whom were racial bigots, would go to extreme lengths to hide their true identities before a national audience.

Whereas Clarence Thomas navigated this minefield as a skilled jazz pianist such as McCoy Tyner, Kyle Larson fumbled and stumbled in such a manner that he has been made a pariah in the public arena. This young man has learned a lesson about Race, representation, cultural wars, and corporate sponsorship in one of the worst ways imaginable. All because of a single word that we all know is used in non-public spaces by those who have distanced themselves from Larson.

Just in case you missed the events that led to the destruction of Kyle Larson’s rendezvous with superstardom, I will quickly rehash it below.

During an iRacing event designed to placate racing fans going through withdrawals due to the absence of sports, Larson’s head phone appeared to lose communication with his designated spotter. It was while checking his microphone that Larson said, “You can’t hear me? N!@@a!” Fellow racers veered from this matter while informing Larson that his microphone was live and that the world could hear him.

The day after Larson’s misspeak, he offered an apology for his use of the racial slur and offered “no excuse” for its occurrence. Unfortunately for Larson, there were things in motion that his quick apology was incapable of stopping. Within hours of the incident, the embattled driver’s three major sponsors one of which was McDonald’s dropped him and his racing team Chip Ganassi Racing fired him forty-eight hours after the incident; the latter occurrence was particularly daunting as it left Larson, a person who is half-Japanese and ironically gained access to NASCAR via its “Drive for Diversity” program, without a racing team. This situation is financially devastating for a young driver who earned $9,000,000.00 last year, an amount that most agree was merely the tip of the iceberg regarding Larson’s earning potential. 

I am slightly surprised by NASCAR’s reaction to this situation. Afterall, it is NASCAR; a sport that has appeared to be a safe-haven for “the good ol boys.” As an outsider, it has always been apparent that the sport has always been lily-white. Most Blacks that I know pay no attention to NASCAR if for no other reason than the belief that the stands and pit crews, not to mention the cars, would be filled with rednecks who own Confederate flags.

Apparently, my father’s NASCAR is not the NASCAR that my son is inheriting. The organization has apparently made a conscious effort to lessen its well-earned reputation as a haven for White bigots. Indicative of such was superstar driver Bubba Wallace who offered the following response to the above incident. An offering that explains why NASCAR’s response to Larson is crucial to the sport’s present and future.

The word brings many terrible memories for people and families and brings them back to a time that WE as a community and human race have tried our hardest to get away from. The sport has made combatting this stereotype one of their top priorities. NASCAR has been doing what it can to get away from the ‘racist and redneck sport’ labels.

Diversity and inclusion is a main priority for the sport across every team, every car, every crew member and employee. With that said, It hurts to see the African American community immediately throw NASCAR under the bus with the ‘I’m not shocked, it’s NASCAR.’ NASCAR has been, and will be way better than how we’ve been represented in the last couple of weeks. As the person that arguably has the biggest voice on this topic in our sport, it’s tough for me to speak to because I didn’t imagine us being here. Can we all do a better job with inclusion? Absolutely, it’s a worldwide problem, not just in our sport. We as humans can always do better.

The efforts of NASCAR leaders are to be applauded as this transformation has occurred without the usual major public relations campaign seeking favor from those that they have previously prevented from joining their ranks. When confronted with evidence of such efforts, any judicious person is forced to re-evaluate their sweeping indictment of NASCAR power-brokers as racial bigots enforcing the tenets of institutionalized racism. If Bubba Wallace’s words are an accurate representation of today’s NASCAR, I, along with the majority of Black America, have to significantly re-calibrate our viewpoints regarding the organization.

Although I am sure that the frustrations of NASCAR leaders will be heightened by the fact that when their present course is weighed against prior patterns it is still insufficient in the minds of Blacks. It should be understandable to all that Black America’s suspicions flow from a host of sources that begin with historical patterns of racial bigotry and institutionalized racism.

Regardless of its fairness, most Blacks will suspect that this alteration to unstated racial policies flows not from goodwill rather the realization that harboring racial bigots whose daunting perspectives are so significant that they can’t be muted even in public spaces is a nightmare for owners who rely on major corporations for their existence. One can only wonder how McDonald’s would be harmed due to its association with Kyle Larson.

Only time will tell if NASCAR’s efforts to be more inclusive and accommodating to non-redneck fans are genuine. One thing is certain, Kyle Larson has learned that wealthy White men, in this case NASCAR owners, will go to extreme lengths to prevent being labeled racial bigots in the public arena. Such a designation is bound to have a horrendous impact on future business. If only Kyle Larson were aware of Clarence Thomas’ slick maneuver during his Anita Hill debacle nearly thirty-years ago, he would still be positioned as the next NASCAR superstar.

If nothing else, I guess that it is a lesson learned; a costly one, yet a lesson nonetheless.

Dr. James Thomas Jones III

© Manhood, Race, and Culture 2020. � c

Uncategorized

Why Stephen A. Smith and Others Like Him Should be Silenced “By Any Means Necessary”

4 Comments

I am sure that no one is surprised that ESPN talking head Stephen A. Smith has once again become ensnared in a seemingly made for TV controversy. This time around it deals with the on-going saga of colluded against Quarterback Colin Kaepernick. Let’s be honest about Stephen A. Smith, he is basically paid to “talk shit” about Race to an audience that knows little more about racial matters than he does. I cringe at much of what I hear that he has said on some episode of ESPN.

In many ways, Stephen A. Smith is the luckiest Black man alive for the following reason. He is not unique in his penchant to “talk shit” for hours, if not weeks and months at a time. Truthfully, he is not much different from the droves of Black men who spend hours upon hours “talking shit” about Race, women, and sports in barbershops, sports bars, strip clubs, and any other place where loudmouth Negroes are found. It would be a gross overstatement to say that Black men such as Stephen A. Smith are a dime a dozen. His kind is much, much, much more common than that.

The latest reality-TV debate that Smith has manufactured via his over the top style involves all people, Hall of Fame wide receiver Terrell Owens. In response to a recent show regarding Colin Kaepernick’s latest ingenious escape from what appears to be the National Football League’s attempt to depict him as a washed-up quarterback whose skills have eroded to the point that his playing again is a ludicrous proposition, Owens proffered that Stephen A. Smith’s argument directed at Max Kellerman revealed him as a “company man” willing to do the bidding of ESPN. Owens’ words were intended to reveal Stephen A. Smith as the latest in a long line of Negroes willing to fight against the fight against racial bigotry and institutionalized racism on behalf of entities that have made such matters the most impactful element in the lives of Blacks. Smith responded to the charge with a to be expected dimwitted tweet that his position did not cancel his blackness. Despite what those who are new to serious discussions regarding Race may think, neither Owens’ charge nor Stephen A. Smith’s rebuttal is new arguments.

Terrell Owens’ charge is as common as the counter-argument issued by the ESPN commentator. This matter raises the following question. Is there an expectation for Blacks to adhere to a particular viewpoint? Are those “free-thinking” Blacks who refuse to do so destined to be ostracized by their contemporaries? The answers to the above questions are not clear cut.

Blacks such as Candace Owens, Clarence Thomas, and Stephen A. Smith whose perspective appear to resist what Khalid Abdul Muhammad termed “the liberation and salvation of the Black nation” have sought cover under a flimsy argument resting on calls for the need for a diversity of thoughts and voices within Black America. The words, ideas, and ideals of such figures who often classify themselves as Black Conservatives have repeatedly opposed politico-economic progress within Black America. Please do not consider the above an indictment against all Black Conservatives as it is intended to address the few who serve as a vocal minority whose ideologies malign the entire political perspective.

Despite the outcries of some, certainly not all, Black Conservatives who present themselves as the most recent victims of Stockholm Syndrome (they identify with and work to advance the agenda of those who dedicate their energies to the further exploitation and denigration of Black America) should be criticized, denounced, muted, and curtailed “by any means necessary.” The advised action has nothing to do with political censorship or calls for conformity and everything to do with the development of a political agenda aimed at advancing Black America’s interests.

I do not need to tell you that it is late in the game for Black America to entertain political voices that work against their interests. Those voicing political programs that threaten to keep progress for racial equality derailed are foolish. Experience has taught me that they are actually too foolish to be ashamed of their actions. Yet, they are comforted by the ransom that they are being paid by those who continue to devise strategies and seek alliances necessary to maintain their selfish stranglehold on precious resources.

Regardless of the venue, it is clear that figures such as Stephen A. Smith and Candace Owens will tell you that the show must go on because they have bills to pay. To hell with the rest of us as we continue to fight for the uplift of all.

Dr. James Thomas Jones III

©Manhood, Race, and Culture, 2019