View Mobile Site
 
Posted: May 20, 2014 10:00 p.m.

Donald Sterling has been treated unfairly

Donald Sterling has been treated unjustly; I’ve said it before, and I remain incalcitrant pursuant to that opinion. Mr. Sterling is being used by race-mongers and melanin pimps as validation of institutional racism — which loosely translated means the modern day equivalents of Joseph Goebbels are using Mr. Sterling’s private conversation as proof that in America rich white men are impeding progress for blacks.

For those who remember the riots in the Watts section of Los Angeles following the acquittal of the police officers charged with beating Rodney King, America was told that the malevolent voices, those such as Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson, et al. represented blacks nationwide. The only problem is, said wasn’t remotely the case. In fact it can be validly argued that it was precisely because of the malicious heterodoxy and vitriol of those who supposedly spoke for all blacks, that black conservatives organized and made their presence known.


We are witnessing another such seminal moment with respect to Mr. Sterling. Persons of color who understand and believe in the Constitution support his right to the free expression of his personal opinions.
Contrary to the opinion of mainstream media elitists who attempt to convince us that free thinking persons of color are noumena (as defined by Kant) -- free thinking persons of color do exist, and the properties of reason and intellect are, in fact, to be ascribed to us.

It is time for the mantra that a free exchange of ideas or personal opinions being viewed as injurious to blacks to be recognized for what it is. It is a form of intellectual bondage used to encourage blacks to reject modernity. It is a form of emotional cancer designed to entrench political correctness and societal division.

As a father, I have referenced Magic Johnson as a successful businessman, but he is not the person I would hold up as a model for my son. Johnson, by his own admission, lived a debaucherous lifestyle. He not only endangered himself with his selfish pursuit of sexual gratification, but he also endangered his family and those he was sexually active with. He is not to be championed as a safe-sex advocate, i.e., just wear a condom; he is to be used as an example of why we should teach abstinence and restraint to our children.

But those who espouse commonality for blacks are loath to admit that. They want blacks to be governed by anger and resentment that’s used to tether them to a past when blacks suffered indignities, and to use anecdotal evidences of same as proving the perceived pandemic of institutional racism argued to exist today.

I and many other Americans of color reject that specious heterodoxy as self-limiting and an ethnic engineering of inferiority. I do not condemn the words of a person such as Mr. Sterling because in America we are privileged to have the right to express our opinions, especially when it comes to the practices of someone we are involved with. I do not view the words of Mr. Sterling as harmful to me as an American of color or to anyone else.

But I do have grave concern pursuant to those who are castigating him and trying to deprive him of his right to own a business as they move to punish him for his right to free expression. Because what said comes down to is the rendering of the Constitution as null and void. It is being replaced with an adherence to feelings and political correctness. The authors of the Constitution have been replaced with those who believe freedom of expression is valid only if they approve.

It should be noted, as well, the dichotomy of those who are permitted to publicly voice vulgar euphemisms with impunity while a private conversation between two people becomes the cause for outrage.

I think it important to ask the question, would Donald Sterling have suffered the backlash he is experiencing if he had said something negative about Justice Clarence Thomas, Ward Connerly, Allen West or myself? An honest answer results with undeniable understanding that it is not what he said, it is who he said it about. Mr. Sterling dared speak ill of basketball royalty. An honest answer also results in the understanding that if you are Harry Reid, Spike Lee, Oprah Winfrey, Julian Bond, the late Ku Klux Klan leader Senator Robert Byrd, or Marie Strumolo Burke, you can say what you want with only someone such as myself challenging you.

Mychal S. Massie is the former National Chairman of the conservative black think tank, Project 21-The National Leadership Network of Black Conservatives; and a member of its parent think tank, the National Center for Public Policy Research. You can find more at mychal-massie.com.

Commenting is not available.

Commenting not available.

Please wait ...