What We Still Need to Learn from Rosa Parks

This week, President Trump commemorated the courage of Rosa Parks, the Montgomery, Alabama seamstress who refused to give up her seat on a bus. In his latest address, the President expanded on the significance of her civil disobedience: “She defended the truth etched into our Declaration of Independence, that all of us, regardless of the color of our skin, are created equal by God.” Incidentally, both Trump and Parks received Ellis Island Awards in 1989 for their work helping inner city black youth.

I first learned about Rosa Parks in Second Grade. The actors dramatizing her story were black and white, but they interchanged the races of their roles by wearing a black or white scarf. It was an interesting interplay, demonstrating that the fight for civil rights belongs to everyone. In high school, I watched a one-woman show dramatizing that entire day. The actress played Rosa Parks’ coming home from work. She also played the racist bus driver telling her to give up her seat, then presented the aftermath of her arrest and the sensational fame that followed.

The basic details of that fateful day are well-known. December 1^st, 1955, Parks was coming home from another long day at work. Alabama winter dip into the low 40s, so she took the bus. She was ready to get out of the cold and get home, as anyone would. Because of the racist Jim Crow laws, she sat down in the Colored Section of the bus after she bought her pass. Pretty soon, the entire “Whites Only” section filled up, yet more white passengers began boarding. The bus driver told Parks and three other black passengers to move to the back of the bus. While the others moved as ordered, she refused. Despite warnings from the bus driver that he would have her arrested, she said “No”. Police arrived, put her in handcuffs, booked her. She was released on $100 bail.

Recently, I learned more pertinent details of that day and why Rosa Parks’ simple act of defiance brought down the established racist social order.

Some people think that Parks was a lady just looking for a fight. In the past, Parks had grudgingly complied with Jim Crow laws, although one incident stuck out her in mind. In 1943, she paid her fare, then attempted to enter through the middle door outside, the common practice on segregated bus lines. Instead of waiting, the bus driver just drove off without her. She determined never to suffer that kind of outrage and humiliation, and further resolved to avoid that particular bus driver, James Blake. But without realizing it, her bus driver that day was the same bigoted bus driver who had left her stranded 12 years ago. There was no way that Blake would get away with dishonoring her a second time.

Many people believe that Parks decided on that December evening to resist the bus line’s Jim Crow ordinance. Some readers may even recall Old Eddie’s refrain from the movie Barbershop: “Rosa Parks didn’t do nothin’ but sit her black a--- down … she was tired.” Actually, Parks wasn’t burned out physically that evening. Also, she had been waiting for the right moment to challenge the unjust law. In her own words, Parks was just “tired of giving in.”

What was she thinking about at that critical moment on the bus? What imposed on her specifically to stand firm and not give in? She thought of 14-yearold Emmett Till, the black boy brutally lynched earlier that year for whistling at a white woman. The bitter injustice of a young boy’s outrageous  murder motivated her to take a stand.

Furthermore, Rosa Parks’ decision was not some “didn’t do nothing” act, for she suffered a great deal following her civil disobedience. She went to jail, faced a fine. Supporters filed a lawsuit on her behalf, which stalled in court. She would lose her job and receive death threats afterwards, even when she moved to Detroit. It cost her a great deal.

Another question arises: Many black activists before her had refused to give up their seats, yet nothing happened. Why was Parks’ refusal to give up her seat successful in fueling protest and ending the bus line segregation? Her actions captured the attention of the new, burgeoning national media, which repeatedly documented the excesses of liberal Democratic bigotry in the South. Because of her connections with fellow activists as the secretary of the Montgomery NAACP, outrage erupted immediately to organize a sustained and ultimately successful boycott.

What should we learn today from her fight against racism and government-sponsored bigotry? How all of us can fight back against a latent movement of resegregation on college campuses and liberal cities. The obsession in higher education with “white supremacy” is particularly disturbing and needs to be confronted, and not just in the United States. One activist in Downtown Los Angeles informed me that white people in South Africa are now experiencing unprecedented racial discrimination, from black patrons who refuse to tip white servers, to white farmers being driven off their land.

Charges of racism have also turned into a militant excuse to shut down meaningful discussion on college campuses. Black activists have blocked white students from entering college dorms. Chicano activists chased white people out of a local park in San Diego. A Professor Emeritus at UC Riverside chanted about “The Brown Race and the Brown Giant” taking over the United States. On the same campus, a Hispanic student stole a MAGA hat from a Trump supporter in the name of ending “genocide”. Whatever happened to “All men are created equal”? Racism is racism, no matter who perpetrates it or is victimized by it.

Let’s hope that Rosa Parks’ example will inspire people today to see everyone as created equal in the eyes of God. The fight for civil rights includes everyone. If necessary, more people will need to engage in civil disobedience, always with the emphasis on “civil”. Parks’ example should still inspire us.

MLK Day 2017: We Have Come a Long Way!

On this Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Day, instead of listening to irreverent race-baiters like “Reverends” Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson, let us imagine what Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and his colleague Rosa Parks might say about race relations in America.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

 First, Dr. King would remind us that in previous decades, white people were never indicted, let alone convicted and incarcerated for willfully killing black people. White lynch mobs would preen for cameras following their savage murders of black people, brazenly smiling because they knew that no white jury would convict them.

 

King would retell the trial of the “Scottsboro Boys”, in which a white judge set aside a corrupt guilty verdict, knowing full well that the nine young African-American men did not rape a white woman of dubious reputation and loose morals. A white lawyer from New York represented those black defendants, and shortly afterward blacks were serving on Alabama juries. King would then remind everyone about the unjust slaughter of fifteen-year old Emmett Till, murdered by white supremacists in Mississippi for whistling at a white woman. Fifty years later, prosecutors indicted Till’s killer. Trayvon Martin of Florida was killed by a man of mixed heritage. The state scheduled twelve days and fifty-six witnesses for his case. Maybe King would mention OJ Simpson, a wealthy African-American athlete and entertainer who was tried for murder, defended by a black lawyer and Harvard Law Professor. OJ was not convicted, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and general outrage from the public. 

 

In his “Letter in a Birmingham Jail”, King lamented that blacks were still begging for a coffee at the local restaurant. Today, blacks are celebrated entrepreneurs and investors, including Earvin “Magic” Johnson, who helped gang-riddled, irrepressibly corrupt Compton, California. Herman Cain owned Godfather’s Pizza. Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm of New York State ran for Congress and for President, long before Obama. Unlike the race-hustlers of today, Chisholm reached out to all Americans, and even comforted a severely wounded (former) white supremacist George Wallace after he suffered an assassination attempt. There are black leaders in courts and statehouses, including Deval Patrick of Massachusetts, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice (National Security Advisor and Secretary of State) among many others.  

 Instead of crying about racism in America, King would say: “We have come a long way!”

 

Rosa Parks

Then I think of Rosa Parks, the civil rights leader who refused to give up her seat on a Montgomery, Alabama bus. “She was tired”, as old Eddie shared in the movie “Barbershop”. She was tired all right: tired of being treated with disrespect; tired of unequal treatment under the law; tired of being told what she could and could not do, how much she could make; and being told where to sit.

Confirming Dr. King’s appraisal of improved race relations in the USA, Rosa Parks would acknowledge that there is room for improvement, but only because of President Obama and his Democratic Party.

Parks would be dismayed that Obama and Democrats in general take the black vote for granted. For example, while 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney attended the NAACP Conference, Obama skipped it. Talk about disrespect.  Dishonoring marriage and expanding abortion (both offensive to blacks), Obama does not respect their values. He has done nothing to amend the unfair sentencing guidelines in our nation’s drug laws, to  re-enfranchise felons, or even commute prison sentences for juvenile offenders. As a result, blacks inadvertently still suffer unequal treatment.

Parks would be disgusted by the welfare state and Democratic resistance to school choice. Obama refuses to allow black families to choose their children’s schools, yet enrolls his children in elite private schools with elite security.  Because of  President Obama’s ruinous “progressive” policies, African-Americans suffer unemployment twice the national average. Black youth struggle against 50% unemployment. Blacks are not doing or making much under this President. Besides, Democratic President Lyndon Baines Johnson offered then expanded government welfare for one reason: “We’ll have those n—ggers voting for us for the next two hundred years”. Johnson’s invidious comment and Obama’s callous indifference validate the argument of black conservatives Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams: Because Democrats enable dependence and resist school choice and vouchers, they basically tell blacks where to sit.

In fact, the Democratic Party, from Woodrow Wilson to today, have been sending blacks “to the back of the bus”, while Republicans offer them the front seat (Condoleezza Rice, Clarence Thomas, and the recently-deceased Edward Brooke), or let them own the bus if they want to (Herman Cain).  To paraphrase crappy rapper Kanye West: “President Obama does not care about black people.” Without a doubt, Rosa Parks would shout: “President Obama, stop putting my people in the back of the bus!”

Ironically, despite this country’s drastically improved race relations, if anyone is hindering progress on race, look no further than the black man in the White House, his black attorney general, and black liberal media elites who profit from unrest rather than peace. Other than Obama and Co., We the People of the United Sates can confidently assert that Dr. Kings’ Dream of 1963 is our reality.

Diversity for Diversity's Sake? Not Working

For the past twenty years, the Republican Party has lamented its seeming "lack of color."

I find that kind of odd, considering that as far back as 1984, Southern Republicans were winning more black voters than most modern political history books will document.

While CBS news was covering the near unanimous victory of Ronald Reagan, they noticed that "old, white" Southern US Senate candidate/incumbent Jesse Helms scored a massive win in 1984. The researchers and pollsters expressed surprise at the higher-than-expected percentage of the black vote.

Was anyone else paying attention to the fact that Ronald Reagan drew in an unprecedented rainbow coalition of support across the country.

He targeted communities based on their ethnic background, but the goal was not merely scooping up voters based on a surface connection with their backgroun.

Reagan reached out to all Americans, and helped US citizens participate in the prosperity that makes this country great.

Here in California, have Republicans fallen into the trap that the name of winning the game is "Diversity at all costs"?

Consider the current list of potential RPLAC Executive Board nominees for Dec. 10, 2016:

Chairman: Richard Sherman

1st Vice-Chairman: Mark Vafiades

2nd Vice-Chairman: Howard Hakes

Treasurer: Gary Aminoff

Assistant Treasurer: Jacqueline Loza

Secretary: Janice Webb 

Assistant Secretary: Andre Hollings

I have heard rumblings from the background that this slate of nominees was selected in greater measure to demonstate a growing element of ethnic diversity in the County Republican GOP.

Honestly, I have nothing against selected individuals who have diverse, enriching culture heritage.

I do have a problem with evaluating the value of leadership based exclusively on the color of a person's skin.

Martin Luther King Jr., himself told his supporters: "I have a dream one day my children will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."

Judgement, whether good or bad, based on skin color is wrong.

I also recall Chairman Mark Vafiades commenting on the widespread diversity of the Republican Party of Los Angeles County's Executive board in the past.

Representation on a executive committee should above all stand on the content of the character and ideas of the people who represent all Republicans in the region.

Once again, there is nothing wrong with reaching out to people within each district and encouraging them to run to represent their citizen-peers.

I do believe, however, if the Republican Party in LA County or elsewhere (anywhere) in the state is looking for diverity for diversity's sake, they are making a mistake.

Donald Trump is as "white" as can get, and yet he earned a record percentage of the black and Hispanic vote compared to Mitt Romney.

George W. Bush too in 44% of the Hispanic vote in 2004, but to the best of my knowledge, he did not connect with voters based on race. He connected with voters based on his skill to keep the country safe from terrorism.

Republicans in California are making a mistake if they campaign and engage in outreach based on skin color alone.

Throughout the country, men and women of differeing cultural backgrounds wanted an American President who would help Americans and make them proud to be Americans in their own country. That value, that need goes far beyond culture clashes and connections.

Some Republicans, I fear, are trying to connect with Hispanics constituents by speaking Spanish, or with Asian communities by speaking the languages of their ethnic origin.

That sounds kind of condescending.

Candidates should speak the language of family, hard work, education, basic public safety, security and freedom.

These values transcend language barriers.

A language which communicates "I care about you" makes the difference, not speaking from talking points in the native language of a voter.

Conservatives are speaking in high tones about cutting debt and spending, reducing the size and scope of the state, but are they talking about the Main Street concerns which resonate with Middle America in simple terms?

"Make America Great Again" is a basic yet winning statement.

"We are going to start winning again!" resonated with voters.

Don't give me a plan. Tell me the outcome.

We have the plans, but let's let people know that they feature YUGE-ly in future gains.

RPLAC, or the state party, orany Republican political community can .place people "of color" in places of leadership. That kind of gesture does not communicate "I care about you."

What will?

Respect.

Outreach.

A willing ear.

A clear demonstration of principle, and how that operates in the lives of all Americans--all Californians.

What are their concerns? Do we know? We need to show that we care!

We can show that we care about people when we treat them as individuals, and not just subsets of an ethnic group. How about speaking the language of their concerns?

And how about we stop assuming that just because someone has a different colored skin or speaks a different language, or talks with a different accent, that therefore we have to engage with those individuals with the same precise manners and mores?

This kind of thinking is illiberal and regressive at its core. This is identity politics, and it made our coutnry worse for eight years. Voters elected President Obama because he was black.

That's unsound and insensitive. Should any Presidential contender be judged based on his skin color? How would you feel if someone looked at you and decided what capacities you held, what capabilities you demonstrated based on your skin color, but never asked any questions about who you are, what you believe, and what you care about?

I don't know about you, but I don't like it when people  think that they can read my mind and know my heart just by looking at my skin color.

Republicans, then, should give up identity politics as the first stop toward accomplishing anything. The diversity game is a set of rules devised by the Left

They divide people into race and ethnicity as main features. It's time for Republicans to reject those stupid paradigms and reach out to others based on their value as individuals in their own right.