The goal of racial politics is to promote the advantage of privilege over merit. Privilege in modern politics is bestowed by favor of preference. That which is preferred, is promoted. Preferential treatment according to the Liberal Progressive social model is granted by favor of political affiliation. Politics being the primary vehicle for social evolution, its not enough to be black (or even female for that matter). To be preferred, one must be a 'correct' black - a Liberal black. Since political beliefs are easier to achieve than actual merit, those that advance in privilege by preference need only say the correct things and be seen to do what is expected. Meanwhile, most persons of true merit have no need of such a model, since it affords them few rewards, and often punishes true achievement. Clarence Thomas and Condoleeza Rice are particularly good examples. By merit alone, both have achieved the pinnacles of their particular professions. They are experts... who just happen to be black. Yet, they are despised for their beliefs and especially for their political affiliations. Barack Obama on the other hand, a Man of little merit, heralded nevertheless for his political charisma, is being propelled by nature of his rhetoric alone to the Nation's highest public office.
The problem with racial politics is that the United States Constitution establishes the principle of merit over privilege. Racial politics is therefore, fundamentally at odds with founding American principles. The Constitution secures the blessings of liberty by promoting an environment of opportunity where individuals are free to achieve (or fail) by choice. Racial Politics, on the other hand, like much of Liberal Progressivism, seeks to replace the rewards of achievement, with the endowed privilege of a new nobility... an Aristocracy of Pull.
The ruler of that Aristicracy is granted to the noble who achieves the most powerful pull or influence. Once installed, the ruler commands all pull and influence, dispensing it by leave of preference, favor, and whim with the primary goal being the maintenance of power... and pull. Currently, two factions of the Democrat Party battle with their pull, for the ultimate power. Hillary Rodham Clinton was, by noble heredity, to be the presumptious Queen of Pull. Barack Hussein Obama, on the other hand, demonstated his own desire to be seated as the King of Pull... and his own pool of formidable pull it seems, to install him there. Both are fighting feircely, by means of their particular factions, just for their Party's nomination, and all of its unified Pull for the fiercer battle that is to follow. Eventually, one of them will need to unleash the Pull againt John McCain to win American's elective favor as their new executive, and leader... their President.
The battle for the Democrat Presidential nomination has gone on far longer than was expected. Because of that, the conflict has become more aggressive then desired with each faction deploying increasingly negative tactics against the other to gain favor in the form of electoral delegates. In a recent post at the Belmont Club, Wretchard looks at these Weapons Turned Inward,
... consider how hijackers and hostages takers get the authorities' attentions by demonstrating their seriousness.
The principle followed by kidnappers in Baghdad who sent five severed fingersbelonging to "four Americans and an Austrian taken hostage more than a year ago in Iraq" was that if you want to be taken seriously you have to demonstrate how far you are willing to go in order to get what you want. And although neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton have sent anyone actual severed fingers yet, both have amply shown their astonished supporters that they are willing to ignite race war, tear the Party apart or engage in political cannibalism to serve their own individual ambitions. What's really awesome about Hillary and Barack is not their resumes but the lengths to which they are willing to go.
His observation aptly describes the ugly nature of today's battle among the American Aristocracy of Liberal Progressivism for the control of their collective Pull. But, Wretchard stops short (for now) of looking at what happens later, when all of those threats and weapons are turn outward...
...at John McCain? At Republicans? And at the America people?
For as Wretchard so eloquently puts it, " The problem with the axiom "by any means necessary" is that it means "by any means necessary". " And the power of that ultimate Pull, is a insanely seductive end.