Neo-Reconstruction

While thinking long and hard a name popped in my head: Hiram Revels. He was the first African American man elected to the U.S. Senate during the Post Civil War Reconstruction. It was a time when white people were a minority in the nation.

Check for yourself, African Americans, Hispanics and American Indians comprised a larger population, so voters typically had to be landholding white males, which was a way to keep minority power until European immigration bolstered their numbers.

Because the Civil War had defeated the Southern Terrorists, African Americans were by law able to participate in the government of their nation and Revels took full advantage of the opportunity.

Here's a Wiki synopsis: "The election of Revels was met with opposition from Southern conservative Democrats who cited the Dred Scott Decision which was considered by many to have been a central cause of the American Civil War. They argued that no black man was a citizen before the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868. Because election to the Senate required nine years' prior citizenship, opponents of Revels claimed he could not be seated, having been a citizen by law for only two years."

So, here's how I understand their argument; the Civil War -- which modern day racists say was not about slavery but states' rights -- gave people like Revels full-citizenship only after the South lost and despite being born here and having families that had been here for generations, they were foreigners in the only nation they ever knew.

Sounds about as fair as Arizona's "Mummy Governor" Jan Brewer deciding that Ethnic Studies is "racial chauvinism" that must be banned because it portrays white people in a poor light.

Hmmm.

We MUST be re-doing Reconstruction because never in all my years have I seen so many white people overtly trying to tear down African American and other communities of color.

This Neo-Reconstruction is everywhere: TV and the movies have become lillywhite. Heck, one program, Saturday Night Live, would rather portray the President in blackface than hire a black actor.

Politicians such as Brewer, Barbour, Pawlenty and on and on are emboldened by fringe elements to act in as racist a manner as possible. And, what I despise about them is they don't even have the strength of their convictions to say, "Hell, yeah! I'm racist." It's a nod and a wink and coded language. Say what you will about the Honorable Min. Louis Farrakahn, but he speaks his mind without the hypocrisy.

Jan Brewer is a snake, just like Beck, Palin, Bachmann, Barbour and much of the Teabag/GOP. They are dumbfounded that people of color don't vote for them, but don't see that their policies are racist.

Why in hell would I vote for someone like Gov. Perry who suggested Texas might secede after the nation elected Pres. Obama? How in the hell is that NOT racist? Why would an Hispanic vote for Brewer who sees a comprehensive study of the history of Mexican/U.S. relations as picking on white people?

Hey lady, Mexico didn't lose the Southwest in a card game. Native Americans didn't give up the deed to the land so they could space travel. They were cheated and killed and terrorized.

Just like Haley Barbour who thinks mentioning slavery when talking about the confederacy is silly, she is communicating with racists who hate that we have a black president and a diverse nation.

These Neo Reconstructionists walk a thin line because they want to agitate white people not in the fringe movement to see fault with darker citizens. It's Cecile B. DeMille (bastard) all over again. They are trying to redefine white and exclude, exclude, exclude.

But, because the nation HAS changed their message is starting to be seen for what it is. Pres. Obama didn't win a majority of white voters, but he still won by 10 million votes. The nation's demographics are making this ugly pasttime of theirs an obvious exercise in hypocritical, power-grabbing, race-baiting evil.

Follow at your own peril.