• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

Amadou Diallo, the West African immigrant who was shot by four New
York City police officers last year, is dead — and that is a tragedy.
But there is a worse tragedy stemming from this incident that is just as
ugly and potentially far more destructive: the politics of race-baiting,
divisiveness and intolerance.

Specifically the Rev. Al Sharpton, noted NYC race activist and
division specialist has, with the help of his political and media
allies, begun cranking up his overworked propaganda machine, wrongly
decrying the Diallo trial verdict earlier this week as patently racist
against all blacks and inherently evil.

The problem with that assessment is the same as it always is; it’s
inaccurate, devoid of the facts, and itself hateful and divisive.

But guys like Sharpton like it that way. That’s how they thrive –
not on unity and justice but on keeping the primary races in America so
full of hate that reconciliation is impossible.

Leading angry protesters in a “march” at the United Nations earlier
this week to bring national attention to the “injustice” done to Diallo,
Sharpton and white apologists who joined him demonstrated in a telling
manner why this trial — regardless of the decision — was doomed from
the outset.

Sharpton, who is ticked because he couldn’t add four more white
scalps to his shrunken head collection, has maintained from the
beginning that whites inherently hate all blacks and that’s why Diallo
was shot — and why reconciling the races is a goal that is too
idealistic even for the most utopian of liberals. Had the jury –
composed of both whites and blacks — found the four officers guilty,
Sharpton would have used the decision as an opportunity to deliver more
hate: “See — even a court believes that all whites hate all blacks.”

There was no winning this one, ladies and gentlemen. Had the jury
found the officers guilty, then many ultra-conservatives would have
blamed jurors for “pandering” to vocal black activists like Sharpton and
sacrificing the four cops on the altar of political correctness.

Such is the real implication of the Diallo decision — that
this country has allowed itself to be so divided by tiny minorities of
hatemongers on both sides of the political spectrum that
collectively we are unable to think clearly, and for ourselves, any
longer. That’s dangerous and will eventually lead to more trouble down
the road.

Whether blacks suffer because they buy into the liberal notion that
they are not capable of being responsible for themselves or because some
whites absolutely refuse to give them credit for anything they have
accomplished is of little consequence. The truth — that blacks are just
Americans like everybody else and that most whites don’t expect any more
or any less from them or any other minority group than they expect of
themselves — is consistently lost because such truths don’t serve the
grand masters of propaganda with their own selfish little agendas.

People like Sharpton on the black left and David Duke on the white
right are incapable of realizing that hate speech, hate thought, and
hate propaganda serves only to destroy what they say they are trying to
build or preserve. Hate, in any form, is destructive; using cases like
Diallo — where justice was served purely on the basis of the available
evidence — can serve to highlight what may be wrong with the “system”
as long as it doesn’t overshadow the truth.

For example one of Sharpton’s main arguments is that because of
“white” racial profiling, all blacks are considered guilty until proven
innocent. That may have been the prevailing mindset that caused the four
NYC cops to mistake Diallo’s wallet for a gun, but if that were the case
then it was a conclusion born out of experience. Sharpton decries the
Diallo shooting as a patent example of white racism, but he refused to
acknowledge the fact that a disproportionate number of young black males
have been in prison, are in prison, or are doing things that will
eventually land them in prison.

If this situation were reversed, with whites in the minority and
causing the most criminal activity per capita, one would assume that the
black majority would also have preconceived notions about the guilt or
innocence of young white males.

Sharpton, however, would rather criticize a law enforcement decision
based on reality — even if that reality is ugly — than try to find out
why so many young black males are falling prey to criminal
activities in the first place. That kind of approach intentionally
sidesteps the truth because the truth — that liberal programs absolve
minorities of responsibility, work ethic and individualism, leaving them
prey to rampant crime, rising illegitimacy and chronic poverty — is
anathema to the agenda.

If guys like Sharpton were really interested in becoming responsible
leaders and icons for their respective minorities, they’d leave the
propaganda at home, use their experience in their own communities to
showcase problems (and provide solutions other than more government
handouts) and work to help everyone restore their self-respect.

Instead, they selfishly work to promote themselves as guarantors of
the “people’s rights” by blaming everyone else for their own troubles.

Blacks who have seen through the façade of Sharpton have left him to
his own devices, moved on to better themselves in a country where civil
and human rights are paramount (except for the unborn), and attempted to
offer those who wish to follow sage advice on how to accomplish that
goal. Meanwhile, the race baiters like Sharpton continue to claim that
nothing has changed in America, despite reams of civil rights laws and
hundreds of living examples to the contrary.

The poor, dejected and socially challenged will listen to anyone who
plays to them. What they ought to do is listen to somebody who offers
them unity, real hope, and a plan to leave their cycle of misfortune
behind. This Diallo case could have been used in this way, but again
the Sharpton’s and the Jackson’s and the Kweisi Mfume’s would rather
bask in the 1950s instead of joining the rest of the country in the year
2000.

Amadou Diallo is dead and that is a tragedy. But it is a worse
tragedy to not realize why he is dead and who is most
responsible for the attitude that may have killed him.

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.