When Barack Obama ran for the presidency five years ago, pundits on both the left and right reassured the country that the election of America’s “first black president” promised to issue forth a new era of interracial harmony.
Some of us, however, knew all too well that this was the kind of stuff that only fools and liars could peddle. In fact, we predicted that, far from inaugurating a “Post-Racial” America, cries of “racism” were sure to increase if Obama seized the White House. Unfortunately, in retrospect, we appear to have been prescient.
We knew, first of all, that there is indeed such a thing as the Racism-Industrial-Complex (RIC) that is every bit as massive as any other industry. Ideologically, professionally, and even emotionally, RIC agents are deeply invested in sustaining their narrative of endemic “white racism” and perpetual “black suffering.” The election of a black man to the most visible and potent office on the planet threatens that narrative.
Thus, the cries of “racism” would have to become both more frequent and more extravagant if RIC was to continue to flourish.
Secondly, we also knew that, given his background, racial unity would be the last thing on Obama’s mind. Quite the contrary: Obama’s lifelong preoccupation with achieving racial “authenticity” and his passion for “community organizing” foretold a presidency that would be accompanied by endless crises—including and especially racial crises.
The acquittal of George Zimmerman in the shooting death of black 17-year-old Trayvon Martin is the latest such crisis that Obama is exploiting for all that it is worth.
Far from using his influence to effect some measure of calm, last Friday, following a week of mayhem in which roving mobs of blacks disrupted cities, destroyed property, and randomly subjected innocent whites and others to violence, the President decided to exacerbate this situation.
It is crucial, Obama maintained, that we—i.e. white folks—understand why blacks share “a sense that if a white male teen was involved in the same kind of scenario” as was Trayvon Martin on the night that he was shot dead by George Zimmerman, “from top to bottom, both the outcome and the aftermath might have been different.”
Blacks suffer “pain” over the Zimmerman verdict because they are “looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a history that doesn’t go away.” But this past is very much alive in the present, according to Obama, for to this day, black men continue to fall prey to the sinister machinations of wicked white racial profilers. Moreover, even Obama himself isn’t safe from this virulent white “racism.”
Most black men, including Obama, have “had the experience of being followed while shopping in a department store.” Most black men, including Obama, share “the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the doors of cars.” Most black men, including Obama, have “had the experience of getting on an elevator” and seeing “a woman clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off.”
Ironically, immediately upon lamenting the ugliness of this racial profiling, Obama unwittingly acknowledges its reasonableness, for he assures us that blacks have no delusions concerning “the disproportionately” high rates of black criminality and the fact that “they’re disproportionately both perpetrators and victims of violence.” Yet even this, he is quick to observe, “is born out of a very violent past in this country[.]”
In other words, while blacks do indeed act more violently than others, this too is because of the oppressive “racist” treatment to which whites have traditionally subjected them.
To the intimidation and wanton cruelty in which the anti-Zimmerman forces have engaged in the aftermath of Zimmerman’s acquittal, Obama spoke not a word except to caution them against “dishonoring” the memory of Trayvon Martin.
So, why did Obama insert himself in this case in the first place? Why has he chosen to fan the flames of an already combustible situation and all but justify even the violence that has been done to innocent person and property?
Answer: Obama is first and always a “community organizer”—a community agitator.
As the Godfather of community agitating, Saul Alinksy, wrote, the agitator should always seek to “cause confusion, fear,” “to agitate to the point of conflict,” and “stir up dissatisfaction and discontent.” The agitator “begins his ‘trouble making’ by stirring up these angers, frustrations, and resentments, and highlighting specific issues or grievances that heighten controversy.” He also “dramatizes the injustices[.]”
The agitator has but one objective: the construction of a “mass power base of what he calls the army.”
Obama most definitely does not want interracial harmony in America. He never did. He wants—he needs—mutual antagonism between the races. It is in his interest, as well as that of his party, for the members of his black base to be ruled by an “us versus them” mentality when it comes to race relations.
This is why Obama has fueled the persecution of George Zimmerman and the Brown Shirt tactics of the black mobs that have taken to the streets courtesy of the inspiration of the Jesse Jacksons, Al Sharptons, Eric Holders, and, yes, Obamas of the world.
And this is why, politically, the acquittal of Zimmerman was a win for Obama.
Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.