“A great achievement of modern liberalism”
Shelby Steele writes in the Wall St Journal:
///A great achievement of modern liberalism–and a primary reason for its surviving decades past the credibility of its ideas–is that it captured black resentment as an exclusive source of power. It even gave this resentment a Democratic Party affiliation. (Antiwar sentiment is the other great source of liberal power, but it is not the steady provider that black and minority resentment has been.) Republicans have often envied this power, but have never competed well for it because it can be accessed only by pandering to the socialistic longings of minority leaders–vast government spending, social programs, higher taxes and so on. Republicans and conservatives have simply never had an easy or glib mechanism for addressing profound social grievances.
But this Republican “weakness” has now begun to emerge as a great–if still largely potential–Republican advantage. Precisely because Republicans cannot easily pander to black grievance, they have no need to value blacks only for their sense of grievance. Unlike Democrats, they can celebrate what is positive and constructive in minority life without losing power. The dilemma for Democrats, liberals and the civil rights establishment is that they become redundant and lose power the instant blacks move beyond grievance and begin to succeed by dint of their own hard work. So they persecute such blacks, attack their credibility as blacks, just as they pander to blacks who define their political relationship to America through grievance. Republicans are generally freer of the political bigotry by which the left either panders to or persecutes black Americans.
Hillary Clinton’s “the House is a plantation” remark provoked Mr. Steele more than a wee bit. Agree or disagree, but this essay is a fine piece of persuasive writing chock full of analysis.
Here’s another example:
But, in fact, it came from a corruption in post-’60s liberalism and Democratic politics that profoundly insults blacks. Mrs. Clinton came to Al Sharpton’s MLK celebration looking for an easy harvest of black votes. And she knew the drill–white liberals and Dems whistle for the black vote by pandering to the black sense of grievance. Once positioned as the white champions of this grievance, they actually turn black resentment into white liberal power. Today, Democrats cannot be competitive without this alchemy. So Mrs. Clinton’s real insult to blacks–one far uglier than her plantation metaphor–is to value them only for their sense of grievance.
Condi Rice, Steele argues, is a new archetype:
The archetype that Ms. Rice represents is “overcoming” rather than grievance.
Dr. Rice is a threat because:
The more ugly her persecution by the civil rights establishment and the left, the more she would give liberalism the look of communism in its last days–an ideology long since hollowed of its idealism and left with nothing save its meanness and repressiveness.
Ouch. But Steele isn;t quite finished. He adds another touche’:
Idealisms quickly descend into evil because they are so easily seized as a means to ordinary power. The politics of black uplift was once an idealism, but today it has become the work of hacks, tired apparatchiks and petty demagogues looking for power…
Read the whole, stirring essay.

Good break down of the Shelby Steele piece. I put up a few graphs from the article on my blog this morning.
Comment by Ed Sherrill — 1/23/2006 @ 11:25 am
In the bad old days, the Democrats had the Klan to persecute black Republicans. Nowadays the y just use other blacks.
Comment by Roderick Reilly — 1/23/2006 @ 3:40 pm
Cold Steele A couple of folks have passed along this WSJ article from Hoover Institute Scholar Shelby Steele, which hits on quite a few of the topics I discuss here. From "Hillary's Plantation":Of course Hillary Clinton's recent claim that Repu…
Trackback by protein wisdom — 1/23/2006 @ 6:04 pm
“Idealisms quickly descend into evil because they are so easily seized as a means to ordinary power” This describes DeLay/Bush Republicanism pretty acurately, I’ld say. What happened to small goverment?
Comment by Mark Zimmerman — 1/24/2006 @ 12:11 pm