Is it just coincidence that Herman Cain is now facing the same charges of sexual impropriety as Clarence Thomas? Of all the charges to level, why have both of the most prominent black conservatives of the past 20 years been targeted by sexual allegation? Why don’t white conservatives get similarly accused? Why does the Left seem to find such charges against black conservatives so credible? Why do charges of sexual impropriety against conservative black men”stick” so readily in the minds of the Left?
I think that the Left has fallen into a psychological rut worn deep in our collective cultural conscience by a century of scientific racism. I think they are all primed to see black men as sexually impulsive. That is why they instantly think such charges as credible.
Classical racism (pre-WWII) held that non-white races were less evolved away from animals than whites and therefore had more animalistic natures. Under the non-Darwinian concept of evolution ascendent at the time, the “scientific consensus” held that natural forces were pushing all living things along a predetermined development towards some “higher” or “perfected” state. In humans, that meant our brains grew larger, increasing intellect and emotional control but at the same time weakening the body.
Non-whites were believed to be less evolved and therefore mentally and emotionally inferior but with the relative strength and stamina of animals. In a time when most men still performed manual labor for a living, the era’s progressives argued that the “lesser” races had an unfair advantage in the free-market when it came to competing for manual labor jobs so the government had to step in. Most Jim Crow laws, unions and immigration restrictions on Asian were supported by the era’s progressives with the argument that “greedy” business owners would hire non-whites because they could do the job better without paying attention to the “socially responsible” need to maintain white supremacy.
One side effect of seeing non-whites, particularly black people, as more animalistic, was that they were also seen as being more sexually virile. However, they were also viewed as being more animal like in having far less sexual self-control and more likely to give into impulses. In a time when people had direct exposure to the highly aggressive and dangerous sexual behavior of bulls, stallions and boars, it was easy to see the supposedly more animalistic black males as poising a similar danger. That is where the idea that black men looking at white women poised a danger comes from this concept. It got a lot of innocent men and boys killed.
Many African-American thinkers today maintain that the fading echoes of this old concept still resonates within our cultural subconscious and that we are all, regardless of race, primed to see African-American males as overly sensual and sexually impulsive. While being stereotyped as virile is boon to the teenager and college aged, being seen as impulsive in any way is detrimental to rising to positions of trust and authority. Many black men still feel they are viewed as impulsive and thoughtless.
Given this history, shouldn’t we be asking just what is driving accusation of sexual harassment against first Clarence Thomas and now Herman Cain? Why these particular allegations against the only two African-American male conservatives to seek high Federal office?
The acts that Anita Hills alleged, even if taken at face value, were trivial acts. Did Thomas’ race and sex amplify the significance of those acts in Hill’s mind? Moreover, were they amplified in the minds of the Leftists who sought to bring Thomas down? Did Cain’s secret accusers likewise assume that a black man, even an older, educated black man, must be sexually impulsive and magnify innocuous comments into something sexual and aggressive?
Does our collective legacy of racism drive us all to we assume that the faintest hint of sexual suggestion on the part of a black man must represent the tip of an iceberg of animalistic sexuality? Do women, even black women, feel more threatened by the comments of black men than those made by other men?
Most worrisome, do these charges gain instant traction on the Left because of cynical political calculation or because of the Lefts’ latent racism? When faced by an African-American male who refuses to defer to them, do they revert to cultural subconscious racism and assume that the offending black man must be sexually dangerous?
I think it quite possible.
One of the defining aspects of Leftism is a complete lack of individual moral introspection. Leftists have an unshakable faith in their own moral rectitude. They are the elect and the rest of us are the damned. Leftists never stop to wonder if subtle, inherited racism influences their thoughts and actions.Believing themselves immune to such failings, they never defend against them and always fall prey.
Racism is a moral failing Leftist definitely believe themselves immune to. They won’t admit that in their hearts, they see African-Americans as lessor people, ever trapped in an infantile state and always requiring the benevolent protection of the noble white Leftists.
They won’t admit that Cain and other black conservatives provoke such a strong emotional reaction precisely because they refuse to act like dependent, subservient infants. The won’t admit to themselves that they are so quick to believe accusation of sexual misconduct against black conservatives because when blacks challenge Leftists the Leftists have no psychological barriers to reverting back to culturally inherited stereotypes about the supposed dangerous sexuality of black men.
The Left thinks they’ve advanced so far but they haven’t. When tested they fail. All it takes is the least suggestion and they revert to the ugly past.