Senator Harry Reid of Nevada made the utterly absurd claim that not voting for the Health Care Bill is tantamount to the acts of racism that were constitutive of American Slavery. The very suggestion is so outlandish that this remark by Reid ought to have been treated either as an absurd joke or an indication that Reid is mentally deranged. This would be analogous to the equally ludicrous claim that anyone who is opposed to affirmative action is likewise engaged in the racism that is constitutive of American Slavery.
Here is one straightforward and ever so simple reason why Senator’s Reid’s remarks are simply ludicrous. If the Health Care Bill is not passed, there are lots and lots and lots people other than blacks people who will be affected by this. American Slavery, by contrast, was ideologically tied to the enslavement of blacks. It did not occur to well-off whites that perhaps it might be in their interest to enslave poor whites as well. And the poorest of whites typically took themselves to be better than any black.
So from the standpoint of comparative analysis, the Health Care Bill and American Slavery are about as analogous as riding a bicycle and travelling a transatlantic jet are. These two modes of transportation are so different that it is not even clear how anyone could think that engaging in one is anywhere near tantamount to engaging in the other.
A second difference is that whereas there is a very straightforward sense in which American Slavery was wrong and the very intent of slavery was to subjugate human beings, like claims cannot be made regarding those who oppose the kind of universal health care envisaged by the proposed Health Care Bill. For instance, it can be rightly said that American Slavery exploited individuals. And, alas, it turns out that one reason why one might oppose the Health Care Bill is that it, too, might exploit individuals.
After all, one very significant problem with the Health Care Bill is that it is rather costly; and while it is very convenient to talk about the government footing the Bill, we seem to conveniently forget that there is no economically independent and viable thing called the government. Government programs are funded through taxpayers. Accordingly, we can rightly ask to what extent should taxpayers be burdened on behalf of supporting the needs of others.
Notice the lack of parallel here. It is unequivocally true that no human being should be enslaved. It is anything but obvious to what extent taxpayers should be burdened on behalf of supporting the needs of others. And decent people can disagree without at all being indifferent to the concerns of others. Indeed, decent wealthy people can disagree with one another and decent poor people can disagree with one another. And so on.
Regarding the Health Care Bill in particular, it is also the case that tremendously self-respecting blacks can disagree with another. This simple truth makes Reid’s claim, which is woefully disrespectful of reasonable disagreement, extremely disrespectful of blacks in particular.
Lest there be any misunderstanding, I am not of the opinion that only blacks can speak to matters pertaining to slavery. That is a silly view. Equally silly, though, is the view that voting against a bill is racist in the way that American Slavery was racist when it is manifestly clear that a fully self-respecting black could—as a matter of self-respect even—vote against the bill.
When we have missed the way in which a policy is morally objectionable because it is sexist or racist (against some group or the other), it is extremely important this is pointed out; and it is rather irrelevant who points out.
Just so, it is truly malicious and, therefore, most inappropriate to draw a comparison to an evil practice when in point of fact there is none. Consider, for instance, someone claiming that if a man gives a woman a grade of “F” in his class on feminism that is tantamount to raping her. Even if he wrongly gives the woman the grade of “F” that is still a very, very long ways from raping her. I have made this point because even if there are indeed compelling reasons for voting in favor of the Health Care Bill, these compelling reasons need not have anything to do with avoiding the racism; and they certainly need not having to do with racism that is on the level that was constitutive of the racism of American Slavery.
As I have intimated, I do not that there is any racism at all in being opposed to the Health Care Bill. But even if I conceded for the sake of argument that there is, the racism at play would not come anywhere close to being akin to the racism of American Slavery. And it most disturbing that Reid proved himself to be too intellectually bereft to grasp this very, very, very simple truth.
There is what I call the issue of rhetorical plausibility. And one of the things that I find most disturbing these days is that the bounds of rhetorical plausibility seem to have fallen by the wayside. Consequently, more harm than good is done. We make the charge of wrongdoing meaningfulness if we make every wrongdoing akin to rape or the Holocaust or American Slavery. If all that a member of the KKK or a neo-Nazi group does is steal my $1 pencil, we certainly have a wrong. But what we do not have a wrong that is comparable to a lynching or to American Slavery or to the Holocaust.
Quite simply, Senator Harry Reid trivialized American Slavery. And what is truly troubling is the simple truth far too many blacks in America are too besotted with the idea of using the charge of racism for self-advancement to see this most despicable reality.
