Infrastructure Is Reparations

There are two components to the “infrastructure” plan being debated in Congress – a plan to do construction and a plan to distribute money to people. There is bipartisan support for the “hard” infrastructure bill to repair roads and bridges, expand internet access, and do other types of physical work. The “soft” distribution portion is actually a down payment on reparations for slavery. President Biden is committed to paying reparations because his election was totally dependent on the support of the black community, epitomized by his primary victory in South Carolina, which was engineered by black congressman Jim Clyburn, and which made him the Democratic nominee after losing badly in earlier primaries.

Although President Biden has traditionally been a moderate Democrat, his obligations to both the black electorate and the progressive wing of the Democratic party are pushing him strongly to the left. The gigantic portion of his infrastructure plan that is not for physical construction is a sop to the progressives and the blacks. Its goal is a transfer of wealth from the rich to the poor, especially to people of color. It addresses inequality and calls for reparations, although the funding is not explicitly called “reparations.”  Biden is paying his debts to those who elected him.

Since it is not called reparations, it will not end the calls for reparations, but it will temporarily appease blacks, who will benefit disproportionately from the soft money for childcare, paid leave, unemployment insurance, and other social safety net provisions.

First, the soft provisions bill must pass. If it does, we will see how much time it buys Biden to deal with the pressure from the people of color on the left. No matter how many trillion dollars it is, it will not be enough.

Lee on Slavery

 

The following is from a Christmas 1856 letter that Robert E. Lee wrote to his wife.  At the time he had never owned more than half a dozen slaves, and they had probably been inherited or given to him by his father-in-law, Mr. Custis. 

“In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge that slavery as an institution is a moral & political evil in any Country.  It is useless to expatiate on its disadvantages.  I think it however a greater evil to the white than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly enlisted in hehalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strong for the former.  The blacks are immeasurable better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically.  The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things.  How long their subjection may be necessary is known & ordered by a wise Merciful Providence.  Their emancipation will sooner result from the mild & melting influence of Christianity, than the storms & tempests of fiery Controversy.  This influence though slow, is sure.  The doctrines & miracles of our Saviour have required nearly two thousand years, to Convert but a small part of the human race, & even amont Christian nations, what gross errors still exist! While we see the Course of the final abolition of human Slavery is onward & we give it the aid of our prayers & all justifiable means in our power, we must leave the progress as well as the result in his hands who sees the end; who Chooses to work by slow influences & with whom two thousand years are but a Single day.  Although the Abolitionist must know this, & must See that he has neither the right or power of operating except by moral means & suasion, & if he means well to the slave, he must not Create angry feelings in the Master; that although he may not approve the mode by which it pleases Providence to accomplish its purpose, the result will nevertheless be the same; that the reasons he gives for interference in what he has no Concern, holds good for every kind of interference with our neighbors when we disapprove their Conduct; Still I fear he will persevere in his evil Course.  Is it not strange that the descendants of those pilgrim fathers who Crossed the Atlantic to preserve their own freedom of opinion, have always proved themselves intolerant of the Spiritual liberty of others?”   

From Lee by Douglas Southall Freeman

Rise of Muslims after 9/11

 

Watching the analysis of the 20^th anniversary of 9/11, I was stuck by how many of the talking heads were Muslims.  It looked like 9/11 and Osama bin Laden were the best things that ever happened to American Muslims.  Twenty years ago, you seldom saw women wearing head scarfs; now you see them everywhere. 

It was a rough few years for Muslims immediately after 9/11 as suspicious minds tended to believe that all Muslims were terrorists.  But then the reaction set in.  American media and academia defended and supported Muslims as good, ordinary people.  As a result Muslims and Islamic ideas have become much more important to American politics and thinking.  America has become more Islamic and less Christian. 

Islamists not only won the war in Afghanistan, they won the war for minds in America.  Osama bin Laden did not “win,” but he should be proud of what he accomplished in terms of promoting Islam. 

In 2001, there were no Muslims in the American Congress; today there are three.  More and more Muslims are running for office and assuming more important positions around the country.  The Los Angeles Times reports that Muslims are becoming more politically active, particularly in Michigan which has a large Muslim community.  The PBS NewsHour, under Muslim Amna Nawaz’s leadership, has been particularly active in lobbying for and promoting Muslims and Islam in the US.   

Another View of Lee

The Abbeville Institute published a letter by L. Q. C. Lamar written on December 5, 1870, to commemorate Robert E. Lee’s death, which offers view of Lee very different from what we hear today.  Lamar wrote:

The day of his death will be the anniversary of the South’s great sorrow. But it was not his darkest day. I was at Appomattox when the flag which had been borne in triumph upon his many battlefields was torn from his loving and reluctant grasp. After the terms of capitulation had been arranged, chance brought him to the spot where my tent was pitched.

 

I had seen him often before. On one occasion, especially, I remember how he appeared in a consultation of leading men, where, amid the greatest perturbations, his mind seemed to repose in majestic poise and serenity. Again, I saw him immediately after one of his grand battles, while the light of victory shone upon his brow.

 

But never shall I forget how completely his wonted composure was overthrown in this last sad interview. Every lineament of his grand face writhed, and the big tears fell from his eyes as he spoke of the anguish of the scene he had just witnessed. And yet his whole presence breathed the hero still. A consciousness of a great calamity to be greatly endured gave to his face the grandeur of victory as well as the mournfulness of death; and when he exclaimed, “It is worse than death!” I could easily see how he would have welcomed the grave for himself and all that he loved, could it have only averted his country’s awful woe. Ah, my countrymen! well may you weep over his grave, for there lies one whose heart broke in the very tension of its love for you and your country….

 

To Lee self-assertion was a thing unknown. His growth into universal favor and honor was the result of a slowly dawning consciousness in the popular mind of his retiring merit and transcendent excellence, of that affinity which silently draws together great men and great places when a nation is convulsed.