Black Republicans

Dear H,

In America, a black intellectual only joins the human race by joining the right wing*.  I had almost said when he votes Republican.  Nearly all the other black "thinkers," their writers and other disseminators of ideas, excluding maybe Oprah Winfrey and Barack Obama, are too caught up in the black question to join the rest of us.  Thus the majority of their works, if not all of them, are focused on black people and the police, or black people in history, or black people in business, or black people in politics.  There's no Thomas Sowell, who's known primarily for his works on economics, or Voddie Baucham, known primarily for his lectures on Jesus and Homeschooling, or Ben Carson, known primarily for his work on brain surgery.  Instead we get a slew of one-trick-ponies and racial narcissists, the likes of Ta-Nehisi Coates, Brittney Cooper, Shaun King, Al Sharpton, James Baldwin, Jesse Jackson, and Michael Eric Dyson.  The only way a black man gets ahead in the Democratic Party is by cutting himself off from the rest of humanity; by whittling himself down to something so small, so specific, so niche, that it can only appeal to black men such as himself, or to white people looking to glorify themselves for loving black people.  A huge market, really, but the biggest one only to spiritual and intellectual midgets.

But a black Republican is bigger than this.  He has ideas that are good for whites and Chinese and blacks alike, and when he talks about being a free man he inspires white men to free themselves alongside him.  His cause is our cause, and our cause is his.  He sees our rise as his rise, and views himself so favorably, and so equal with the strongest of us, that he believes less laws, less protections, less encumbrances for everyone in general, will make him more vibrant and successful, not less**.  He considers the last four hundred years of history not just as a tragedy, but as a gymnasium.  They've made him stronger, harder, smarter than many of the rest of us; and the chip on his shoulder isn't for the whites who no longer oppress him, but for the blacks who are jealous he's risen above them.  He knows who's trying to drag him down, and he responds accordingly -- by cutting their government cheese funds, and mocking their bastard children, their saggy pants, and their work ethic.

Because of this he's viewed as a race-traitor.  But is he?  His sheer self-respect commands respect from the other races.  He does what affirmative action programs intended, and the opposite of what they've actually done: to make people consider the black issue as something more than an issue: to flesh it out, with all the dignity of bearing, and real thought, and know-how, and elbow-grease; to take part in America not as a pity-case, but as a free citizen, on par with Jimmy Stewart, or Ronald Reagan.  A black Republican is someone who heard his life was terrible and that he was a door-mat, to which he replied it isn't and he isn't, which led a lot of leftists to hate him.  His grandfather escaped the racists only to have him persecuted by the anti-racists.  The inferior blacks want him to keep saying they're oppressed.  The white leftists need inferiors so they can feel like they're heroic.  Thus his only natural allies are men who need him to prove himself.  He finds these in the Republican Party: men who like him if he's solid, laugh at him if he's an idiot, and hate him if he's a jackass.

On top of all this a black Republican is gracious.  You have to be to live in America, where leftists waterboard you with films, lectures, and books about racism until you cry uncle, making you feel raped if you're a black person, and like Hitler if you're white.  The black Republican knows this and moves along anyway, taking one white man at a time, judging him, good or bad, based on how the white man treats him, and how he carries himself, and what he's good for.  The Democrats deified Martin Luther King Jr. and excommunicated the black man who took "I have a dream" seriously.  He hates whining, and gun-grabbing, and race-baiting --  he knows that some men are damned and others are saved, and that handicapping the best of us is no way to better the worst of us.  He feels comfortable in a good white middle-class neighborhood, but not in a white lower-class trailer park.  He loathes the ghetto, and does everything he can to keep his children far away from it.  In short he's not just a good black man, but an exceptional man in general.  I wish there were more of him.  And I'm glad to hear that every day, there are.

Your father,

*What makes me right wing?  In short, the idea that quality should have precedence over quantity.  I want the best of us to have more life, more riches, more liberty, more rights than the worst of us.  I want the poor in spirit, poor in talent, poor in intellect, poor in beauty to be out of the way -- and in their worst forms, combined into monstrosity, to be entirely gotten rid of.  I love mankind not for itself, but for how beautifully it expresses itself -- to me.

On this note, Millenials these days are fond of saying we need a new plague and other such nonsense; and I have never been a fan of Hitler.  But I suggest that Hitler was a better man than these people.  He lumped too many of the wrong people with the inferiors, but at least he believed in superiors.  The Millenial says he wants a new plague.  Hitler said he'd be the plague; and instead of wiping out half the planet willy-nilly, the best alongside the worst, he put his mind to it, and decided he'd get rid of the so-called worst.  He's one of the most evil men who ever lived -- and still, at life, more rational, more healthy, more robust than the average environmentalist. Considering they both want a mass death, Hitler's big crime here, in comparison, is only putting thought into it.

**I consider myself a capitalist, but within boundaries.  There are two kinds of people in favor of lawless, Godless, dog-eat-dog anarcho-capitalism, and the first are genuinely superior people, who are being held down by the government.  The second are people who haven't realized they're inferior, and that a whole host of laws protects them from their superiors.  I believe there are far more of the second than the first.

It's perfectly just, of course, to protect weaker people from the stronger people.  This is the meaning of law in the first place.  But leftism goes beyond this -- and instead of protecting the weakest from looting, combines all the weakest to loot their superiors.  It's no wonder that regulated capitalism, the defense of the strongest within reason, has gained us greater advances than socialism, which defends the weakest at the expense of the advancers.

Like these essays?  Email me at and start your subscription today.

Support the Letters by sending a gift to or