The 'right-wing' respondents to a poll on the most admired public figure tell us something about the state of so-called 'conservatives' in America.
First, it's probably a very safe bet that most of the respondents are White, because it's just a fact that there are few non-whites who consider themselves 'conservatives' or even Republicans -- much less 'right-wingers.' These respondents are of the variety proudly self-named 'colorblind' conservatives. In spite of the near-certainty that most of them are White, they picked 2 black men among their three most-admired.
There was a three-way tie for first place:
1) Scott Walker (63)
1) Clarence Thomas (63)
1) Thomas Sowell (63)
If you haven't noticed, two of the three are black. And I'm not the least surprised, actually, that Sowell and Thomas are the two blacks among the top three. Sowell is practically worshiped by many ''conservatives'', but Clarence Thomas would seem to be a favorite because he was so hated by the lefty ideologues as an ''Uncle Tom'' and a ''traitor to his race." Otherwise I don't know what his notable accomplishments may be; I suppose he might be a great man by contrast to the hacks and lefties on the Supreme Court.
Now, I am not an economist so I can't say that Sowell is not a genius in his field. I've read some of his pieces over the years and he seems mostly sound in what he's written. But if he were a White scholar with identical credentials and abilities, would he be nationally known, even if only among a rather small group of fans? I rather think the answer, if honest, would be ''no." But we don't live in an honest world, nor in a world in which people are ''not respecters of persons." Those of us who are Christians are told we must not be ''respecters of persons'', in other words, to discriminate favorably towards someone because of their social standing, or lack thereof. We mustn't exalt the rich man because he is rich and may do us favors, but neither should we discriminate in favor of the 'have-nots' just because they are have-nots. We judge the person by his fruits, ideally.
The Civil Rights revolution was engineered so that blacks would not be discriminated against; however, we merely put the shoe on the other foot. We now discriminate blatantly in favor of blacks -- and Hispanics, women, homosexuals, 'gender-confused' people, immigrants, and on and on. Two wrongs don't make a right -- do they? Apparently they do; by discriminating against Whites we are proving that we have sworn off our ''racism'' towards nonwhites. Conservative Whites, apparently having guiltier consciences than other Whites, seem to feel the need to overcompensate greatly by leaning over backwards to prove to one and all that there is not a racist cell in their bodies. So they spend a great deal of time searching for a black hero who says mildly conservative things, and focus their attention on him -- or her, as with Condoleezza Rice.
One thing that should be noted about these heroes fawned over the Colorblind tribe: they generally prove to have feet of clay. Remember Colin Powell, who was pursued by both parties in the 1990s as a possible presidential candidate? He went on to disillusion most conservative Whites by his obvious liberal leanings and his lack of colorblindness towards Whites. Likewise Condi Rice, and her anecdotes of 'racism' back in the bad old days in Alabama. It seems she was oppressed by White department store clerks when she was a child. And so on. She went on to be among the 97 percent of blacks who voted for her kinsman in the last couple of elections.
Then there were Herman Cain, Allen West, Ben Carson. Enough said, although some continue to doggedly admire them regardless of their shortcomings as conservatives.
What I see in all this is that a certain number of White Americans have some degree of need, a real emotional need to have a black to admire -- to overcompensate for their 'unconscious racism'? To atone for their White guilt? To self-flagellate? To feel morally superior and to look down on their politically incorrect fellow conservatives? To fit in with their liberal colleagues or friends?
You might say the number of the respondents to this poll is too small to be significant. Maybe that's true. But the fact that there are still -- in spite of the events of recent months and years -- a group of Whites who apparently identify with 'Others' more than with their own kin, and this is rather disheartening. We need to have some degree of solidarity amongst ourselves, as every other race or ethnicity seems to, but there are still some who are heavily conditioned to think otherwise.
Wanted: a cult deprogrammer.
We need to find heroes among our kinsmen, like every self-respecting folk.