TribLIVE

| Opinion/The Review

 
Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

What happened to the dream?

Email Newsletters

Click here to sign up for one of our email newsletters.

Letters home ...

Traveling abroad for personal, educational or professional reasons?

Why not share your impressions — and those of residents of foreign countries about the United States — with Trib readers in 150 words?

The world's a big place. Bring it home with Letters Home.

Contact Colin McNickle (412-320-7836 or cmcnickle@tribweb.com).

Daily Photo Galleries

'American Coyotes' Series

Traveling by Jeep, boat and foot, Tribune-Review investigative reporter Carl Prine and photojournalist Justin Merriman covered nearly 2,000 miles over two months along the border with Mexico to report on coyotes — the human traffickers who bring illegal immigrants into the United States. Most are Americans working for money and/or drugs. This series reports how their operations have a major impact on life for residents and the environment along the border — and beyond.

By Thomas Sowell
Tuesday, Aug. 27, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
 

The 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, and of the Rev. Martin Luther King's memorable “I have a dream” speech, is a time for reflections — some inspiring, and some painful and ominous.

At the core of Dr. King's speech was his dream of a world in which people would not be judged by the color of their skin, but by “the content of their character.”

Judging individuals by their individual character is at the opposite pole from judging how groups are statistically represented among employees, college students or political figures. Yet many — if not most — of those who celebrate the “I have a dream” speech today promote the directly opposite approach of group preferences, especially those based on skin color.

What was historic about that speech was not only what was said but how powerfully its message resonated among Americans of that time, across the spectrum of race, ideology and politics. To say that that was a hopeful time would be an understatement. To say that many of those hopes have since been disappointed would also be an understatement.

There has been much documented racial progress since 1963. But there has also been much retrogression, of which the disintegration of the black family has been central.

Many hopes were disappointed because those were unrealistic hopes to begin with. Economic and other disparities between groups have been common for centuries, in countries around the world — and many of those disparities have been larger than the disparities between blacks and whites in America.

Even when those who lagged behind have advanced, they have not always caught up, even after centuries, because others were advancing at the same time. But when blacks did not catch up with whites in America, within a matter of decades, that was treated as strange or even a sinister sign of covert racism.

Civil rights were necessary, but far from sufficient. Education and job skills are crucial, and the government cannot give you these things. All it can do is make them available. Race hustlers who blame all lags on the racism of others are among the obstacles to taking the fullest advantage of education and other opportunities.

When the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was pending in Congress, my hope was that it would pass undiluted, not because I thought it would be a panacea but because “the bitter anticlimax that is sure to follow may provoke some real thought in quarters where slogans and labels hold sway at the moment.”

But the bitter anticlimax that did follow provoked no rethinking. Instead, it provoked all sorts of new demands. Judging everybody by the same standards was now regarded in some quarters as “racist” because it precluded preferences and quotas.

There are people today who talk “justice” when they really mean payback — including payback against people who were not even born when historic injustices were committed.

The nation has just been through a sensationalized murder trial in Florida, on which many people took fierce positions before a speck of evidence was introduced, judging those involved on nothing more than the color of their skin.

We have a long way to go to catch up to what Martin Luther King said 50 years ago. And we are moving in the opposite direction.

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University.

Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.

 

 


Show commenting policy

Most-Read Stories

  1. New Steeler Boykin clarifies remarks about former coach
  2. Zimbabwe alleges Murrysville doctor illegally killed lion
  3. Bucs’ starter Burnett says ‘surgery is not an option’
  4. After early criticism, Haley has Steelers offense poised to be even better
  5. Rossi: Looking at the next great Steeler
  6. EPA diktats: Pushing back
  7. Former Lincoln Park star Rowan chooses N.C. State
  8. Steelers swap draft pick for Eagles cornerback
  9. Ability to clog the trenches crucial to Steelers defense
  10. Penguins not alone in top-heavy approach to salary cap
  11. Starting 9: Examining Pirates’ deadline decisions