Diversity 101 In Damascus, Md.
Print Friendly and PDF

Ever on the alert for the persistence of "racism," The Washington Post couldn't find space for a story about the attempted mass murder of whites by a New York black man who told police he "was bent on killing as many white people as he could," but it devoted the center of its front page last week to what it called "Racial Discord in a Maryland Town."

In the town of Damascus, Md., there are no blacks threatening to murder whites (or if there are, don't wait for the Post to report it), but one black teenager did get into a fight with several white guys.

There actually was not much more to Damascus' "racial discord" than that, but the Post was determined to ferret it out anyway. One instance of "discord," if not race hatred, it sniffed up was the following, disclosed in the story's opening paragraph: 

"In the small town of Damascus at the northernmost edge of Montgomery County, a white youth drove through the streets last week waving a red-and-blue Confederate flag. When police officers confronted his mother, she said she saw nothing wrong with it."

Well, there you have it, plain as day, proof that the most vicious bigotry thrives in Damascus because a white guy waved "what to many African Americans is an incendiary symbol of subjugation."

The Post never asks

(a) why the police found it appropriate to "confront" the boy's mother about her son's perfectly legal and indeed customary act; let alone

(b) why forbidding the Confederate flag is any less "an incendiary symbol of subjugation" for whites proud of their Southern and Confederate heritage than waving it is for blacks.

The Post's story about Damascus was of no significance whatever, except that it did help confirm suspicions about the mentality of the Post's (and therefore the Establishment Media's) reporters and editors and that it tells us, as well as the reporters and editors themselves, some hard truths about racial "diversity" of previously homogeneous societies.

According to the Post (and even a few of the locals it bothered to interview), Damascus is experiencing difficulties in race relations, especially among high school youth. The town of about 9,000 has a high school of about 1,900, of which 84 percent are white. In 1989, the school had only 37 black students; now it has 300. Blacks complain they can't get onto athletic teams or into most school clubs and that racial slurs are commonly used. A survey found that 90 percent of white students and 70 percent of black students felt racial hostility at the school.

The story's assumption is that the "hostility" is all the fault of the whites, but that doesn't explain the student body president, a young lady named Kim McGuire, who calls herself a Hispanic and told the Post, with more than a whiff of white guilt, "When people think of Damascus, they think of cows, football and racism."

In fact, people don't think of Damascus at all, but Miss McGuire believes it's revealing that "When we put on a Black History Month program, the reaction I heard was, 'What about white history month?'"

In other words, it's fine for blacks to have their own racial consciousness and identity, but it's "troubling" when whites insist on theirs.

That's what happens with "diversity." Racial identity doesn't vanish; it intensifies, and if intense racial identity is OK for one group, it's just as good for another.

That's Lesson One of Diversity 101 as taught at Damascus High.

Lesson Two is that intensified racial identities in racially diverse environments often lead to violence—to the "racial hostility" that most students now feel and to the fight at a local mall earlier this year in which three whites and one Asian from the school allegedly beat up a local black student. The Post is quite coy—indeed, totally silent—on the causes of the fight or the personalities involved, but presumably race was a factor.

"This is a community that was white for so long," sighs the inevitable NAACP official quoted by the Post, "And they're having to deal with diversity at a fast, fast rate."

It never occurs to either the Post or the NAACP munchkin that non-whites have to deal with diversity as well. Perhaps that's because neither the Post nor the NAACP has any intention of "dealing with" it at all, since for them the whole point of diversity is to eradicate white identity and the cultural architecture that goes with it.

The white people of Damascus need to learn the real lessons of diversity at an even faster rate—that if they accept diversity, they will also have to accept the racial-political dynamic that goes with it and understand that that dynamic promises to wipe their own identity, heritage and community off the map.


July 08, 2002

Print Friendly and PDF