Discussion about this post

User's avatar
E.W.R's avatar

I don’t mean to rain on her parade, because now Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson deserves congratulations. I don’t doubt she’s qualified and the old Ira & Nadine era card-carrying ACLU member in me likes the idea of former public defender on the court. A mix of experiences and perspectives is a good thing, as long as a judge isn’t too driven by an ideological certainty. However, a quote highlighted from her comments upon confirmation jumped out at me: “I am the dream of the slave”. This is the single-minded identitarian bent that suffuses so much of even the broad left of center these days. It concerns me not only because its atavism defines and essentializes her role (and agenda?) as an avatar of an anachronistic communal grievance. It concerns me because it again subordinates if not erases our common role and agenda of American citizens. Is any success I achieve however modest “the Appalachian sharecropper’s dream”? Or aren’t I - and all of us - more properly concerned with the project we share today as fellow citizens of a great but imperfect country in which too many of our people of all colors and ethnicities are struggling? So, while I want to embrace Justice Jackson, I can’t help a little bit of an eye-roll when I see how she chooses to define herself. She’s older than I am and has grown up in a world of affirmative action, from clear and significant preferences in admissions and hiring, to special mentorships, scholarship programs, and contract set a sides. She’s come of age in an era of in which myriad forms of black American culture and identity enjoy enormous caché, maybe even ascendence. Why can’t she be the dream of a lawyer and teacher and school principal? You know, a middle class American success story. I’m incredibly grateful for the single mother who raised me almost entirely by herself. She sacrificed a lot so she and my sister and I could live in one of the smallest houses in the “Golden Ghetto” of a good suburban school district. She put my safety and education ahead of many of her own wants and needs. But I’ll tell you: growing up without a dad - and losing him in tragic and haunting circumstances - is no picnic, whether you’re black or white. If Justice Jackson’s upbringing as the child of a lawyer and principal is disadvantaged, I’d like to have some.

She’s not Thurgood Marshall enduring death threats and hopping between safe houses as he fought for voting rights in the Deep South. She’s not Clarence Thomas, who, however cynically his appointment may have been strategized by the GHW Bush White House, did grow up in astounding poverty and deprivation in a different America. She was selected only from candidates with the threshold ideological and identity requirement of being left-leaning black women. For how long are we supposed to regard these characteristics as some sort of disadvantage in American professional life, when, ever more, they are plainly an advantage. Finally, I don’t like the implication that Justice Jackson as the present day embodiment of “the slave’s dream” is in her opinions somehow representing an inherently more righteous, just point of view, essentialized in her skin color and distant heritage. I want a Justice Jackson who can powerfully speak to the experience of genuinely quite powerless criminal defendants. I don’t want a Justice Jackson who is supposed to perceived as holy messenger from Americans enslaved over a hundred a fifty years ago.

Expand full comment
Alex Lekas's avatar

Like most, if not all, other causes, race has degenerated into a racket. It is very easy to imagine this very speech being given by a future Glenn 50 years from now, because perpetuating racism, or the idea of racism, is advantageous to a great many people. It helps those people sell books, it gives them political power, it puts them on a media platform. They have no incentive to listen to, let alone agree, with anything in this speech and every incentive to do the opposite.

This is how activism works. Its role is not to solve issues; it is to perpetuate them for as long as possible. The idea that life for minorities today is unchanged from, say, the 1940s is patently offensive and also insulting to the people who lived in those times. When a person who has no concept of what it was like to live in the "colored only" era acts as if life is unchanged, that person's attempt at drawing equivalency between now and then deserves ridicule, not head-nodding.

The word "racism" itself has been cheapened to the point of being worthless. This was most recently evidenced by the SCOTUS nomination hearings for Ms. Jackson, during which we were told that the only possible opposition was based on skin color. This fails, epically, on two counts: first, many of the people making that declaration were around for the Kavanaugh hearings, when a white man was accused of being a serial rapist with zero evidence. Second, the support for Ms. Jackson was based in large part on her being black and a woman. None of the supporters could tell you a think about her judicial background; on the contrary, they ran from any questions about her record. Because she is black and that's enough. Tell me again which group is more closely aligned with racist behavior.

Expand full comment
36 more comments...

No posts