"Perhaps, someday, blacks will win the right to be treated like volitional human beings. But not yet."
Ann Coulter wrote that, not me. God no, not me. I would be ashamed to write such a thought. I would be ashamed to even think such a thought. To have that thought suddenly appear in my brain would terrify me. I would fear something had gone dreadfully wrong with my brain. I would worry some undetected fever was burning away my humanity, or some toxic virus was eating through the wiring that leads to logical conclusions, or maybe a tumor was growing inside my skull, putting pressure on the healthy parts, squeezing out all the things I have spent my life recording, seeing, experiencing.
Wiping away all those good, hopeful things that have accumulated in my brain and have led me to conclude there is more to human beings as a whole that is decent and loving, thoughtful and marvelous and inspiring, than there is vile and hateful, thoughtless and vicious and repugnant. So yeah, not only would I be ashamed to think that thought, I would be alarmed at what I was becoming.
Not so, apparently, with Coulter. In a recent opinion piece on how racism now exists only in the imaginations of confused white liberals and the scams of scheming black activists, she gave that statement a paragraph all to itself. Two short sentences, set apart from what came before and after. By structuring the piece as she did, we know Coulter was proud of the thought and pleased with the way she worded it. It's a writers' technique to emphasize the central point to which they have been building. Following is an example of me doing the same thing:
As to those two sentences, where you and I saw an unflushed clump of literary offal circling the toilet that is Ann Coulter's brain, Ann herself saw a bright gem she plucked out and held up for the world to marvel at.
Of course, that gem didn't appear suddenly in Coulter's brain. It had been there all along. It was forged in the fires of early tribal ignorance, stoked with the billows of irrational fear and held dear by uncounted clan chiefs, kings, empires and conservatives. For millennia, it has passed from cowardly father to cowardly son--or cowardly daughter, as the case may be--each subsequent generation too craven to acknowledge that what they hold to be a guiding principle is a goddamn lie.
It is arguably the oldest of lies, but unarguably, the most destructive. At one time or another, most tribes have enslaved, raped, slaughtered, visited any number of holocausts upon their neighbors, all with the moral justification that they were more complete human beings than those they tormented. That they were endowed with greater strength, greater culture, greater gods, greater beauty, greater brains and a greater will. That they had actually willed themselves into superiority over the others. The others, who by not having such a greater will--a greater volition--had shown themselves to be little more than animals, unworthy of the rights inherited by the superior breed.
Thus, with that statement, Coulter articulated what has been in the brains of conquerors, cowards and killers since forever. "They have no claim to equal consideration, because they aren't equal."
And about the door she left slightly open with "... not yet," that was her way of saying, "Should the day ever come when they think like me, when they accept as truth the lies I have never questioned, only then will they be worthy of my respect."
As you may have guessed, this opinion Coulter was so pleased to express came as a response to the George Zimmerman verdict.
From the beginning, the murder of Trayvon Martin has induced similar expressions of tribal solidarity from Coulter-like specimens all over America. First, the law in that Florida sump had to be shamed into even prosecuting the lumpen Zimmerman. Then money poured into his defense coffers from sympathizers who didn't need to know what really happened to know who the guilty one was.
Sean Hannity, another glorious example of the white man's superior volition, eagerly granted Zimmerman a high-profile opportunity to personally defend his act of blackchildicide--something the lump had not the guts to do at his own trial. And can we ever forget the targets with the bullseye centered on a figure wearing a hoodie, holding a bag of Skittles?--an event so blatantly racist that, in a current right-wing argument, it could have been conceived only in the schemes of white liberals and black activists.
Yet as offensive as I found the verdict to be, not to mention Zimmerman's crime and the Right's reaction to the murder, I find it even more offensive that Coulter considers herself a proper judge of who is a "volitional human being," and who is not. Perhaps she confuses her own vicious nature with superior volition--a common misconception among racists.
The following statement is another example of me using that aforementioned writers' technique to emphasize the central point to which I have been building:
Where you and I see in Ann Coulter a strident, reptilian harpy in a size-bulimia dress--a hysterical raw nerve who has become the automated voice box for a range of the most repulsive ideologies--Ann must see in herself a triumph of the will, a paragon of self-determination, entirely independent from the herd with which she runs.