What America needs to advance its interests abroad: resentful black diplomats

When I’m with Democrats they see me as a black. When I’m with Republicans they see me as an individual. That’s why I’m a Republican.
—Condoleezza Rice, Bob Grant radio program, circa 1993

I have lamented that I can go into a meeting at the Department of State—and as a matter fact I can go into a whole day of meetings at the Department of State—and actually rarely see somebody who looks like me. And that is just not acceptable.
—Condoleezza Rice, keynote address to annual Conference of the White House Initiative on National Historically Black Colleges and Universities, September 2008.

Well, no shock here. For many years Rice has made clear her switch to a mildly black racialist position and a somewhat stronger pro-racial preference position.

However, in addition to the usual problem with affirmative action, namely that the number of blacks with the intelligence and personal attributes to be diplomats is decidedly limited, there is another element of unreality in Rice’s demand for lots more blacks in the State Department: very few blacks would want to be diplomats.

Rice continued:

[W]hen I go around the world I want to see black Americans involved in the promotion and development of our foreign policy. I want to see a Foreign Service that looks as if black Americans are part of this great country.”

There’s the problem. How can you have a Foreign Service that looks as if blacks are part of America, when blacks at every level of American life, particularly the more educated and privileged ones such as Michelle Obama, have repeatedly made it clear that they themselves do not feel that they are part of America? A large percentage of the black population, and virtually all blacks who belong to black organizations, see America as Other and themselves as a people apart—still, to this day, mistreated and harmed by the white majority of this country, and deserving special treatment including reparations to make up for slavery and segregation, which they see as the ongoing cause of their ongoing socioeconomic backwardness. How can people represent America, when they feel perpetually aggrieved by it?

At best, the only thing blacks can add to the State Department is more narcissistic Condoleezza Rices gallivanting around the world telling politely puzzled foreigners what a guilty country America is because it hasn’t yet reached racial parity—including racial parity in the State Department.

- end of initial entry -

Jonathan W. writes:

You write:

“For many years Rice has made clear her switch to a mildly black racialist position and a somewhat stronger pro-racial preference position.”

I haven’t seen her state it in such blatant terms before. Unfortunately, she could respond with the standard pro-affirmative action mantra; namely, that “diversity” can be achieved without preferences and that the solution is simply to seek out qualified blacks for these positions. However, as you’ve written about for years and state again here, because of the endemic IQ differences between the races, there will never be a large percentage of blacks qualified for any type of intellectual position. Therefore, her ultimate goal is impossible to achieve without preferences.

It’s tantamount to when the diversity proponents call for more female firefighters, but qualify their statements with “They should be held to the same standards as the men.” Since in the real world, there will never be a large number of 160-180 pound women who are strong and in good physical shape, the only way to realize that goal is to lower standards.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at September 08, 2008 11:56 PM | Send