The Intolerance of Tolerance

A lot of people think John Derbyshire of National Review, the cranky ex-pat Brit, unreconstructed Tory, and mathematics obsessive, is a nasty, antideluvian bigot. I can see their point of view, sometimes. I don't know that I agree with every word he said in his NRO piece today. But I will say that I think his DOG/DVG (Designated Oppressor Group/Designated Victim Group) dichotomy is more true than not. It certainly explains the differing responses to Trent Lott and Corrine Brown (thought I'd forgotten about that, didn'tcha?). It also bears out my personal experiences.


The first "racial" incident I ever witnessed was in elementary school. It wasn't a bunch of white kids tormenting a minority. It was two minority kids (I won't tell you which ethnic group they belonged too, because it doesn't matter) harassing a kid I knew, promising to "kick his little white tail" if he had a problem with it. These two were surrounded by white children, none of whom (myself included) said a word in defense of their fellow honky. I was perhaps too shocked, unwilling to believe that in this post-Martin Luther King age, people acted this way. You see, every year before the MLK holiday, we were sat down, class by class, and shown the same video on MLK, and the Dream he had. I understood that in the past those that weren't white were put down, but the laws against them were taken away thanks to men of courage like King. I believed that dream was reality. On that day, it was killed, because nobody stood up for the abused kid. No one dared.


Everything I've seen since has but augmented that impression, that while everyone of us is supposed to be equal and respected for our diversity, some of us are more equal than others. White male Christian heterosexuals are supposed to respect everybody's diversity, to be polite and cheerful, to listen courteously and engage in self-criticism. White female Christian heterosexuals are expected to be this way to everyone except WMCH's, because of historical sexism. Black male Christian heterosexuals are expected to act this way towards everyone except whites, but they're not too loudly condemned for the rest, especially if as regards people who are Jewish or who kinda look white. For black females, see above. And so it goes, until you reach the ultimate Designated Victim: the minority transgendered atheist, who can be as nasty as he/she wants to whomever, and face criticism from no one.


I realize that there's a hearty pile of oversimplification here, and that we're dealing with the rules according to our cultural elites, and not the heartland folks. I don't know how well a minority transgendered atheist would do in rural Alabama. But I do know how well a white male Christian heterosexual Republican does in Manhattan. He mocks his whiteness and his maleness for the amusement of those who aren't either, he makes as little reference to his Christianity as possible, and hides his Republicanism at all costs. This isn't tolerance, and I submit that tolerance will not exist until its demanded from everyone. And I do mean everyone. That's right, leftists too.