Racism is not dead, but it is on life support – kept alive by politicians, race hustlers and people who get a sense of superiority by denouncing others as "racists" - Thomas Sowell
In the latest episode of political absurdity, Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley has taken it upon herself to issue a verbal cease-and-desist order to Republicans: “Keep Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s name out of your mouths!” That’s right, folks, quoting the man who dreamed of judging people by their character rather than their skin color is now a privilege reserved exclusively for people with the "correct" melanin levels, according to Presley.
This isn’t satire—well, not yet. Let’s first get into the absurdity of Presley's contradictions.
The Irony is Thick
Let’s take a moment to remember the man in question. Dr. King famously envisioned a world where his children would be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. But according to Presley, that dream now includes a disclaimer: “Offer void if your skin tone doesn’t meet these specific requirements.”
This is not just ironic—it’s downright tragic. Presley’s remarks are a perversion of the very principles Dr. King championed. Instead of fostering unity, she has chosen division. Instead of embracing the progress we’ve made as a nation, she reopens old wounds, pointing fingers and reliving past grievances like a DJ spinning the same sad track on repeat.
DEI – Dividing Everyone Instantly
At the heart of this drama is the Dismantle DEI Act, proposed by Rep. Michael Cloud, R-Texas. This legislation seeks to eliminate federal Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs, arguing they perpetuate division rather than progress.
Cloud’s reasoning is solid: DEI offices have become less about inclusion and more about enforcing a new kind of segregation—a hierarchy of victimhood. "Progress," Cloud argues, "has been about tearing down walls of division, not building new bureaucratic ones."
But Presley disagrees. In fact, she sees the elimination of DEI programs as an “utter disgrace.” She insists we need these initiatives to address America’s historical wrongs, listing grievances from the three-fifths compromise to redlining. While no one denies the stains on America’s past, Presley’s fixation on these injustices ignores the strides we’ve made as a nation.
Living in the Past Won’t Build the Future
Presley’s rhetoric is like a broken record stuck in the darkest chapters of our history. Yes, slavery happened. Yes, redlining happened. But pretending that America is frozen in the 1860s or the 1930s is not just inaccurate—it’s harmful.
By constantly rehashing these grievances, Presley feeds a narrative of perpetual victimhood. Instead of empowering individuals to rise above their circumstances, she shackles them to a mindset of dependency and resentment.
Dr. King’s Words Belong to Everyone
Presley claims Republicans have “perverted” Dr. King’s words, but let’s be clear: nothing could be further from the truth. Quoting Dr. King’s vision of a colorblind society is not a perversion; it’s a celebration of his legacy. It’s Presley who is twisting his words to suit her divisive agenda.
Dr. King didn’t fight for equality so we could slap a "For Black People Only" sign on his legacy. His dream was universal, transcending race, politics, and time. It’s not just for Democrats. It’s not just for Republicans. It’s for everyone.
The Real Oppressors
Let’s talk about oppression, shall we? During the same hearing, Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, declared, “There has been no oppression for the White man in this country.” While historical context matters, this kind of blanket statement is not just divisive—it’s false. Oppression isn’t about skin color; it’s about power dynamics. And ironically, this new wave of woke authoritarianism is oppressing anyone who dares to think differently.
Where Do We Go From Here?
Presley’s declaration isn’t just another soundbite—it’s a dangerous precedent. If we start dictating who can and cannot quote historical figures, we’re stepping onto a slippery slope of censorship and division.
America has come a long way since Dr. King’s time. But if we want to continue moving forward, we need to reject the politics of division and embrace the principles of unity and equality that he stood for.
Congresswoman Presley, take note: Dr. King’s dream wasn’t meant to be a weapon. It was meant to be a bridge. And bridges, unlike walls, are meant to bring people together—not keep them apart.
Disclosure:
The opinions expressed in this article are inspired by the writings of Thomas Sowell and Candace Owens, who have emphasized personal responsibility, the dangers of victimhood culture, and the importance of context when examining societal disparities.
As Thomas Sowell once noted, the question is not whether past or present evils exist, but whether they automatically explain the economic, educational, and social disparities we see today. Similarly, Sowell argued that racism, while still present, survives largely through the narratives of those who profit from keeping it alive.
Echoing these ideas, Candace Owens reminds us that ignorance, not racism, is often the greater challenge—and that ignorance can be cured through experience and education. She advocates rejecting victimhood and embracing empowerment, urging the black community to stop viewing themselves as oppressed and start taking control of their own destinies.
These perspectives aim to encourage unity, critical thinking, and self-reliance in addressing the challenges of our time.
Comments