Largely symbolic, but also largely illustrative of multiculturalism hard at work.
Going 368-31, the House overwhelmingly voted to condemn the French city of St. Denis for horoning convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal with the eponymous naming of a street there.
Abu-Jamal shot Officer Danny Faulkner after the officer became involved in an altercation with Abu-Jamal's brother, and the ensuing gunfire exchange left Faulkner dead. The only legitimate question is whether Abu-Jamal should've been convicted with first- or second-degree murder (he was convicted with first-degree murder and handed a death sentence which has since been successfully overturned but the case faces continuing appeals from both sides).
Thirty-one House members voted against it. Seventeen--over half--are black, even though the 109th Congress only has 43 black members, two of whom are non-voting delegates (Christensen of the Virgin Islands and Norton of DC) and Senator Barack Obama. Seven black House members didn't vote. Only 16 voted with the majority.
So of those chirping yea or nay, over 96% of non-black House members voted in condemnation of the city; 48% of blacks did. Conversely, 52% of blacks opposed even symbolically censuring the city. Staggering.
But Abu-Jamal is a negro, a Muslim, and a former member of the Black Panthers. Oh, and he's a cold-blooded murderer. It's hard to be any more antithetical to the ideals of the white American middle class than that. Irrespective of his egregious conduct, black representatives have split their collective support between Abu-Jamal and Faulkner's widow, who'd only been married to her husband a year yet has refused to remarry, indefatigably fighting Abu-Jamal's continual appeals and suffering the torment of her husband's killer being lionized by celebrities like Mike Farrell and Tim Robbins. She is white, afterall.
Haven't we been fighting for an individualistic, colorblind society since decades before I was born? Well, I don't want to wake up lost in the dreams of our fathers if this is the realization of those dreams.
Functional individualism, and the democracy that it is able to breed, relies upon relative equality--and parity--among members of the society cradling it (and a level of intelligence sufficient to sustain it). Yet virtually nothing is more powerfully related to inequality than racial and ethnic diversity, be it in measurements of IQ, wealth, or criminality. Our immigration policies and birthing trends make us more vibrant each day.
Spanish, English, and Portuguese Europeans brought blacks to the New World in bondage, and their problems are inescapably our problems as well. But as OJ, Durham, Tookie, and Abu-Jamal show, social cohesion has remained elusive after more than four centuries. We don't need to voluntarily be dumping more fuel onto the fire by recently posted on how his Kiwis will be a minority on the islands by mid-century. Funny, stateside so will we. A commenter from the UK portends similar clouds in his kingdom's future. While viscious imams call for the destruction of everything Western from London, criminal charges are brought against a native Briton who sounds the tocsin, warning of Islamic trouble.
The West is dying. In 1960, people of European ancestry represented one-fourth of the world's population. At the turn of the century, that had fallen to one-sixth. By 2050, Westerners will comprise only one-tenth of the globe's people. Europeans have never faced an existential crisis this grave. Everywhere save the US and Israel, we aren't reproducing fast enough to maintain a stable population into the future. Much of the non-Occidental world is, and then some.
Keep the pressure up on the immigration front. Don't let the political elites depress your neighbor's wages and inhibit yankee innovation. Stay healthy, sharp, and fecund as you can.