The Questionable Racial and Ideological Authenticity of Mia Love

Let’s talk about the questionable racial and ideological authenticity of Mia Love, shall we?

Let’s talk a bit about Mia Love. Yes, that Mia Love, the lovely New York-born daughter of Haitian immigrants currently running for Congress from the state of Utah. The same Mia Love who gave such an incredibly naïve speech at the Republican National Convention. Much of her speech made sense; at least the parts where she talked about how her parents came from Haiti and built a life without government assistance, pulling themselves up, as Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas would say, “by their own bootstraps”. Never mind that Thomas benefited from the very same government programs, such as affirmative action, that he more-or-less regularly excoriates.

Of course, Ms. Long didn’t offer any evidence beyond her word, but that’s neither here nor there at this stage of the game. The fact of the matter is that she is the only one of her generation in her family born and raised in these United States. As such, she doesn’t have a personal historical background as do the many black people living here descended from the slaves set free (on paper at least) by Abraham Lincolns’ Emancipation Proclamation a hundred and fifty years ago.

She has no inherent or inbred comprehension of why the rules, regulations and laws put into effect after the supposed end of legal slavery are still necessary today. And thus she, too, has jumped on the Republican bandwagon of less regulation and rolling back the very rules, regulations and laws that allow her to openly speak and act as she does. Remember, the Constitution originally counted “negroes” as 3/5ths of a person under the control of their “owners” and therefore ineligible to vote or to benefit from most of the other benefits of the new nation.

However, even if she should win her seat, it still opens a door to the future. Consider this. She may be considered the “top token negro” in the Republican Party at the present time, displacing such luminaries as Colin Powell for example. But it’s clear that she was given her spot at the convention as a means of detracting from the clear racism endemic to the Republican Party as a whole, which is evident from the tone of that party ever since Barack Obama won the election, and even before, while he was still running.

Yet and still, it opens the door, just a tiny bit, for more black Americans to be come out as Republicans, to be suckered into supporting policies that don’t benefit them or any other working American but only those in the highest income brackets. And by opening that door even a fraction of an inch, if a sufficient number of black Americans decide to join her, bring with them their own historical perspective having been raised up in this country for many generations and endured what has gone on regarding them since before its’ founding, then the Republican Party will be forced to change.

It will be changed, returning to a more moderate platform similar to what it embraced before the Nixon era. Why and how? Simply because it would be unable to keep the gains it makes in terms of minority membership if the far-right radical bigots maintain their stranglehold on the party. And that being so, those radicals will be forever consigned to the fringes from whence they came. I’m not suggesting th at this will happen in this upcoming election, or even in the next Presidential election four years from now. But it will happen nonetheless, because if it doesn’t, then the Republican Party will sooner or later be consigned to the dustbin of history.