In my previous article, I wrote about George S. Schuyler, a great conservative who also happened to have been black. Since his death in 1977, he has, unfortunately, been forgotten.\u00a0 It is with an eye toward rectifying this situation that I write about him.<\/p>\n
That Schuyler could lay legitimate claim to the conservative tradition is born out by a few things, namely, his belief in the tradition or culturally-constituted character of human life; his rejection of rapid and revolutionary change; and his anti-utopianism. \u00a0Though each of these ideas is conceptually distinct, in conservative thought they tend to be intertwined.<\/p>\n
Schuyler witnessed the proliferation of a number of \u201cBack toAfrica\u201d movements.\u00a0 The adherents of such movements wished to see American blacks take up residence in the continent from whence their ancestors were taken.\u00a0 As far as Schuyler was concerned, this was a utopian dream of the worst sort.\u00a0\u00a0 The reason for this was simple: American blacks, by virtue of inheriting the same cultural traditions as their white counterparts, share substantially more in common with the latter than they share with non-American blacks.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Schuyler explains that while \u201ctheir training and education would undoubtedly be helpful to the backward and newly-emergent states\u201d throughout the non-Western world, \u201cbarriers of language and culture\u201d guarantee that black Americans \u201cwould not be accepted today anywhere on earth[.]\u201d\u00a0 With respect to the black American\u2019s relationship vis-\u00e0-vis Africa specifically, he writes:<\/p>\n
\u201cSoil depletion, desiccation and the most general impoverishment and ignorance of quarreling ethnic groups indigenous to theDark Continentmake it most unappealing to people whose standard of living is in general superior to that of Europeans, to say nothing of Africans.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
Simply put, \u201cAmerican Negroes\u201d have \u201cnothing whatever in common with even the most advanced Africans [.]\u201d<\/p>\n
It will doubtless surprise many a contemporary reader, black and white, to learn that Schuyler also opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.\u00a0 This legislation he viewed as another species of utopia, for like all utopian schemes, its designs could be implemented only at the cost of depriving us of much that we already enjoyed\u2014in this case, our liberties as Americans. \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
The Civil Rights Act of 1964, Schuyler believed, would be but the latest effort \u201cto speed social change by law [.]\u201d\u00a0 This, in turn, implies that \u201cit is possible to make people better by force,\u201d an idea that has \u201cbeen the cause of much misery and injustice throughout the ages.\u201d\u00a0 A relatively young country likeAmerica, overcome as it is by delusions of grandeur regarding its own character and always tempted to succumb to the \u201cpassion for novelty,\u201d is particularly disposed to suppose that rapid change can be induced through the creation of law.\u00a0 But, as Schuyler accentuates, this is nothing more or less than a sign of \u201cpolitical immaturity.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cIt is axiomatic,\u201d Schuyler confidently asserts, \u201cthat it takes lots of time to change social mores, especially with regard to such hardy perennials as religion, race and nationality, to say nothing of social classes.\u201d\u00a0 In order for legislation to be effective, it needs to be buttressed by custom.\u00a0 Unless legislation accommodates the community\u2019s sensibilities\u2014unless it seems to be a reflection or function of its customs\u2014its enforcement will be that much \u201cmore difficult and expensive\u201d and the government will be that much \u201cless popular.\u201d\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
Schuyler was under no illusions concerning the treatment to which black Americans had historically been subjected by the white majority.\u00a0 This treatment has been \u201cmorally wrong, nonsensical, unfair, un-Christian and cruelly unjust [.]\u201d\u00a0 Still, there a few considerations that he insisted we bear in mind.<\/p>\n
First, Americawas \u201cdealing better\u201d in its quest for racial equality than any other <\/em>multi-racial society on the face of the planet.\u00a0 Schuyler wrote that while \u201cit was all well and good to expect more ofAmerica than any other country,\u201d we mustn\u2019t ever lose sight of the fact that what \u201cwas an American problem was also a global one from which no country was free.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Second, since blacks\u2019 emancipation in 1865, there have been <\/em>changes inAmerica that, however slow the rate at which they\u2019ve transpired, have nevertheless \u201cbeen marked.\u201d\u00a0 Yet \u201ccivil rights laws, state or federal, have had little to do with it.\u201d\u00a0 What civil rights laws were passed throughout the decades \u201chave been enforced and accepted only when the dominant majority acquiesced, and have generally lain dormant in the law books.\u201d\u00a0 To state it succinctly, it has been \u201ccustom,\u201d not law, that \u201chas dictated the pace of compliance\u201d with the law.\u00a0<\/p>\n The final and most important consideration that Schuyler invoked when attending to the Civil Rights bill of 1964, his \u201cprincipal case\u201d against it, pertains to the constitutional liberty that it imperils.\u00a0 As he said, this bill promised to be \u201canother encroachment by the central government on the federalized structure of our society\u2026.\u201d\u00a0 Schuyler continued:<\/p>\n \u201cUnder such a law, the individual everywhere is told what he must do and what he cannot do, regardless of the laws and ordinances his state or community.\u201d\u00a0 As should be obvious, this legal arrangement is \u201ca blow at the very basis of American society which is founded on state sovereignty and individual liberty and preference.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n That Schuyler possessed an abiding understanding of and appreciation for tradition, recognized destructive utopian fantasies when he saw them, and detected\u2014and valued\u2014the secret (\u201cthe federalized structure of our society\u201d) of our American liberties prove that he was a great conservative.\u00a0<\/p>\n These characteristics also prove that he was a great American.<\/p>\n Jack\u00a0Kerwick, Ph.D.\u00a0<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" In my previous article, I wrote about George S. Schuyler, a great conservative who also happened to have been black. Since his death in 1977, he has, unfortunately, been forgotten.\u00a0 It is with an eye toward rectifying this situation that I write about him. That Schuyler could lay legitimate claim to the conservative tradition is…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":399,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-167","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n