What happens when generations of children are reared to view others as less than human, unworthy of basic human rights?  It creates a dysfunctional society, which has lost any sense of morality.  It’s a society in which rape, torture, kidnapping, and the wanton murder of innocents is met not with moral outrage, but with celebration.  It’s a society incapable of coexisting with others, because its values have diverged from anything considered “civilized.”  When such a society is created, it must either subdue others around it or be subdued itself.  There can be no negotiated peace when one side of a conflict refuses to acknowledge the inherent humanity of the other side.  There can be only a winner, a loser, or perpetual conflict.

The Palestinians are the sad story of an entire people condemned to lifetimes of violence and misery because they accepted the sentence of “victimhood.”  They have bought in to the notion that their lot in life isn’t driven by their own decisions, but is the result of evil visited on them by others.  In embracing victimhood, the Palestinians have accepted hatred in lieu of empowerment.  They have mentally placed their future in the hands of others and sacrificed the foundation necessary for self-improvement — a commitment to improve their community themselves.  The Palestinians have traded self-determination for the false nobility of victimhood.

We’re making the same trade for America.  In the last century, we made great strides in resolving our racial tensions.  Tragically, we seem to have reached a summit with the civil rights movement.  We peaked before we solved the problems.  After the successes of the ’60s, the diversity industry (in its various forms) triggered a fundamental change in our approach to the resolution of racial issues.  We stopped seeking a colorblind society in which all are judged equally and began demanding special treatment for perceived victims.  We started down the path of manufacturing racial tensions by teaching that there are the privileged and the oppressed, the latter of which require protection from a system that victimizes them.

The 1619 Project teaches our youth that America was founded on slavery and is therefore permanently flawed.  There is no acknowledgement that America is also a country that lifted itself out of such barbarity — at great sacrifice.  It is a lesson that America’s successes were achieved on the backs of slaves — for which all “privileged whites” should feel shame.

Critical Race Theory (CRT) teaches our children that regardless of actions, some of their classmates are oppressors.  Those of inadequate dermal melanin are forever marked with the sins which their ancestors may or may not have committed.  It is designed to teach resentment and shame — both of which brew hatred.

Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity (DIE) demands that descendants of past oppressors provide benefits to descendants of past victims.  Such benefits are to include preferential treatment in admissions, hiring, and advancement — and even monetary reparations to be collected and distributed by the government.  To make it easy, the oppressor/victim determination is to be done based on skin tone rather than actual ancestry.  Hence, a white taxpayer whose great-great-grandfather died to free the slaves is expected to pay reparations to a black woman, like Sunny Hostin, whose great-great-grandfather owned slaves.

Is any of this designed to create harmony rather than resentment?  In fact, we are creating a society in which one’s value is not his inherent humanity, but rather his skin tone — and those of lighter tones are worthy of scorn.

We are teaching our children to hate one another, apparently oblivious to where that leads.  It leads to Gaza, a society that rejects peaceful coexistence.  Is that what we want for America — a society in which hatred and distrust prevent us from working together toward solutions to problems?  Do we want what the Palestinians are demanding — a “river to the sea” clear master-race winner?

After forty years on focusing on superficial differences rather than colorblindness, is there any evidence that DIE is moving us towards racial harmony?  Are we coexisting better now than we did forty years ago, or has the industry been dehumanizing one race and elevating others at the expense of progress?

Andrea Widburg recently described Tiffany Henyard, the mayor of Dolton, Illinois.  Mayor Henyard is in trouble with the city council for misusing city funds for her personal benefit.  She’s outraged at the city council — not because she’s innocent of the charges, but because the black members of the city council aren’t “sticking up for” the black mayor.  Her argument is that the color of her skin takes priority over the content of her character.  She’s incensed that the council is more concerned about her behavior than her color.  She has been brainwashed to see society as a racial contest rather than a civilized cooperative.

We accept as a given that black lives matter.  But saying “all lives matter” is considered hateful, because it fails to acknowledge the unique value of the “oppressed.”  The advocates of DIE fail to understand that creating a value ranking of races inevitably devalues some.

Where does devaluing a race lead?  It leads to non-white youths murdering a white bicyclist with a stolen car — for the fun of it.  It led them to shamelessly post their deed on social media and then boast that they would suffer no consequences.  The teens were trained to believe that their victim’s life had no value.  They believed that society would excuse the minor offense of murdering a “privileged white man.”  Where did they get such an idea?

Soros-backed prosecutors routinely decline to prosecute non-white people because they’re overrepresented in prison.  They are therefore victims of an oppressive system and deserving of special treatment.  Does such prosecutorial discretion increase racial harmony and social order?  Or does it release a class of citizens from accountability, teaching them that the rules of society don’t apply to them?

In protest of a black man’s death (George Floyd), rioters burned cities and looted businesses.  Their antisocial behavior was excused as a legitimate exercise of free expression — because the rules are different for certain protected classes.  Have the living conditions in our cities improved due to the new rules for the “oppressed”?

Is Gaza our future?  There is a tipping point at which peaceful coexistence will become untenable.  It’s the point at which hatreds become so ingrained that reasonable discussion of issues is replaced by open attempts to crush each other.  How long can we assert that skin tone justifies the targeting of some and empowers others to collect the booty?  When will DIE destroy our ability to have a dialogue about issues?

We haven’t reached the Gaza level of dysfunction yet — or I couldn’t write this article.  But of course, the Palestinians have been brainwashing their children for four generations, and we’ve been at it for only two.  I don’t know how far over the horizon that Rubicon lies, but we seem to be trying awfully hard to get there.

John Green is a political refugee from Minnesota, now residing in Idaho.  He is a staff writer for the American Free News Network and can be reached at greenjeg@gmail.com.

Image: stevepb via Pixabay, Pixabay license.