Justice Clarence Thomas is certainly one of the most accomplished African-Americans alive today, yet, so little is said or celebrated about him in his community—the African American community that his case exemplifies the words of Jesus Christ in the book of Mathews, “..a prophet is not without honour, except in his own house and amongst his brethren.”
Considering he is only the second African-American to be appointed as a Justice of the United States Supreme Court, his achievements should be heralded in the African-American community as a prime example of African American success as much as the presidency of Barack Obama was, yet sadly, that is not the case.
What defect does Clarence Thomas have? What errors has he made? What taboo has he committed to be ignored and disdained in such a manner by those who should be the proudest of him?
This disdain was highlighted recently in the remarks made by Whoopi Goldberg on the view a few days ago during a conversation on President Joe Biden picking an African-American woman to be appointed as the next Supreme Court Justice. When it was mentioned that there have only been two black men appointed to that position, Whoopi Goldberg responded referring to Clarence Thomas—“and one doesn’t really represent the black community.”
What does it mean to represent the black community in that capacity? Is his job not to interpret the law and represent the interests of the union? To give fair and unbiased judgements? Since when is it the job of Supreme Court Justices to represent the specific interests of their racialized communities?
Should a white judge represent the specific interests of the white community, should an Asian judge represent the interests of the Asian community, should a female judge represent the specific interests of women? Should racial affiliations become the basis for judicial representation? If this becomes the accepted norm it becomes a slippery slope down the hill to perdition.
In my opinion, Clarence Thomas only owes the black community the duty of representing their interests as Americans. Supreme Court Justices should not be activist Justices. They should interpret the law as best as it should be interpreted, give fair and unbiased judgements in favour of the greater and collective good of Americans.
This dismissive remark is not the first time Whoopi Goldberg had taken a shot at Justice Clarence Thomas in this manner. In 2008 while hosting the Tony Awards for CBS, Whoopi Goldberg implied that Clarence Thomas was not black by stating that Thurgood Marshall was not only the first black Supreme Court Justice but the only one.
During this latest vitriol against Clarence Thomas, Joy Behar commented that Clarence Thomas was to the right of Attila the Hun. That was a truly vile comment. To compare one of the most accomplished black men in America today to Attila the Hun, a military leader famous for his brutality was despicable, to say the least. However, Joy Behar may have unwittingly paid Clarence Thomas a compliment, because Attila by his rights was a very successful political and military leader ruling over an empire that stretched from Central Asia to modern-day France and down through the Danube valley, an empire he created from nothing in just ten years amid the mighty Roman empire.
It is understood that Behar’s comment comparing Clarence Thomas with Attila the Hun was not meant to be flattering, she meant to say that Clarence Thomas has been as—or more—destructive as Attila the Hun ever was. Where did the idea that it was okay to compare a Supreme Court Justice—whatever his ideological position—to a pillaging barbarian who had his brother murdered for power come from?
By this comparison, Clarence Thomas is painted as a traitor to his people akin to Attila being a traitor to his brother when he murdered him to solidify his hold on power.
Each of the hosts took their turn unabashedly piling on Clarence Thomas as Hostin, another host in the view commented, “It’s terribly disrespectful to appoint someone like Clarence Thomas with his philosophies to the seat of Thurgood Marshall, a civil rights activist.” Implying Clarence Thomas was “the wrong kind of black man,” ignoring that the seat is not anyone’s by right, and a successor must not take on the ideals of their predecessor, if that were the case, all the seats would be held by racist old white men.
Whoopi Goldberg isn’t the only African American public figure who has implied that Clarence Thomas, wasn’t “black enough” Rep Karen Bass of California in an interview with Al Sharpton in 2016 said “I think many people would like to see an African American on the Supreme Court,” Bass said. “We don’t need to go into Clarence Thomas’ background or his behaviour on the Court, but I think to have an African-American voice that has not been there since Thurgood Marshall would be an incredible contribution to our country.”
But why has Clarence Thomas incurred the ire of many African Americans? Might it be because of his conservative leanings or views? If so, is being conservative and being black mutually exclusive? Should black people be of only one ideological and political persuasion?
Why can a white politician have the liberty to be conservative or liberal without being accused of not being white enough or not seen to be representing the interests of their racialized community, while a black politician can’t. This apparent double standard is appalling. To construct black people as a monolith politically is to take away agency from them, it’s to say black people can only embrace one particular ideology.
This kind of behaviour emboldens certain white people that it’s okay to be unnecessarily hostile or even racist towards a black person, so long as they are conservative. In California’s recall election last year, a white woman threw eggs at Larry Elder, others, mostly whites, physically assaulted him and his security detail, while accusing him of hating his people. The incident had media coverage from conservative media for about a second, with no condemnation from liberal media—the self-appointed protector of minorities.
Doesn’t Larry Elder count as a minority to be protected? Does his political leanings strip him of his minority status and thus any associated protections from the liberal media? It seems the rules are being applied inconsistently, and one is only to be protected if they fall within the confines of what is deemed appropriate for a black person. Essentially, others have set the criteria for black behaviour; fixed it within a limit from which it must never deviate. One does not need to go into the “…if you don’t vote for me you’re not black,” comment to see this attitude in all its glory.
Clarence Thomas gets the same treatment that many black conservatives get, from Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Shelby Steele to Larry Elder and Glenn Loury. These conservative black voices are labelled as uncle toms, coons and sellouts, nomenclature reserved for a traitorous black person.
Back to Clarence Thomas, I admire his courage and tenacity in staying true to his convictions even though that condemns him to be forever seen as a traitor by many in his racialized community.
Excerpt from Hotel Shendam
He looked lost and fatigued; the sweat breaking out at his brow a testament to that. His arms, numb from the weighted bags extending from them, lay limp at his side as he trudged along the dirt road to the destination unknown. Brown dust, coated his leather shoes—which in turn left their prints embedded on the face of the sandy road. He caught a glimpse of the lighted signboard of what appeared to be a hotel, its name undecipherable. It was some minutes away by foot and his legs protested an estimation of the distance—he couldn’t find any means of transportation to take him down to the hotel, so he settled for walking the distance. A passerby he approached for directions, confirmed to him that there was indeed a hotel in the direction he was headed.
The sky was coloured crimson by the sun in its late stages of descent, painting a mural of fiery patterns—splashed about like tentacles, engulfing patches of white-blue sky in a reddish web—as it made its way to the underworld, to rise again with dawn. Nightfall was imminent. The dry northern wind agitated dead leaves, strewn about on the street. The dead leaves coloured a dark brown, danced about to the rhythm of entropy……
Get the Novel on Amazon
Charles Ekokotu (Pharm. D.) is a bibliophile, prose fiction writer, poet, and playwright. His first self-published novel, Hotel Shendam—a crime fiction novel featuring a debate on race and colonialism—is available on Amazon. A very fun read! Grab a copy now!
The real systemic racism in the US lies with those of the political left who clearly do not see blacks as their equals. As they argue for eliminating grades, tests, employment standards they show that they do not believe blacks can meet them. It is so obvious a lack of respect that you would think blacks would rebel at that slur alone!
There are many blacks who do push back. You have named a few but there is Robert Woodson at his eponymous foundation and the black writers included in RED, WHITE, AND BLACK; rescuing American history from revisionists and race hustlers, plus locals such as Kendall Qualls and his Take Charge Minnesota, and Derrick Wilburn of Rocky Mountain Black Conservatives. Do Whoopi, Karen, and Joy know these people exist?
It is really a shame that instead of holding up as models the many blacks throughout American history who succeeded against overwhelming odds and blacks who today have all of the same opportunities as other Americans and have seized them, they are telling today’s school children that they are victims and will always be second class citizens. That is a recipe for disaster.
Great article Charles. Seriously lit.