Group vs. Individual in a System of Freedom
Two articles caught my attention today, “The One-Drop Rule revisited” by Ramesh Ponnuru and the other “The Fading ‘One Hate Rule’” by Michale Bertolone. The one-drop rule is the “historical practice of counting as black any individual with any black ancestry.” The one hate rule “is the lumping together of all non-European minority groups into one category that is thought to experience white racism in the same way…”
Both rules have a central focus of ethno-cultural boundaries. Ethno-cultural boundaries have led in the United States to slavery, mal-treatment of indigenous people, Jim Crow (separate but equal) and today, affirmative action.
What both articles fail to realize is that in a system of freedom, ethno-cultural boundaries are meaningless. In a system of freedom, the largest “group” possible is the individual. To discuss ethno-cultural boundaries and divisions invites “tribalism” which is anathema to freedom.
A system of freedom has one set of laws that apply equally to all members of society. This is precisely why the statue, Lady Justice, wears a blindfold.
Justice doesn’t care where you are from, what color your skin is, what your name is, how smart you are, etc.
Granted, to deny ethno-cultural boundaries exist is to deny reality. The focus, however, in a system of freedom, shouldn’t be on perpetuating group differences, but rather the unique qualities of each individual. This is where true “diversity” is found, not in the phony “group identity” spiel.
The goal in a system of freedom is life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Logically, these concepts can’t apply to a “group” only to an individual. It’s time we get away from group thinking and concentrate on each member of society as an individual.