Black Skin Privilege: To Be The Wedge For The Totalitarian Future

Obama's race-based plan to turn Congress Democratic, forever.

Editor’s note: The following article is the first in a series of articles elaborating on David Horowitz and John Perazzo’s 2013 pamphlet “Black Skin Privilege and the American Dream.” “White skin privilege”—a term that has made a comeback in the last few years of racial demagoguery—was first popularized by the terror sect Weatherman in the early 1970s during its campaign to launch a race war in “Amerikka.”  Although most leftists did not follow the call of Weatherman leaders Bill Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn to join in a global race war to eradicate “white skin privilege,” the foundation of racism, the concept gradually took hold as an article of faith among all progressives as an all-purpose explanation for why the great Civil Rights Acts of the 1960s had not produced immediate equality and why such quintessentially un American policies as affirmative action were necessary.  Because of “white skin privilege,” virtually ineradicable “institutional racism” continued to saturate our society even though individual racism was a thing of the past.

By its obsessive quest to find evidence of illusory “white skin privilege” the progressive left created and enshrined in our national life its very real opposite—“black skin privilege.” As David Horowitz and John Perazzo showed in their 2013 pamphlet Black Skin Privilege and the American Dream,” its effects can be seen in the presumption of guilt on the part of innocent whites (think Duke lacrosse team) on the basis of their skin color while guilty blacks (think O.J. Simpson) are often presumed innocent.   Blacks can commit racist attacks on whites certain that civil rights “activists” who sift the news obsessively for black victims will either not notice or dismiss such attacks as a form of delayed “justice” for the historical oppression of black people.  

The liberal media obediently follow their lead. When Trayvon Martin was killed by “white Hispanic” George Zimmerman it became a national outrage. But the media was nowhere to be found in the year afterward when  there at least 14 known incidents of attacks by blacks (often citing the death of Martin as their motivation) against whites, including the brutal beating of a 78 year old man.  

The result of such prejudice—there is no better word for it—is the creation of an optical illusion of deeply embedded, if largely invisible, white racism that creates vast numbers of black victims when the social facts show quite a different situation.  According to statistics gathered by  the National Crime Victimization Survey, for instance, blacks attacks on whites are  five times greater than the opposite.  When differences in relative population size are factored into the equation, a white person is 25 times more likely to be attacked by a black than a black by a white. 

Such statistics are not the whole U.S. racial picture by any means.  But they are a part.  And they are suppressed (or shrugged off) by the media and civil rights “activists” dedicated to creating a one sided and propagandistic narrative of race in the United States.  Such inconvenient facts complicate their melodrama of white guilt and black victimhood.  

The presence of black skin privilege as odious as white racism was: two sides of the same coin.  To illumine the complexity of racial truth in America, FrontPage Magazine will regularly present articles about black skin privilege, beginning with today’s piece by John Perazzo on how it has become a wedge into a possible totalitarian future.

To order “Black Skin Privilege and the American Dream,” click here.


If you’re a white Republican who lives in a well-to-do, majority-Republican suburb anywhere in America, Barack Obama has huge plans for you. Why? Several reasons: (1) He resents you for taking advantage of what he sees as your unfairly acquired ability to afford life in an affluent neighborhood, while so many poor nonwhites live amid squalor and crime in the central cities of this racist land. (2) He believes that by choosing to reside in a suburb, you are selfishly depriving a nearby city of precious tax dollars which could otherwise have been used to fund the public schools and social services that minority city-dwellers so desperately need. (3) Above all else, he resents the fact that people like you tend to elect Republicans to the U.S. House of Representatives.

Thus our president has set in motion the political equivalent of “The Knockout Game,” where you’re going to be blindsided by a devastating head blow that will rattle your world more dramatically than anything the government has ever previously done to you. You see, Barack Obama has lots of racial scores he wants to settle, and this one is at the very top of his “to-do” list.

Like a dutiful totalitarian, Obama has quietly been hard at work on a stealth plan to make Republican suburban communities from coast to coast disappear. It’s a plan to empower Democrat-led cities to annex those suburbs and seize political control of them. How? By moving large numbers of poor blacks and Latinos (virtually all Democrats) out of the cities and into the surrounding white suburbs, where they can be much more politically useful to Obama and his party. Instead of merely being “surplus voters” who do nothing more than pad massive Democratic margins of assured electoral victories in urban districts, these transplanted nonwhite Democrats will now be utilized to help Obama tip the demographic scales in a host of Republican suburbs—and turn them Democratic.

Obama’s plan was conveniently buttressed by the recent _Texas Housing v. Inclusive Communities_ Supreme Court decision, where the Court’s five reliable left-wing activists ruled that plaintiffs will henceforth be permitted to base housing-discrimination lawsuits on mere population statistics. That is, they won’t be required to show evidence of actual racial discrimination, or even of any intent to discriminate. Instead they can simply cite, as “proof” of discrimination, the racial makeup of a given neighborhood with comparatively few black or Latino residents. And even if that neighborhood is able to definitively show that no discriminatory motive or policy has ever existed there, it won’t matter. “Disparate impact”—a statistical racial or ethnic imbalance in a given population—is now enough to indicate guilt.

The Texas Housing decision dovetails beautifully with the Obama agenda, as laid out in a recently unveiled 377-page document called “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing,” crafted behind closed doors by the nameless, unelected bureaucrats at Obama’s Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). In this document, the Obama Administration articulates its plan to aggressively and forcibly change the demographics of majority-white suburban neighborhoods by requiring them—even in cases where housing discrimination has never even been alleged, let alone proved—to meet federally imposed quotas for the creation of government-subsidized, multi-family “affordable housing” units, and to aggressively market those units to ethnic and racial minorities.

A corollary Obama plan will be to enact a “regional tax-base sharing” scheme that diverts a portion of suburban tax money into a common regional pot, from which it is then redistributed to poor urban neighborhoods. Thus the suburbs will not only be blended into the cities racially and politically, but economically as well.

This will all take place, of course, under the pious banner of “social and racial justice.”

As Obama sees things, black or brown skin, by definition, makes people victims of white America’s intransigent bigotry. And justice demands that their victimhood be addressed by a variety of compensatory measures, like the privilege of living—at taxpayer expense—in a community whose existing residents—whatever their race or ethnicity—sacrificed a great deal in order to get there.

Obama’s scheme has limitless political potential because of one vital fact: Whereas Republicans constitute fewer than 40 percent of all residents in cities with populations above 500,000, the corresponding figure in the suburbs that surround those same cities is 52 percent. That’s a rather slim majority, thus Obama is cocksure that he can erase it with some well-executed social engineering which he can orchestrate from his throne. All he needs to do is infuse a few dozen middle-class, suburban congressional districts with several hundred or several thousand additional nonwhite, impoverished Democrats, and he will have sown the seeds of a permanently transfigured electoral map, a permanent Democrat majority in the House of Representatives, a permanent totalitarian future of one-party rule.

If the neighborhoods targeted by Obama’s grand scheme have preferred, up to now, to be zoned for single-family housing, too bad for them. It’s time for a change. Washington knows best. The Democrat Party knows best. President Obama can sniff out a singular white racist at a thousand paces, without so much as a mild breeze to carry the scent.

Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing effectively authorizes the federal government to re-engineer, through HUD, every neighborhood in America—that is, to obliterate all local zoning laws and create racial “balance” wherever and whenever it pleases.

So how will HUD decide where to focus first? That’s easy: It will consult the reams of data it has been quietly and secretly gathering, without a shred of statutory authority from Congress, about the racial and economic makeup of every community in the nation. As investigative journalist and Hoover Institution Fellow Paul Sperry explains, HUD’s bureaucratic beavers have been busy analyzing the distribution of “four racial groups—white, Asian, black or African-American, and Hispanic/Latino”—in “every U.S. neighborhood” and representing them as different-colored dots on “geospatial data” maps designed to “pinpoin[t] racial imbalances.” The dots on these maps will serve as the basis upon which HUD will target various communities with its demands for forced population redistribution.

And you, my fellow American, constitute a microscopic fraction of one of those dots. Makes ya real proud, don’t it?

Now you may be wondering, what if some municipalities try to resist the Obama decree? Predictably, our stalwart master has already figured out how to deal with such obstinate party poopers: The government will punish them by cutting off their federal aid. And if that’s not enough to gain their submission, the government will file economically devastating federal lawsuits claiming violations of fair-housing regulations.

This, then, is the grand plan that Barack Obama has so cleverly pieced together to systematically—district by district, state by state—turn one suburban congressional district after another from Republican red to Democrat blue.

“What about my personal rights and liberties?” you may be tempted to ask, rather quaintly.

Sorry, pal. To Barack Obama and the Democrats, you’re just a white, black, brown, or yellow dot on a geospacial map. Your only civic duty is to sit still, keep your mouth shut, and wait for the masterminds at HUD to sprinkle you where they want you, like a grain of salt, pepper, or sand.

Meanwhile, Obama and the Democrats are having one heckuva good laugh over your meaningless little lives, which are so pathetically insignificant in comparison to the glorious utopia they’re busy erecting behind your backs.

Note: Three individuals in particular have done yeoman’s work in articulating the dangers of Obama’s plan to eradicate America’s suburbs: Stanley Kurtz, Paul Sperry, and broadcaster Mark Levin. You are highly encouraged to acquaint yourselves with their extraordinary insights.