What the Reactions to Clarence Thomas Post-Roe Reveal
NBC Think | Musa al-Gharbi, Paul F. Lazarsfeld
An insightful read for anyone who wants to understand how the racist, post-Roe attacks against Clarence Thomas only serve to vindicate his beliefs. “There is a deep irony in characterizing Thomas as an ‘Uncle Tom’ (or worse) given that…he identified with Black nationalism… [and] his views on race and racial issues have remained highly consistent over the course of his life… The reactions…[are] a clear vindication of Black nationalists’ longstanding suspicion that…many self-described ‘allies’ are themselves deeply racist and simply use the Black cause as a convenient vehicle for shoring up their own power and influence.”
As the authors details, “Thomas’ embrace of the Republican Party is consonant with a deep mistrust of white liberals, the institutions they control and the policies they try to advance in the name of ‘social justice.’”
In a recent interview, the authors cite Thomas as saying, “The only people with whom I’ve had difficulties are white, liberal elites who consider themselves the anointed and us the benighted… I have never had issues with members of my race.”
Going back, “Thomas was deeply inspired by Malcolm X…[who argued], ’the white liberal is the one who has perfected the art of posing as the Negro’s friend and benefactor… By winning the friendship, allegiance and support of the Negro, the white liberal is able to use the Negro as a pawn or a tool.’” Citing a 2019 New Yorker piece, it is also known that Thomas supported Black Panther leader Kathleen Cleaver and Communist Party member Angela Davis.
How did Thomas’ views get shaped? The authors write, “The political theorist Robin notes that, in the aftermath of King’s assassination…‘by his own report, Thomas has a realization that nobody is going to do anything for black people. And by nobody, he means white liberals and white leftists.’” From there, “it was the work of Black economist Thomas Sowell that ultimately helped him channel his misgivings toward ‘white saviors’ into a coherent, right-aligned political philosophy.”
Today, the authors argue it is “Black nationalist impulses [that] continue to influence his rulings and judicial philosophy… Core to Thomas’ thinking…is ‘a belief in Black self-defense’… [It] undergirds…[his] support for the Second Amendment…[and] his opposition to abortion.” As the authors write, Thomas’ “aversion to abortion is significantly informed by its deep and longstanding ties to racial eugenics programs…pushed heavily by white liberals of the time, also in the name of helping the marginalized and disadvantaged. Thomas has no trust in similar social justice rhetoric being deployed by abortion rights advocates today.”
As for the racist vitriol targeting Thomas on the overturning of Roe? “The reactions many contemporary liberals have directed toward Thomas… seem to be a clear vindication of Black nationalists’ longstanding suspicion that, at bottom, many self-described ‘allies’ are themselves deeply racist and simply use the Black cause as a convenient vehicle for shoring up their own power and influence.”
