Here’s a fascinating post at The Thinking Housewife:
IN THIS 1971 BBC interview, Muhammad Ali passionately defends racial identity and explains why he objects to interracial marriage. It’s well worth watching for his unapologetic and commonsense arguments. Sir Michael Parkinson, his interviewer, is a typical liberal sap. He insists that the races are all the same and only “society has made us different.” To which Ali instantly responds, “No, God made us different.”
Ali is applauded by the audience. “It’s nature to just want to be with your own,” he says. “I want to be with my own…. You a hater of your people if you don’t want to stay who you are. Are you ashamed of what God made you? God didn’t make no mistake when he made us all as we are.”
“I think that’s a philosophy of despair,” Parkinson says.
“Despair?” Ali says. “That ain’t no despair. [applause] I tell you no woman on this earth … can please me like my American black woman… I want to be with my own. I love my people.”
No white person could make the same arguments today without risking his livelihood and accusations of serious psychological illness. Was Ali sick and evil when he defended racial identity? No, he was the most normal of men. He was healthy and honest.
I don’t have a big stake in this debate. I don’t object to interracial marriage. Nor do I object to an ethnic group trying to preserve itself by discouraging out-marriage; it’s no more evil when southern whites do it than when the Jews do it. I don’t know whether it’s good or bad that there are different races. I lean toward the view that it’s an indifferent thing, but that it naturally accompanies something that is usually a good thing–a diversity of cultures.
What really interests me in the above debate is how the interviewer simply assumes that everyone must regard racial homogenization as a good thing, so that if Ali isn’t preserving this goal, it can only be because he “despairs” of its realization. He simply can’t fathom that Ali doesn’t regard racial homogenization as a good thing to strive for at all, regardless of whether it’s achievable.
This is, of course, a general liberal presumption. We conservatives need to get the news out: it’s not the case that we’re only nonliberals because we’re pessimistic. It’s not that we agree that liberalism’s utopia is beautiful and morally perfect, but unachievable given human sinfulness. We find liberalism’s desired utopia evil and hateful. If anything, we fear that it may be achievable, and we desperately want to save humanity from this spiritual catastrophe.