Skip to content

A Primer on “Environmental Racism”

September 10, 2009

Following President Obama‘s speech last night, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly interviewed the race-obsessed academic Marc Lamont Hill. In a side point, Hill used the term “environmental racism,” a phrase O’Reilly seemed never to have heard before. Lucky him.

Environmental racism is the profitable invention of litigious leftists. It is a form of “racism” caused by neither malice nor design, which is usually brought on by the very conditions “civil rights” leaders sued to create. For decades, they complained of a lack of industrial jobs and public transportation in the inner city. Now they and the Democratic architects of urban blight complain minorities “disproportionately” suffer from the pollution these industries create — and shake down businesses for remuneration.

I discussed the myth of “environmental racism” in my first book on Teresa Heinz (Kerry), who awarded Peggy Shepard a 2003 Heinz Award (and its honorarium of $250,000) for her work popularizing the concept. Shepard heads the West Harlem Environmental Action, which she inexplicably abbreviates “WE ACT”:

Shepard and WE ACT’s seemingly only project of note is a multi-year struggle against the Manhattan Transportation Authority. At issue is the fact that six of the MTA’s eight bus depots are located in Northern Manhattan, an area primarily populated by minorities. Shepard alleges…[the increased diesel emissions constitute] a form of “environmental racism.” According to WE ACT:

“Title VI of the Civil Rights Act states that no agency receiving Federal funds shall administer a program that discriminates against people on the basis of race. If an agency’s actions have the effect of discriminating, the agency is in violation of Civil Rights law, even if discrimination is not intentional. ‘The MTA would not get away with putting the diesel depots and diesel bus parking lots in other neighborhoods in Manhattan,’ said Ms. Shepard.”

She summed up, “We believe it’s discriminatory because [MTA officials] are spending their money to place a disproportionate burden on low income communities and communities of color in New York City.” Inverting 40 years of civil rights rhetoric, Shepard interpreted increased government spending in “communities of color” as “discriminatory” – a calamity to be remedied by ratcheting up governmental regulation and expanding public health programs. And awarding financial reparations to aggrieved communities and their legal counsel, like Ms. Shepard…

Obviously, cities situate bus depots in those areas most likely to use them, and studies have shown minorities disproportionately avail themselves of public transportation. Indeed, civil rights organizations have accused cities of racism for failure to locate more buses in minority neighborhoods. In other words, Shepard’s group has cried racism and filed a federal lawsuit with the U.S. Department of Transportation, because New York City is too attentive in providing taxpayer-subsidized services to minorities. No good deed goes unpunished.

So, “environmental racism” is a myth, but it is not Hill’s invention.

About these ads
5 Comments
  1. Swemson permalink
    September 10, 2009 5:17 pm

    You’re exactly right when you say that those lawsuits are a shakedown, but then again, as Fred Reed pointed out, the entire civil rights movement, which was absolutely legitimate when it got started, has now morphed into a shakedown racket.

    But regardless of labels like racist, fascist & communist, if you closely observe many of the leading environmental extremist’s organizations it sure looks like like they’re running their operations according to the Saul Alinsky playbook…

  2. Julie Trevor permalink
    September 11, 2009 5:57 am

    Hmmm, if northern Manhattan is such a bad place to be – why did Bill Clinton locate his offices there?

  3. Judy permalink
    September 11, 2009 8:27 pm

    I do not understand how Dr. Hill has such a lack of logic,wisdom and commonsense. I recognize that America rewards celebrity and has ceased to reward hard work, self-reliance and self-accountability, but after watching Dr. Hill on Bill O’Reilly’s show, I still can’t move past the point that Dr. Hill’s stacato view point is racist and quite frankly illogical.Caught in a circle of old ideology and plantation mentality makes those that espouse enviromental racism point in every direction as the problem, and not at themselves. “It’s not my fault”. Wow, I don’t know what we need to do to change this victim mentality, but it should take priority over an health care bill.The whinning is deafening at times.

    • Swemson permalink
      September 11, 2009 10:10 pm

      Sometimes I get the feeling that O’Reilly, in order to fulfill his promise to show all sides of the issues, intentionally brings in clowns like Hill, to help make it clear to the audience how very absurd arguments like Hill’s actually are.

  4. Judy permalink
    September 12, 2009 12:55 am

    Swemson, I have that thought at times also.

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.