Inside Every Liberal Is a Totalitarian Screaming to Get Out: The Death of the Neighborhood
A policy at least two years in the making, and President Obama’s broadest attempt to fundamentally transform the United States of America, is moving forward. Unveiled in July of 2013 at the NAACP convention, a plan known as “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” (AFFH) will require  the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to gather data on segregation and discrimination in every neighborhood in America and attempt to “fix” these alleged problems. The move little more than social engineering on steroids, giving further credence to the slogan emblazoned on the Frontpage Magazine masthead: “Inside every liberal is a totalitarian screaming to get out.”
The final regulations are due out this month and HUD is pitching them as a plan to “diversify” America. “HUD is working with communities across the country to fulfill the promise of equal opportunity for all,” a spokeswoman for the agency explained . “The proposed policy seeks to break down barriers to access to opportunity in communities supported by HUD funds.”
The effort calls for HUD to set aside taxpayer funds to upgrade poorer communities with amenities such as better schools, parks, libraries, grocery stores and transportation routes as a means of gentrifying those communities. It also calls for using grant money to build affordable housing in wealthy neighborhoods. Ultimately however, as it is with virtually every facet of the leftist agenda, it’s a naked power grab: the Obama administration is holding certain housing funds hostage to a city’s efforts to determine patterns of segregation in various neighborhoods and submit plans to address those patterns. Cities that refuse to do so would have funds used to improve blighted areas withheld.
This is nothing less than the despotic attempt to overrule  the zoning laws of more than 1,200 local city governments. Even more insidiously, HUD is attempting to get those governments to “discover” subtler and unintentional forms of harm they inflict on minority communities, using the “disparate impact” theory as their club to achieve that objective. Under Title VII of the Civl Rights Act of 1964, one is prohibited from using a facially neutral practice “that has an unjustified adverse impact on members of a protected class. A facially neutral employment practice is one that does not appear to be discriminatory on its face; rather it is one that is discriminatory in its application or effect,” the law states.
There may be no greater triumph with regard to the left’s totalitarian instincts than the notion that there are “protected classes” of Americans who can force other Americans to accommodate them, absent any proof of harm. One is left to wonder if leftists would be equally sanguine with white Americans suing minority-dominated professional sports teams for minority “over-representation” on the playing field, an outcome that produces an adverse impact on white athletes. Moreover, it will be utterly fascinating to see how a lawsuit leveled  against Harvard by Asian-Americans, who have alleged they have a higher bar for enrollment than other ethnicities, proceeds. The irony here is that there might be completing  clams of disparate impact: if more adversely affected Asians are enrolled, there may be less places for Hispanics and black Americans—who will then be adversely affected.
FULL ARTICLE HERE