At the state Democratic convention last month, Al Checchi made quite a splash by hiring the Los Lobos rock band for his private rock concert.

The Airline magnate, who reportedly has spent nearly $20 million in his quest to govern California, also learned first-hand a valuable lesson about the spirit of the age.

The Democrats’ Latino caucus had showed up in force, with chairman Steve Ybarra blasting Proposition 227, the ballot initiative that would eliminate most bilingual education, as “racist thuggery.”

In his speech to the caucus, Checchi noted the appearance of his wife in the candidate’s Spanish-language TV commercials. That failed to impress and further attempts to be inclusive bombed big time.

Checchi said that, as an Italian, he shared a common bond with other “Latin people.” As on reporter put it, “the caucus was not amused.” They were apparently not in an inclusive mood. Welcome, Al Checchi, the the world of ethnic politics. Actually, the Democratic hopeful is historically correct.

Who is Latino?

The term “Latino” originally derives from the plain of Latium in what is now central Italy, cradle of the Mediterranean world. Technically speaking, Frank Sinatra, Madonna, Al Pacino, Lee Iacocca and New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani are all Latinos. Italian immigrants arrived in America every bit as hungry, poor and lacking in English skills as any recent immigrants from Mexico or El Salvador.

Checchi is a testament to how well they have done in their adopted land. But by current standards, one has to be politically correct rather than historically or geographically correct. Here’s how it works:

In the politically correct world of ethnic politics we are not the world, we are not the people. The rule is not “one people, one planet.” Rather, this view neatly divides the world into a creditor class and a debtor class.

In current usage, ơLatino” is a political designation claiming accredited victim status due to past malevolence from an oppressor group called “Anglos” or sometimes “Anglo-Saxons,” a people that has not existed for 600 years. And whether they like it or not, “Anglos” includes people with names like O’shaughnessy, Kluczewski, Horowitz and even Checchi. These are not only in the debtor class but on the wrong side of history.

As popularly expressed, “Anglos” and people of no color (whites) are locked into a struggle with people of color and Latinos, which the minority side will win by becoming a majority in some 20 years.

“The people of California will be mostly Hispanic in the future. It’s inevitable that we will take control of all the government institutions.” That is the prophecy of Mario Obledo, a former candidate for governor of California who headed the state’s health and welfare agency during the administration of Jerry Brown.

Politics of exclusion

Note that he has discarded the current doctrine of proportionality, that institutions should reflect the ethnic make-up of the general population. In the future California envisioned by Obledo, Jews, Blacks, Italians and Asians aspiring to hold office all must give way to the inexorable ethnic laws of history.

In January, shortly before he made this prediction to The Sacramento Bee, Obledo, received the Presidential Medal of Freedom from Bill Clinton.

Advocates of this view claim to be on the side of diversity and inclusion but in reality they exclude and divide. Checchi should know that now. He should also know that there is a better way.

Our rights accrue to us as individuals, not as members of any group. And regardless of our color or ethnic background, we are all members of the human race. That’s the only caucus to which we all belong.

Kenneth Lloyd Billingsley is editorial director of the Pacific Research Institute in San Francisco and the author of From Mainline to Sideline: The Social Witness of the National Council of Churches. He can be reached via email at klbillingsley@pacificresearch.org.