Plantation Politics, Part Two

As a Unitarian Universalist, I am obliged by covenant to affirm the inherent worth and dignity of every person. As a minister within this free religious tradition, I have a special obligation to attend to these affirmations. But I have to tell you, gentle reader, that for the past few days, Geraldine Ferraro has nearly made me lose my religion. Or to quote my late father, she has made my a@# ache.

The part of me that is feeling pastoral at this moment may be willing to cut Gerry some slack because she may be too old to know any better. As a white woman of a certain age, Ferraro’s political and personal awareness on issues of race preceded the work of women like Peggy MacIntosh, the uber-white-ally whose landmark work on white privilege laid the foundation for genuine anti-racist work a generation ago. Ferraro, on the other hand, is one of those women who is stuck in the monolithic view of white feminist privilege, a woman who may very well believe that being a woman is such a singular disadvantage and burden that all others pale (you’ll pardon the inadvertent pun) beside it.

I remember standing more than 20 years ago in the newsroom of the Wall Street Journal, where I worked as a copy editor, on the day that Ferraro was named Walter Mondale’s vice presidential candidate. I stood there as a black woman and cried, imagining then that I had been privileged to live at a time when a white woman would be seen as a creditable vice presidential candidate, and imagining that my day might one day come. I remember Election Day, when I voted for her, even though it turned out that she would lose. I even remember telling others not to blame her, years later, because her husband was involved in less than transparent financial dealings. All those moments were a long time ago.

Now I am so ashamed that I ever allowed myself to be seduced into believing that she and I could make common cause; for white women like Ferraro and Clinton, common cause means men and women of color playing adoring handmaidens to them while they take the lead–even when they don’t deserve it. I am reminded of nothing so much as an old movie (by my sons’ standards) called “The Competition,” with Richard Dreyfuss and Amy Irving. Dreyfuss and Irving, concert pianists, fall in love during a cut-throat piano competition, which Irving wins. But winning the competition has a drastic effect on Dreyfuss, who suddenly finds himself faced with an unthinkable reality that threatens their relationship. Even though they had made plans to be together before the competition was decided, everything threatened to change once the Amy Irving character won. As Dreyfuss said in the movie’s most arresting scene, “It never crossed my mind that you were better than me.”

Ferraro/Clinton have worked hard for what they have, just as Dreyfuss did in this sleeper film. But it is obvious that a subtle combination of entitlement and racism has fueled their every cynical move, especially as Obama’s delegate lead grows ever larger. (Anyone who’s driven Routes 80 or 81 in Pennsylvania can testify to how well Ferraro’s rank innuendo–and Clinton’s tepid denials–will play among certain folks there.) Obama’s skills, timing, and (perhaps too much) grace under pressure have had a synergistic effect which neither the two of them, nor any of their supporters, had counted on when this long race began. Under other circumstances (before they started showing their collective a@#??, perhaps) I would have found a way to affirm Clinton’s historic and cynically pragmatic campaign. But it is far too unattractive for me to cooperate with a group of people who are so amazed that a black man can accomplish what they, so far, have not been able to manage, that they have resorted to slander, innuendo, condescension and the cheesiest kind of racism.

One day, I will turn on my television, and a black woman will be running for President of the United States. I used to think I would never live to see such a day. But I have been blessed enough to see several things I was sure would never happen in my lifetime: Nelson Mandela walking out of prison; Geraldine Ferraro being named as a vice presidential candidate; Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton being the last two people standing in a Democratic presidential nomination process. I am only 52 years old, and I believe in God, so I think Time and The Holy are on my side. In the meantime, I am left speechless by the horrific spectacle of the Clinton campaign revealing their racist underbelly. I only wish I could tell you how surprised I am by it all.

3 Responses to “Plantation Politics, Part Two”

1. Chalicechick says:

   March 13, 2008 at 1:43 pm

   I don’t get this. (A voice in my head is telling me I can’t possibly get this, because I’m white, but I’m going to try).

   I didn’t understand your previous post either, to be honest. (Am I crazy, or was even Carol Mosely-Braun telling Clinton that the Guinier nomination wasn’t going to go through and he should cut his losses and withdraw it? I really doubt that Ms. Brown’s grounds for saying that were that Guinier was not properly appreciative of the Clintons. Nominations, particularly nominations of people who advocate ideas the American public sees as radical*, fall apart sometimes and get withdrawn, particularly when congress is not supportive. This happened to Clinton a lot and I don’t see how the Guinier nomination differs much from the other times it happened.)

   I don’t have a ton of sympathy for Geraldine Ferraro. I do get why she would see things that way, particularly in regards to this campaign. I’m going to follow your convention of blocking out dirty words and say simply that I’ve heard the C word a lot more than I’ve heard the N word recently, and I bet in Geraldine Ferraro’s case that’s true as well. But I also get why Samantha Power would see Hillary Clinton as a monster.

   In both cases, the candidates have said they don’t agree with the remarks, and the campaign staffers have resigned after calls for said resignation from the other side. I’m not sure why in one case that’s “politics as usual” and in another case it’s “plantation politics.” I’d say in both cases it is exhausted campaigners mouthing off in front of the press when they shouldn’t have. Since you brought up Jesse Jackson, I feel safe in mentioning the word “Hymietown.” These things happen on all sides.

   I don’t get why Power herself is to blame for her remarks, but both Ferraro and Clinton are to blame for Clinton’s remarks.

   I don’t think Clinton is amazed at all that Obama is as popular as he is because he’s black. I just think she thinks she would do a better job running the country, and I do think she is amazed that voters would pick someone whom she views as inexperienced over her, but I honestly don’t think race has anything to do with it.

   Anyway, that’s this white girl’s perspective.

   CC

   *When I was in graduate school I did some work with a guy who has devoted his career to proportional representation, so I’m more used to the idea than a lot of people. At one point, I planned to write a PhD thesis about vote dilution, the results of which would have made me as un-nominateable as Guinier.
2. lizardeater says:

   March 14, 2008 at 1:20 pm

   I remember when Anita Hill testified, and a lot of women who hadn’t previously self-identified as feminists said, “Yes. I am a feminist.”

   I am afraid that this year is going to be another watershed, as many women who proudly called themselves feminists looked at Gloria Steinem, Hillary Clinton, and Geraldine Ferraro (and many more) and said … “Um … I don’t want to be in *that* club.”

   The entire Ferraro thing was so hurtful to me, from her warning that Obama shouldn’t make her angry to Hillary Clinton finally “repudiating” Ferraro and saying that “we can be proud of both Jesse Jackson and Senator Obama.” The latter, how it rankled!
3. revrose says:

   March 15, 2008 at 5:02 am

   Hi ChaliceChick–

   (Girl, have you talked to someone about those voices you’re hearing?)

   Seriously, though: I don’t think being white is an automatic barrier to understanding the racialized aspect of this campaign. Keith Olbermann is white, and he gets it.

   Just to be clear, you will never hear the N word the way you hear the C word in the context of this campaign. That is the part of this conversation in which I concur with you. The idea that an anti-Hillary organization could name itself in a way that allow its initials to become C**T is a disgrace, no matter how you feel about Hillary Clinton.

   But that doesn’t change the reality of the Clinton campaign and the way they use race. They especially love the use of code. The code is meant to communicate with certain groups of people. Ferraro’s comment was not planned by anyone except her–but I believe the use of that comment and the way that it played out over several days was absolutely planned by the folks in the Clinton campaign.

   Clinton MUST win Pennsylvania to make her argument that she should be the nominee. Her polling tells her what James Carville famously said years ago: Pennsylvania is Pittsburgh and Philadelphia with Alabama in the middle. White ethnic men living in that big rural expanse, men who blame their declining fortunes on America’s broadening of access to opportunity, will resonate with Ferarro’s message that Obama is “lucky.”

   Clinton could have put a stop to this story immediately, the way Obama put a stop to the Samantha Power story immediately, with two words: you’re fired. Instead, she made excuse after excuse (I didn’t say it; I regret it; those aren’t my views, blah-blah-blah). Clinton let that story string out for days, because she and her advisors currently find it useful to do so.

   Want to see how it’s done? Pay attention to tonight’s news about Obama’s pastor, Jeremiah Wright,who was out of his role as a campaign advisor within 24 hours after remarks he made as a pastor about the state of the US. That’s what you do when you’re not interested in speaking in code.