My secret has been uncovered. I had tried so hard to keep it under wraps but I have been discovered: I am a white man. But I am also a gay man. And that is pertinent to the argument I am going to make. I want to say from the outset that I am not attempting to mansplain anything to anyone. I would seriously welcome opinions from others who are not like me on these very difficult issues to which there are no easy answers.
In 2008, candidate Barack Obama and running mate Joe Biden said in the presidential debates that marriage was between a man and a woman. It was hard to hear because there is evidence that Illinois State Senator Barack Obama had come out in favor of marriage equality. The idea was that if he came out for something which the majority of the public against it, he could lose and then power would be handed over to John McCain and the GOP with a MUCH worse record on equality. So while I was briefly tempted to not vote for BHO in 2008 because of this stance, I knew that the alternative would be much worse. I felt that Obama could evolve on the issue. I felt that, while he was not saying everything I wanted to hear, he would not hurt me, while John McCain would. It was a choice of one or the other. Furthermore, aside from just a few people in blue states, NO ONE was particularly vocal about marriage equality in 2008. Claire McGaskill, Bill Nelson and Harry Reid certainly didn’t jump on the marriage equality bandwagon. Many DEM senators said things I didn’t want to hear but I made the choice in my donations to help people who were vastly better on the issue. It might be years or even decades until I could get that perfect supportive advocate in Missouri or Florida or.. So when I looked at the alternatives and Obama’s and DEMs’ potential to change, I made a decision to choose Obama and the Dems over politicians who would actively hurt me. Does that make me and all of you who supported Obama homophobic or is it complicated?
Fast forward to Kos’ recommended diary. Basically he says were all on the same page on economic issues but it all comes down to white men being unable to cede their privilege. I think that, while white male privilege is a huge problem that needs to be addressed, I think it is painting with a quite broad brush particularly given the case of Health Mello in Omaha.
First, let me say that I think this whole thing about Mello quickly devolved into a proxy war between Hillary and Bernie fractions. I am not a Bernie fan by any measure but one of the big issues I had with him was that he always seemed so line in the sand, this or nothing. I thought in this aspect, he was showing a bit of pragmatism and in this case, given the extreme nature of his opponents, I would agree with Bernie’s endorsement here. This is particularly in light of the in-depth diary here showing that Mello had been supported by Planned Parenthood and Cecille Richards herself, something which carries huge weight with me. It was also explained that he signed onto something that would mention an ultrasound to women but not make them do it, in lieu of much harsher legislation which would violate women with ultrasounds etc.
Second, I think we all need to look at what we mean when we say, “Support”. If Dailykos makes an endorsement or not, that has a good deal of weight. But if you say you “support” a candidate, does that mean you go there and campaign, phone bank, canvas or does it mean that you may chip in $25, $50? Or does it mean you are simply expressing your support or lack thereof on a liberal blog? If it is the former, that can be a big deal. If it is the latter, and you are just debating on a blog, it really doesn’t mean diddly squat for people in real life conditions in Omaha or elsewhere. A popular diary from the end of last week said that she draws an absolute line on this issue and if we didn’t agree, she would “fight” us. Ok, how exactly does fighting with me or anyone on a blog help the actual conditions for real women who need real services in the real world?
So getting back to the matter at hand: is it always just about privilege if I or anyone else chooses the best policy on the ground that will impact real lives? The reality it, in politics, you often have to make a choice. It is not RWNJ/more conservative Dem/Cecille Richards on the ballot. It is about working with someone who has said, despite his personal philosophy, he will work with Planned Parenthood, enough to get the support of Cecille Richards herself versus someone who will actively work to undermine choice and undertake legislation which actively undermines a woman’s right to choose and hurts women. Does it make me a privileged white male because I want women in Omaha to have a safe haven while services in Nebraska are so severely lacking? How much of this is actually a Bernie/Hillary proxy war?
Let’s look at the reality on the ground: Virtually anything that has been progressive: minimum wage, marijuana, marriage equality, emissions caps, disabled rights, trans rights has started from a more progressive state or city. Very often, in redder and more rural areas, Dems are often more reserved about these issues. In fact, sometimes they are often retrograde. Look at choice: our former VP Joe Biden was AGAINST Roe v. Wade when the ruling was made. He made numerous other unfavorable comments on choice over the years. But he evolved and when vice president he did nothing to harm women’s reproductive rights and supported choice in policy, if not in personal philosophy. This can also be said about Harry Reid, Bob Casey and others. Tim Kaine actually signed ultrasound legislation, but most of us were reasonably ok with him as Hillary’s VP. He too stated he would not let personal philosophy dictate policy. The fact is, many rural and red/purple state Dems have made lots of very muddy statements about issues. And yet compared to the GOP alternative, they are vastly better. You can say Jon Ossoff is this or that, but compared to that monster who brought down Komen over her agenda to end choice, yeah, I’m going for Ossoff and I think a lot of women would too.
The same can be said about marriage equality. If I made that my red line in the sand, until roughly 2012 I would not be supporting many Democratic candidates who may not make the best statements and helping the much, much worse GOP alternative win. Here I am looking at my own self-preservation.
I think that is the case here as well. Yes, white male privilege is a huge problem. But I think here the issue is more complex. If I lived in a red state, I would certainly have a female relative whom I cared about and faced with the choice of a Mello vs. RWNJ or Ossoff vs. Handel, I’d be making the choice based on what would be best given the conditions and the candidates to choose from. I don’t see that as white privilege, I see it as being as pragmatic as possible, choosing philosophical impurity or someone who would do actual harm.
Now your mileage can vary on this. I accept Bernie endorsing Mello in Omaha given the alternatives and given the support of Planned Parenthood whom I trust. I do NOT accept him endorsing Tulsi Gabbard, homophobe, islamophobe and Assad apologist. Because Hawaii can do better. Much like I have huge issues with Di-Fi in my native state or Joe Lieberman in my adopted state.
I would like to close with some hypothetical scenarios, and I’d be curious what people’s answers would be:
- You want marijuana legalized in your state and you need to choose between a Dem who “has issues and is not there yet” over a REP who wants it illegal forever and to go after states who legalized it.
- You are a person of color and you have to choose between Robert Byrd (alive and say 70 in this scenario) with his unfortunate history of being in the Klan 50 years over a current racist who wants to stop people of color from voting and does nothing about police brutality.
- You are a trans person who has to choose between a Dem who is pretty indifferent to your cause or a Rep who wants bathroom bills.
- You have to choose between a Dem who kowtows to big coal over a Repub who totally denies climate change and wants to roll back all of what Obama achieved.
There are the hard, pragmatic choices people on the ground have to make everyday. In purple and red states, in particular, it often comes down to making an imperfect choice over an alternative which is much worse. And in our national politics we have to accept some Dems who don’t have perfect histories on things provided a) They do not harm us in legislation and b) They are able to evolve on issues. Because nobody who is a Dem, not Bernie, not Hillary, not Obama is going to have every position we agree with.
So please don’t paint me with a broad brush. I am a white man. But I care about choice. I care about issues affecting people of color. I am a gay man. I will continue in my votes and my support and donations to choose the person I feel is best for the people on the ground given their local circumstances and their alternatives. White privilege must be addressed but sometimes the issues and the choices we make are more complex than all of that. I am a white man but I am also many other things and try to make educated choices for people different than I am — that is why I am a progressive and a Democrat.