Who needs Ward Connerly
when you have Geraldine Ferraro?
- By Gregory Rodriguez
- March 17, 2008
For decades, critics of
affirmative action on both sides of the aisle have argued that the
policy calls into question the talents and qualifications of the
minorities who benefit from it. They insisted that it generates a
cloud of suspicion around the successful black or Latino student
or professional. It makes whites wonder whether their minority
colleagues really "earned" their positions.
It turns out those critics are right about the suspicion part. And
evidently you don't even have to be an actual beneficiary of
affirmative action to be accused of having an unfair advantage.
Geraldine Ferraro's remark that "if [Barack] Obama was a white
man, he would not be in this position" was not racist per se; it
did not presume racial inferiority on the part of any person or
group. But it was remarkably arrogant, ignorant and,
unfortunately, reflective of an all too common and growing
sentiment in the post-Civil Rights era.
- In 1999, the Seattle Times commissioned a
survey that found 75% of whites agreed with the statement that
"unqualified minorities get hired over qualified whites" most or
some of the time. Two-thirds felt the same when asked about
promotions and college admissions. Whether white disadvantage is
real or imagined, the poll showed that a considerable number of
whites feel threatened not only by the means of ascent but by
minority advancement itself. Clearly, most minorities who
advance up the professional ladder are not unqualified. (If you
think that last sentence is incorrect, you probably are a
true-blue racist.)
But what's most troubling about Ferraro's comment was that she
seemed blind to its implications and absurdities. In retrospect,
Ferraro's own claim to fame -- being tapped by a white male
party "elder" to be the Democrats' vice presidential candidate
-- clearly had the whiff of tokenism about it. Unlike Ferraro in
1984, Obama has built his run for high national office over
many, many months, from the ground up, raising money and voter
awareness on his own. Where then is the affirmative action?
If Ferraro had clarified her remarks (and she had oh so many
television minutes last week to do so) -- perhaps explaining
that what she meant was that Obama's blackness has played a role
in his appeal -- she might have saved her role in the Clinton
campaign, but she still would have been only partly right.
Because what's impressive about Obama is not so much his African
American identity as the way he wields it. He uses both the
language of group pride and national unity. Unlike so
many -- often media-created -- black leaders, Obama doesn't use
a parochial message of victimhood or the zero-sum logic of "us
versus them." Rather than spend a lot of time talking about
racism, historical or otherwise, he preaches a form of
collective can-doism. He sells himself as a symbol of
reconciliation and knows that at this point in history, cries of
racism are the quickest way to turn off white voters who are
tired of being made to feel guilty for racial injustice.
But, of course, after Obama's campaign rightly complained about
Ferraro's rhetoric (calling it "absurd" and "wrongheaded"), the
indignant Ferraro inaccurately accused them of accusing her of
being a racist. So there you go, despite all his efforts, the
lucky-to-be-a-black-male presidential candidate can't escape the
stereotype. In the end, she still sought to paint him as that
much-maligned "black civil rights leader" who never stops
whining about racism: Barack Obama as the Rev. Al Sharpton.
Now, none of this would matter much if these had been the
utterances of a small-time Clinton campaign worker. But Ferraro
has a legacy in Democratic politics. Her remarks, coupled with
those of former President Clinton comparing Obama's win in South
Carolina to Jesse Jackson's victory there in 1984, reveal a
reckless disregard for blacks in the higher echelons of the
Democratic Party. Yes, it'll all be forgotten if Obama wins the
nomination. But it'll fester if he doesn't.
Nor should Republicans gloat too much. Ferraro's implicit
leveraging of white resentment over affirmative action was
essentially an ad-hoc version of Richard Nixon's infamous
"Southern strategy."
And what happens if black voters do become disaffected with the
Democratic Party? Because the GOP isn't likely to embrace them,
those voters would probably abstain from the process. And as
even someone with the slightest knowledge of history should
know, having large numbers of African Americans feeling
alienated from the political system and with no place to turn
isn't just bad for blacks but for the entire body politic. Now
is as good a time as any for Hillary Clinton's supporters to
realize that there are more important things than winning.
grodriguez@latimescolumnists.com
-
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-rodriguez17mar17,0,6671075.column?track=ntothtml
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this
material is distributed by HispanicVista.com (www.hispanicvista.com)
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
the included information for research and educational purposes.) |