One of the differences between Senators Clinton and Obama is that Senator Clinton repeatedly makes references to her campaign as an effort to elect the first woman as President of the United States. That is part (some would say a big part) of her appeal to many voters. Senator Obama, on the other hand, does not campaign on the fact that he might be the nation’s first black President. While race is certainly a factor in the electoral politics of some states he is not running as the black candidate – rather, he is running as a candidate who happens to be black. His message reaches beyond boundaries of race and gender.So the choice is less one between electing the first woman or the first black to the White House. The choice is between an identity politics of the past and a national unity politics of the future.
Here is Reed Hundt at TPM Café on identity politics in the 2008 Presidential race:
Subtly, continuously, President Clinton invokes identity politics: he tells everyone all the time that Obama is the black candidate, Mrs. Clinton the female candidate.
Bill Clinton grew up with the identity politics of the 60's and 70's. Barack Obama is talking about a politics that does not start and finish with demographics, but instead depends on common ethical principles that don't so much cross, as they ignore lines drawn by race, gender, and religion.
The choice now is between the old identity politics -- the politics that gave the Democratic Party nominees like Walter Mondale and Mike Dukakis, honorable people whose candidacies did not inspire -- and a new kind of politics that might build a large, winning, and effective coalition.
By talking daily about identity, President Clinton is rooting himself and by extension Mrs. Clinton in an old, out-of-date reference scheme. Maybe it will work; maybe in some other big blue state this old language will still resonate. But increasingly I doubt that.
1 comment:
Post a Comment