Nowadays, it’s only Latinos, women, and African-Americans who practice identity politics. Everyone else agrees that white, male Anglos are the only ones qualified to be in charge of anything. But it wasn’t always this way:
Back in 1962, when Joseph Lieberman was 20, he attended a raucous Democratic state convention in Hartford, Conn. Abraham Ribicoff, the former governor, had decided to leave his post in the Kennedy Cabinet to run for the Senate.
John M. Bailey, then the party chairman, wanted to clear the field for Ribicoff, his protege, but the Democratic congressman at large, Frank Kowalski, had his own eyes on the Senate nomination.
Bailey easily mustered the convention votes to endorse Ribicoff and then turned around to offer Kowalski another shot at his old job in Congress. Kowalski, on a high horse, refused, and briefly the prospect loomed of a Democratic ticket without a Polish name — a no-no in an era of ethnically balanced politics.
The other day, Lieberman recalled what happened next: “Backstage, the call went out for a Polish Catholic, preferably someone who could speak Polish.” The answer was a lawyer named Bernard Grabowski, who had no idea that morning that he was about to become a candidate. In November Grabowski was elected.
I know what you’re thinking: did Grabowski ever describe himself as a “wise Pole” who ate pierogies?
Punchy
But did they take a poll before taking a Pole? Was it above the pale to fix the pall by taking a poll to choose said Pole?
I could do this forever.
eric
The fundamental fact of the American political and economic system is that the economic injustices thrust upon most workers by the ruling class creates the environment of fear and distrust that the same ruling class can manipulate to turn sufferer against sufferer without either turning his eyes towards making the sorts of systemic changes necessary to remedy the root injustices.
And, as an added benefit, when you point this out you are an anti-American commie/$ociali$t and the sufferers are the loudest shouters.
eric
C Nelson Reilly
Hard to believe Joe Lieberman was once twenty years old
eric
@C Nelson Reilly: he went by Japeth at the time.
eric
Hunter Gathers
Looks like GITMO probably won’t be closed anytime soon. Evidently, we are a nation of complete cowards. Or morons. One of the two. The world’s dumbest argument worked.
cleek
speaking of Lieberman
eric
@Hunter Gathers: isn’t part of this problem solved by simply saying that every prisoner at Gitmo will be treated as if he was on US soil.
I get the optics problem of maintianing Gitmo, but it solves the civil rights/justice problem.
eric
** Atanarjuat **
Pierogies are tasty once in a while, but nothing beats a heaping plate of Arroz con Pollo, with some tostones on the side still hot from the frying pan.
I’m hoping that once Judge Sotomayor is appointed as a Supreme Court Justice, she’ll be a leading advocate for this fine Caribbean island cuisine. My mouth is already watering from having described it.
In fact, I daresay that if Sotomayor were to convince all the other eight Justices to try a steaming bowl of sancocho, their opinions will certainly swing to the left.
-A
David Hunt
Only part of the problem. It might very well solve the problem actual abuse of prisoners. However, Gitmo has become a symbol of our lawless rush to become a rogue state. As long as there’s a prison there, it will continue to endanger U.S. forces and civilians throughout the world.
Hunter Gathers
@eric: The problem is that a majority of the people polled are opposed to it’s closure, period. A majority wants it to stay open. Every time that Obama takes a step to close it, the GOP will bust out Cheney’s argument, the media will run with it, and nothing will happen because most people in this country are fucking stupid. If you take Cheney’s argument at face value, that these detainees are ‘too dangerous’ to be allowed on American soil, , that closing GITMO will weaken the national security of this country, you are a moron.
schrodinger's cat
What do you call a really attractive Polish person?
Bob In Pacifica
What I find funny (ironic funny) is that in this “post-racial America” the people who have relied so much on identity politics are the ones that accuse others of racism.
For example, when I saw the hubbub over Sotomayor talking about the wisdom she acquired from her background my immediate reaction was to think of my background and what I learned from my background. That is, a woman who grew up a poor Puerto Rican learned life’s lessons just as I had as a working class white person. In my mind this was an inclusive statement by her because I presumed that life’s lessons and the strength of character derived from them are universal.
But the reactionaries were put off by them and immediately presumed that the comments were racist and anti-white. You see, their conclusions only stand if you buy their presumption that being a Puerto Rican is fundamentally different from being white. If you’ve been out and about in the world you know that everyone is pretty much the same. Different cultures, different colors, but the fundamental life lessons are the same. Long short, the reactionaries need to see racism (and sexism) because they are racist and sexist.
Zifnab
@schrodinger’s cat:
Three days after you get her number and not a day before, or you’ll look desperate.
Anton Sirius
You meant the first sentence in jest, Doug, but changing demography makes it more true than you intended. Back then, Poles (to use your example) were a recognizable minority; now they’re just caucasians of European descent who have a not-quite-Russian accent.
You can only “play identity politics” when you are assumed to have a distinct cultural identity because you are noticeably different than the norm. Poles were noticeably different from the “norm” (pure-bred WASP) back then; hell, Catholics were different enough from the “norm” to get that cache.
Today you have to outright be a different color to earn that ‘special’ status. Talking funny or having a tough-to-spell last name is too subtle.
schrodinger's cat
@Zifnab
Ok I will now answer my own question
A magnetic pole. Is a physics joke, get it?
jcricket
Speaking of Identity politics, did anyone catch this from Josh Marshall?
(Click through the link to TPM to see the Facebook links, they’re hilariously awful).
Steeplejack
@Punchy:
It seemed like forever, anyway.
TKK
Someone needs to do a screengrab of those Facebook pics/captions before they disappear.
PurpleGirl
Back in the 1970s Professor Rita Cooley (NYU, Department of Political Science) taught a graduate level seminar on ethnic politics. I still the have recommended reading list somewhere — it was like 20 pages long. Yeah, the groups change over time but it seems like every group has its time playing the game. I agree that you need a differentiating factor to define the group in order for it play the ethnic game.
gex
@Hunter Gathers: Time to release the pictures then. Do something to get through to the public.
dj spellchecka
well, i live in the cleveland area where the word “ethnic” translates into “what part of europe are you from….??”
bill james once pointed out [or quoted someone who did] that before jackie robinson broke baseball’s color barrier, various groups of players were identified by their nationality…irish, italian, polish, etc etc….after jackie they were all simply “white.”