by MARK GABRISH CONLAN
Copyright © 2019 by Mark Gabrish Conlan for Zenger’s
Newsmagazine • All rights reserved
“McCarthyism” is
a term of art in American politics. Coined during the ascendancy of U.S.
Senator Joe McCarthy (R-Wisconsin) between 1950 and 1954, it originally meant
targeting politicians, government officials, celebrities, educators and others
with flimsy, out-of-context evidence to indicate they were either active
participants in or unwitting dupes of the “international Communist conspiracy.”
McCarthyism actually pre-dated McCarthy. Republican politicians had been
attacking Franklin Roosevelt’s and Congressional Democrats’ New Deal programs
as Communist-inspired since the late 1930’s. The end of World War II, the
almost simultaneous start of the Cold War with the Soviet Union and the abrupt
switch in the U.S. government’s “party line” in which the Soviets morphed from
valiant wartime ally to bitter enemy of all we believed in and held dear just
added fuel to the fire.
Though McCarthy
died in 1957 and the “international Communist conspiracy” died with the fall of
the Soviet Union in 1991, Right-wing McCarthyism is alive and well. We saw
quite a lot of it in the 2016 Presidential campaign and particularly in the
conspiracy-mongering around Hillary Clinton, who was portrayed by her opponents
as so unremittingly evil the Wicked Queen in Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs looked like Mother Teresa by comparison. But there
is also a Left-wing McCarthyism, which uses the same tactics as the Right-wing
version — conspiracy-mongering, guilt by association and reaching into the
farthest-back records of their targets’ behavior to slam them no matter how
remote this may be to who they are and how they behave now — and, if anything,
is even less fair and more destructive to its victims than the Right-wing
version.
As I write,
Left-wing McCarthyism has virtually destroyed the Democratic Party in Virginia.
The flame was lit, ironically enough, by a Right-wing blogger, Patrick Howley,
who as a former editor and reporter for the Daily Caller and Breitbart News is
the sort of person who’s keeping the flame of Right-wing McCarthyism alive.
Howley was determined to find something
on Virginia Governor Ralph Northam, a Democrat, to stop Northam’s attempt to
liberalize Virginia’s ultra-strict abortion laws. Under its previous Republican
government, Virginia had gone so far out of its way to stop women from having
abortions that they had passed a law requiring any woman seeking an abortion to
undergo an invasive transvaginal exam first. Northam was determined to end this
nonsense and restore reproductive freedom to Virginia’s women — and Howley and
other Right-wingers were equally anxious to find dirt on Northam and other
elected Democrats to stop him.
Howley got his
chance when someone — “a concerned citizen, not a political opponent,” he told Washington
Post reporter Paul Farhi for a story
published there (https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/a-tip-from-a-concerned-citizen-helps-a-reporter-land-the-scoop-of-a-lifetime/2019/02/03/e30762ea-2765-11e9-ad53-824486280311_story.html?noredirect=on)
and in the Los Angeles Times
February 3 — sent him a copy of a page from Ralph Northam’s medical school
yearbook, published in 1984. The page contained a photo of two figures, a young
man dressed in blackface and one in a Ku Klux Klan outfit, complete with hood
covering the head. The text on the page didn’t explain the context of this
image or what it was intended to convey.
But it sparked
precisely the reaction Howley was undoubtedly hoping for when he released it.
The head of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
(NAACP) and other prominent African-American political and community leaders
immediately denounced Northam as a racist and called on him to resign. So did a
lot of other people, including white Democratic politicians in Virginia and
nationwide. The gravamen of the charge against Northam seemed to be that posing
in blackface for a college yearbook photo irrevocably marked Northam as a
racist, and was so far beyond the pale that nothing he’s done in his life since
could atone for it.
One Black woman
on MS-NBC said that by posing for that photo, Northam had not only associated
himself with but taken personal responsibility for every horrible thing that
white Americans have done to African-Americans since first bringing them to
this country as slaves exactly 400 years ago. Another commentator, an
African-American man, compared Northam’s photo to D. W. Griffith’s 1915 film The
Birth of a Nation, an aesthetic masterpiece
(easily the finest film ever made to that time) and a political horror which
portrays the Black politicians who came to power in the South during the
post-Civil War Reconstruction period (1865-1877) as incompetent drunks and
louts manipulated by unscrupulous white Northerners, and the Ku Klux Klan as
heroes riding to the rescue of the decent (white) South and taking the votes
and the guns away from the terrible Black monsters (all of whom were played, by
the way, by white actors in blackface).
Northam’s
response to the accusation didn’t help. At first he did the right thing: on the
afternoon the scandal broke, February 1, he owned up to it and said he was “deeply
sorry for the decision I made to appear as I did in this photo and for the hurt
that decision caused then and now.” The next day, though, he gave a bizarre
press conference, flanked by his wife, in which he said he wasn’t either of the two people in the photo, though he
said that he had worn blackface on another occasion, a party in 1984 in which
he darkened his skin to participate in — and win — a Michael Jackson
impersonation contest. (I couldn’t help but savor the irony that he darkened
his skin to look like Michael Jackson, given Jackson’s own well-documented
racial transformation in the other direction.) He even offered to show the
reporters his rendition of Jackson’s famous “moonwalk” dance, until his wife
blessedly talked him out of it by saying it would be “inappropriate.”
The Right Scores a
Second Scalp
At the time,
some of the people leading the charge against Northam — mainly the Black ones —
said it didn’t matter politically if Northam resigned because there was a fine,
intelligent, popular, charismatic leader in line to succeed him: Virginia’s
African-American lieutenant governor, Justin Fairfax. But then Right-wing
blogger Patrick Howley struck again and nailed a second Virginia Democrat’s
scalp to the wall. On February 4, he released another bombshell, this one
attacking Fairfax and claiming that he had sexually assaulted a woman at the
2004 Democratic National Convention.
“Imagine you
were sexually assaulted during the DNC convention in Boston in 2004 by a
campaign staffer,” said the post on Howley’s Big League Politics site,
attributing the quote to the alleged victim, Scripps College professor Vanessa
Tyson. “You spend the next 13 years trying to forget it ever happened. Until
one day you find out he’s the Democratic candidate for statewide office in a
state 3,000 miles away, and he wins that election in November 2017. Then by strange,
horrible luck, it seems increasingly likely that he’ll get a VERY BIG
promotion.” The Big League Politics post didn’t mention Fairfax’s name as
Tyson’s assaulter, but it contained enough biographical details it wasn’t hard
to figure out he was the accused.
Fairfax
immediately denied the accusation, saying that he and Tyson had had sex but it was completely consensual. Tyson
appeared publicly and said that when Fairfax started kissing her it was consensual, but he then forced himself on her
against her will. Then another alleged victim, Meredith Watson, released a
statement through an attorney that said Fairfax had out-and-out raped her when
they were both students at Duke University in 2000. Unlike Tyson, Watson had
contemporary corroboration for her story: Kaneedreck Adams, a neighbor of
Watson’s in 2000 who told the Washington Post that Watson had disclosed the rape just after it
happened. “She was upset,” Adams said. “She told me she had been raped and she
named Justin.”
Coming on top of
the attacks against Northam, the charges against Fairfax put the Virginia
Democrats in much the same position the Republican caucus of the U.S. Senate
was in when allegations of sexual assault surfaced against then-U.S. Supreme
Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. The Republicans in the Senate basically rallied
around Kavanaugh and voted to confirm him. But Democrats, far more reliant on
the support of women and people of color than Republicans, face a very
different political calculus.
As Vox reporter
Anna North summed it up at the end of her February 4 article on the Fairfax
scandal (https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/2/4/18210638/justin-fairfax-ralph-northam-virginia-sex-assault-allegation),
“Historically, Democrats have responded far more aggressively to allegations of
sexual misconduct than Republicans have. But this situation is new, and it is
unclear how the party will respond. Whatever happens, however, will set a
standard for how Democrats confront sexual misconduct accusations even when
they come from an adversarial source — and when they concern a rising star who
looked like he could help lead his party out of a crisis.”
Dems’ Virginia Success
Turns to Ashes
It’s harder to
dismiss the charges against Fairfax — and the calls from Virginia legislators,
Democrats as well as Republicans, for him to resign (and face impeachment if he
doesn’t) — as Left-wing McCarthyism as it is the ones against Northam. Northam
is accused of pulling a stupid, racially insensitive prank in his college
years, while Fairfax is accused of serious crimes against actual, identifiable
victims. But the result could be to strip Virginia Democrats of their historic
victories in the state’s last two elections and hand control of it back to the
Republicans.
If both Northam
and Fairfax resign or are removed from office, the third in line for the
governorship of Virginia is the state’s Democratic attorney general, Mark
Herring. But he has recently admitted
that he donned blackface during his college years. If he goes, too — and it’s
hard to believe that he can survive in office if Northam resigns for doing the
same thing — the fourth in line and the person who will become Virginia
governor is Kirk Cox, speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates — a
Republican.
One tragedy in
all this is that until the scandals broke, Virginia had been one of the
Democrats’ few recent success stories in the South. In the 2016 and 2018
elections, Virginia stood out as a stark contrast to the shellacking Democrats
were getting through the rest of the South. Tim Kaine easily won re-election to
the U.S. Senate from Virginia even as incumbent Democratic Senators Bill Nelson
in Florida and Claire McCaskill in Missouri (a state that didn’t secede during
the Civil War but is still sociologically and ideologically “Southern”) were
voted out of office. While Beto O’Rourke was losing his heavily hyped challenge
to Texas Senator Ted Cruz by a double-digit margin and African-American
Democrats Andrew Gillum and Stacey Abrams were narrowly losing their
gubernatorial bids in Florida and Georgia, Virginia voters elected Democrats to
statewide office and narrowed the Republican majorities in the state
legislature from 2-1 to virtual ties.
Indeed, one
state legislative race in Virginia was so close it literally was a tie. Kirk Cox got exactly as many votes for the
Virginia House of Delegates as his Democratic opponent, and he was literally elected by the toss of a coin. Now, thanks to the
Left-wing McCarthyist attacks on Democratic Governor Ralph Northam and the
sexual assaults allegedly perpetrated by Democratic Lieutenant Governor Justin
Fairfax, the Republicans are likely to take over the governorship and resume
control of Virginia’s entire state government. What’s more, the phrase
“Virginia Democrat” is becoming a national laugh line and the prestige of the
Democratic Party in Virginia has suffered a blow from which it will probably
take a decade or more to recover.
Just How Bad Is
Blackface, Anyway?
One of the key
elements of the Left-wing McCarthyist attack on Ralph Northam is an hysterical,
ahistorical condemnation of the whole idea of blackface. Northam’s critics are
speaking and acting as if Northam actually joined the Ku Klux Klan or led a
lynch mob. To understand what blackface really means you have to look at it in
historical context. It was part of a wide variety of ethnic stereotypes
comedians and entertainers in the U.S. trafficked in from the mid-19th
to the mid-20th centuries. Look at the products of classic Hollywood
and you will see comedians who specialized in playing stereotyped Germans,
stereotyped Swedes, stereotyped Irishmen, stereotyped Jews and stereotyped Blacks.
The Marx Brothers
began their careers playing ethnic stereotypes: Groucho was the “comic Jew,”
Chico the “comic Italian” and Harpo, until he gradually got fewer and fewer
lines of dialogue until he stopped speaking on stage at all, was “Patsy
Brannigan,” the “comic Irishman.” Since the Marx Brothers actually were Jewish,
modern audiences watching their movies tend to regard Groucho as the most
“authentic” of them — but the people who went to their vaudeville appearances,
their Broadway musicals and the initial releases of their movies saw Groucho as
just another ethnic comedian playing a
Jew.
There’s evidence
that at least some blackface performers regarded their work as a genuine,
heartfelt tribute to authentic Black music and culture. One of the most
interesting documents of this is the 1934 film Wonder Bar, in which Al Jolson — whose star power and status as
the first person who played the lead in a successful sound film kept blackface
and the minstrel-show tradition it sprang out of going for about two
generations after it would have otherwise died out — has two large production
numbers.
On his whiteface
number, “Vive la France” (the film is set in Paris and casts Jolson as an
American entertainer who owns a nightclub there), Jolson sings in a high,
rather whiny tenor with a fast, irritating vibrato. On his blackface number,
“Going to Heaven on a Mule,” he drops his register, sings from the chest
instead of the throat, slows his vibrato and achieves a sound surprisingly like
that of the genuinely African-American concert singers and Broadway performers
of the time. The number itself, directed by Busby Berkeley, is a conglomeration
of just about every racist stereotype you can imagine (which probably kept this
film from being revived in the early 1970’s with Berkeley’s other major films),
but Jolson’s sincerity and soul transcend the minstrelsy conventions and are
genuinely moving.
But McCarthyism
of both the Right and the Left has a
total disregard for historical context. If we consider it wrong today, it must always have been wrong. In a recent Los Angeles
Times article on the problems various
potential Democratic Presidential candidates are having with the “#MeToo”
movement (https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-me-too-presidential-campaign-20190210-story.html),
Nan Whaley, mayor of Dayton, Ohio and a long-standing Democratic Party
activist, is quoted as saying, “I think what has been acceptable in the past is
not going to be acceptable in this cycle. And you’re seeing that bear out.”
Another
characteristic of both Right-wing and Left-wing McCarthyism is its reluctance
to consider a person’s total historical
record. To a McCarthyite, on either end of the ideological spectrum, you are
the worst thing you ever did — forever. Local Democratic party organizations
throughout the U.S. used to hold major fundraisers on what was called
“Jefferson-Jackson Day.” No more: the two founders of the modern-day Democratic
Party have both been ruled out of its pantheon, Thomas Jefferson because he was
a slaveowner and Andrew Jackson because he not only was a slaveowner but
pursued a genocidal policy against Native Americans.
The fact that
Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, with its flat-out statement
that “all men are created equal” and are entitled to the “unalienable rights”
of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” has been flushed down an
Orwellian “memory hole” by the Left’s modern-day McCarthyites. More sophisticated
historians might look at Jefferson’s ownership of slaves and participation in
the plantation system that exploited them as signs of his human complexity and
his inability, all too typical of our species, to live up to his noblest ideals
in his personal life.
They might also
look at the positive aspects of Jackson’s record, including his fierce
opposition to secession (Donald Trump made an arguable case when he said that
if Jackson had been around in the 1850’s there might not have been a civil war)
and his attack on the Bank of the United States, a leftover from Alexander
Hamilton’s desire to put Northern financiers in charge of the American economy
forever. (The Bank of the United States got effectively revived in 1913 with
the creation of the Federal Reserve, which subcontracted America’s monetary
policy to the financial elites who make it up.) But they don’t because to a
McCarthyite, Right or Left, you are the
worst thing you’ve ever done and nothing else matters.
Yet another
problem with Left-wing McCarthyism, even more than the Right-wing variety, is a
bizarre lack of concern with the aftermath of bringing down elected Democrats
and allowing Republicans to take power. Do the people who are working so hard
to drive Ralph Northam out of office really think that the cause of
African-Americans in Virginia will be better off if Republican Kirk Cox becomes
the state’s governor? Or, more likely, do they care?
San Diegans have
an object lesson in what happens when Democrats gang up on a Democratic politician
and force him out of office so he can be replaced by a Republican. In 2013
newly elected Mayor Bob Filner, the first Democrat to be Mayor of San Diego in
20 years, was brought down by a coalition of Democratic activists concerned
about his lewd and salacious comments towards women in his office. They
eventually got rid of Filner and forced a special election to replace him —
which was won easily by moderate Republican Kevin Faulconer.
Had the parties
been reversed — had Filner been San Diego’s first Republican Mayor in 20 years — the Republicans would have
rallied around him as they did nationally around Brett Kavanaugh (and Clarence
Thomas before him), and he’d probably still be in office. But Filner had the
bad luck to be a Democrat, a member of the party crucially dependent on the
votes of women and people of color to make up for their ongoing disadvantage
among white men, and therefore he had to be sacrificed — as did U.S. Senator Al Franken (D-Minnesota), New
York governors Elliot Spitzer and Eric Schneiderman, and other politicians who
have, justly or unjustly, run afoul of the Democrats’ sex police.
At least Filner
was held to account in 2013 for things he actually did in 2013. Ralph Northam is the victim of a concerted campaign
by fellow Democrats to push him out of office over things he did 35
years ago. But that’s yet another aspect of
both Right-wing and Left-wing McCarthyism: not only are you the worst thing
you’ve ever done, you’re the worst thing you’ve ever done no matter how long
ago it was or how much you’ve changed since. The folks leading the charge
against Northam are utterly uninterested in how he’s grown or changed, or
whether the ambiguous photo in that medical-school yearbook (even if he’s in it
we don’t know whether he’s the figure in blackface or the figure in the Klan
hood) reflects how he feels about racial issues now.
In 2017 Northam
was forthright in his denunciation of the racist “Unite the Right” rally in
Charlottesville and said that white supremacy had no place in his home state.
That was a highly gutsy move for a candidate who was running as a moderate and
hoping to peel off some crossover Republican votes in his campaign. It was also
just two years ago. Reason and good sense would suggest that the Northam of
2017, the one who denounced the violent white supremacists in Charlottesville,
is more likely to be the Northam of today than the Northam of 1984 who blacked
himself up for a Michael Jackson impersonation contest and put a stupidly
insensitive, racist photo on his college yearbook page.
But McCarthyism,
on either side of the ideological aisle, has nothing to do with reason. The
Right-wing McCarthyites, including McCarthy himself and the members of the
House Committee on Un-American Activities, didn’t just ask people if they were
Communists. They said, “Are you now or have you ever been … .” What’s more, they didn’t just ask people if they
were or ever had been Communists, they asked them about a whole variety of
progressive and liberal organizations and movements because their real intent
was to destroy America’s progressive and liberal political ideologies by
associating them with our Cold War enemy, Communism in general and the Soviet
Union in particular.
No Compassion, No
Redemption
Indeed, one
crucial difference between Right-wing and Left-wing McCarthyism actually makes
Left-wing McCarthyism look worse.
Right-wing McCarthyites, perhaps influenced by the Christian religious doctrine
of sin and redemption, at least offered its victims a way out. Just as Jesus
Christ told the woman taken in adultery, after he saved her from being stoned
by the mob, “Go and sin no more,” Right-wing McCarthyites offered an elaborate
ritual for its victims to escape its clutches and go on about their careers.
The ritual was
humiliating. It involved not only accepting a public shaming but feeding the
McCarthyites more victims by “naming names,” denouncing your friends and others
who’d been in those dreaded liberal, progressive or Communist movements with
you. Victims of the Hollywood blacklist had to appear before a number of highly
placed figures in the Right-wing movement — newspaper columnists Sidney Skolsky
and Westbrook Pegler, actor John Wayne, director Cecil B. DeMille, labor leader
Roy Brewer (who as head of the motion picture projectionists’ union was the key
figure who enforced the blacklist by ordering his members to refuse to show any
film made with blacklisted talent) — and grovel enough until these people were
convinced of the sincerity of their repentance.
The victims also
had to give up any involvement in liberal politics, no matter how innocuous
they would have seemed by today’s standards. If they pledged to donate in the
future only to health charities and other innocuous causes, that was one step
on the road to redemption. If they flipped their political views 180° and
re-invented themselves as born-again Right-wingers, that was even better. The
process of political rehabilitation for a blacklisted actor, writer, director,
educator, businessman or clergy member was arduous and humiliating, but at
least it existed.
The Left-wing
McCarthyites of today offer no such process of rehabilitation. To them, there
is no sin and redemption — there is only sin. People who have offended against
today’s codes of conduct, no matter how far back it happened, are to be shamed,
anathematized and driven from public life forever. When Kevin Spacey was
revealed to have made unwanted sexual advances to aspiring males (one good
thing the #MeToo movement has done is expose that the casting couch victimizes
men as well as women), he was cut out of an already completed film, The
Richest Man in the World, and replaced with
another actor.
Movie stars and
production officials who have attempted comebacks after falling from grace due
to allegations of sexual harassment and assault have been ridiculed back onto
the sidelines. They have also been the subject of calls from progressive
organizations for the banning of their work. I have been sent e-mails asking me
to sign petitions urging Spotify and other music streaming services to
eliminate R. Kelly’s records from their playlists because of the allegations of
child molestation against him. I’ve also been asked to sign a petition to the
producers of the upcoming film Red Sonja
to fire the film’s director, Bryan Singer, because he, like Spacey, has been
accused of unwanted sexual advances towards young men trying to make it in the
business.
I have refused
to sign any such petitions because to me they are all too reminiscent of the
tactics Right-wingers in the 1940’s and 1950’s used against progressive
entertainers. If these people have committed actual crimes, they should be
prosecuted. If their actions don’t rise to the level of prosecutable offenses
but you disapprove of them on moral grounds, you can punish them by refusing to
see Bryan Singer’s movies or buy (or stream) R. Kelly’s records. But I think
it’s just as wrong for the Left to try to make certain people unemployable
because of actions that now seem
politically or socially unacceptable as it was for the Right to do that in the
original McCarthy era.
Another tactic
of both Right and Left McCarthyites is their utter lack of a sense of
proportion. When the U.S. Senate was debating Al Franken’s fate, and his
defenders were saying that all he had done to his alleged victims was put his
arms around them and kiss them — whereas people like Hollywood producer Harvey
Weinstein were credibly accused of sexual assault and, in some cases, out and
out rape — Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York) made a statement that the
mere act of saying there should be
distinctions made between levels of sexual misconduct was itself sexist and
reprehensible.
The Los
Angeles Times article cited above about
Democratic Presidential candidates’ struggles in the “#MeToo” era to deal with
their pasts offers plenty of examples of Left-wing McCarthyism. One of the
interviewees, Sarah Slaman, an activist in Texas who worked for Bernie Sanders’
campaign in 2016 but since turned against him because she felt he had been too
dismissive of women’s complaints of sexual harassment from some of his male
staffers, said that despite Sanders’ recent apologies “I don’t think that Sen.
Sanders has changed much of his mindset.”
Another
interviewee, National Organization for Women president Traci Van Pelt, said of
former vice-president Joe Biden, “It’s hard for me to forgive him” for having
chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1991 when it considered Clarence
Thomas’s nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court and dismissed allegations of
sexual harassment against him by his former staff member Anita Hill. Van Pelt
was asked if Biden’s sponsorship and success in pushing the Violence Against
Women Act through Congress in 1994 mitigated his record in the Thomas hearings.
Her answer was basically no: “He’s done a lot of good with the Violence Against
Women Act, there’s no question of that. But I just think maybe it’s time for
new thinking.”
Another
potential Democratic Presidential candidate, U.S. Senator Kamala Harris
(D-California), is facing a scandal the Sacramento Bee broke last December over her former staff member
Justin Wallace’s record of sexually harassing women in the workplace. Wallace’s
assistant Danielle Hartley sued him and the state over Wallace’s alleged
treatment of her. Harris publicly insisted that she didn’t know anything about
Wallace’s actions until the Bee
reported them: “It was a very painful experience to know that something can
happen in one’s office — of almost 5,000 people, granted, but I didn’t know
about it. That being said, I take full responsibility for anything that has
happened in my office.”
It’s typical of
the left-wing McCarthyite mind-set that Harris’s aggressive questioning of U.S.
Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh over the allegations of sexual assault
against him in his confirmation hearings
is not being treated by
Democratic activists and the media as a sign that her mind has changed or that
having harbored a sexual harasser in her own office might have increased her
awareness on the issue. Instead, she’s being denounced as a hypocrite. A Sacramento
Bee editorial called Harris’s denial
“far-fetched” and added that if it’s true, she “isn’t a terribly good manager.”
Larry Gerston, a
political scientist at San Jose State, was one of the people interviewed for
the Los Angeles Times article. He said
that Harris, like Sanders and Biden, are being judged by today’s standards for
behavior that occurred years or even decades ago. “It’s very hard for those
folks to go back and undo what they did at a time when it wasn’t viewed as terrible
as it is now,” he said.
The history of
the original McCarthyist period offers some lessons the Left should be learning
right now. Liberal Congressmembers and Senators who offered “compromise”
measures against politically repressive legislation being pushed by Right-wing
McCarthyites often found their proposals didn’t replace the original bills but
just got added to them, making them even
more repressive. Much of American political history consists of the Left
pioneering strategies and tactics that the Right then adopts and uses against
them. No matter what the motives of the Left-wing McCarthyites, their attempts
to shame fellow liberals and progressives as secretly racist, sexist or not
aggressive enough in their defenses of women and people of color are likely to
backfire. The shame game is one the Right is simply better at than the Left.
Besides, as
American liberals, progressives and Leftists fight each other and have nasty
public spats over who’s the “purest” of them all, it will be the Right who
triumphs. It’s an odd quirk of modern American politics that Democrats seem
more obsessed than Republicans with the personal qualities of those they nominate and attempt to elect, while the
Republicans — supposedly the party of evangelical Christians and their “family
values” — couldn’t care less. Republicans keep their eyes on the ideological
prize, voting for people (including Donald Trump) who promise them results —
especially appointing Right-wing judges who will end all this “dangerous
liberal nonsense” about women, people of color, and Queer people having rights.
Democrats need
to learn to be a little less principled and a little more practical. They have
to start asking themselves, before they launch McCarthyite jihads against elected officials like Ralph Northam over
35-year-old yearbook photos, if the causes they believe in — particularly civil
rights for people of color and protection of women against sexual harassment
and assault — really will fare better if they drive flawed Democrats out of office
and replace them with ideologically driven Right-wing Republicans.