Gillibrand knows about race
Before we bid adieu to Kirsten Gillibrand’s bid for the Democratic presidential nomination, some respect is due.
The New York senator nailed an important issue for the 2020 presidential race during a recent debate between the Democratic contenders in Detroit: the need to reach white women, who cast their ballots for President Donald Trump by a 10-point margin.
Will they swing toward the Democratic candidate this time, tired of the president’s endless onslaught of sexist and racist taunts?
Gillibrand suggested a way forward, and it was an unconventional breath of fresh air. Her gambit? Addressing white privilege, from the standpoint of her own admitted privilege.
“I can talk to those white women in the suburbs that voted for Trump and explain to them what white privilege actually is,” Gillibrand said, replying to a moderator’s question. “That when their son is walking down a street with a bag of M&Ms in his pocket (and) wearing a hoodie, his whiteness is what protects him from not being shot.
“When their child has a car that breaks down and he knocks on someone’s door for help and the door opens and the help is given, it’s his whiteness that protects him from being shot,” she said. “That is what white privilege in America is today.”
Bravo. Standing O. Gillibrand’s passionate, firm tone drove the points.
It was a brief but powerful appeal, presented on a national stage, for lessons that so much of America needs to absorb yet fervently and routinely denies.
People run from the subject. I’ve heard far too many African Americans and Latinos try to explain it in well-meaning if somewhat overbearing tones. They share the horrific experiences that have caused them personal pain. Unfortunately, the passion of the telling can often cause unwilling white ears to flinch and tune out.
Empathy, let alone deep understanding, can only come when denial is broken. And that’s the layer that people like Gillibrand have a good shot at piercing with white women.
Gillibrand was not paying lip service to a politically correct storyline. She was, as she stated, bearing witness to her responsibility as a self-defined “white woman of privilege.”
This is how Gillibrand and so many other white women of privilege like her can make a difference in the upcoming election and beyond. It’s doubtful that her campaign can carry on much longer, but she can play a role in winning the White House for her party.
To prevail in 2020, Democrats will need to appeal very strongly to women. They need to turn out high numbers of African American and Latina voters, register new voters and turn some of the white suburban and blue-collar women who went with Trump in 2016.
Trump, meanwhile, continues his monomaniacal effort to divide people along color lines. In some ways, it might make it possible to advance the national discussion about race to a deeper level. But in order to do that, the Democrats need to step up to the challenge of addressing white privilege and institutional racism, to call out the longstanding, generational implications and begin outlining what political remedies might be feasible.
No one should think this is easy.
I’ve led in-depth conversations around these issues through painstakingly designed and tested programming. I’ve trained dozens of others to do this work as well, though volunteer work with the National Conference for Community and Justice. Breaking through people’s layers of denial, their inaccuracies about what white privilege is — and isn’t — is stressful and complicated.
Too often, the concept is assumed to imply that white people haven’t also suffered, that their problems with jobs and finances are insignificant, or that they somehow haven’t earned what they have accomplished for themselves or their families. This is incorrect. And in previous public instances, Gillibrand has proven herself adept at gracefully debunking those myths as well.
Gillibrand’s commentary on white privilege was one short moment during one debate.
For the sake of the nation, I hope she keeps it up.