Politics as Usual?

Count me among those who see the reasoning behind John McCain choosing Sarah Palin for his running mate in the 2008 presidential election. I’m not going to rehash all of the reasons for choosing her, since all of that can be found in the many accounts that have discussed the choice over the past week. Suffice to say that I see the logic of it and, while I’m not going to try to act like I know enough to say if she was the “correct” choice, I’ll say that I think Palin as McCain’s choice makes sense and, while I don't want to say I "like" the choice, since I tend to disagree with a lot of Palin's positions, I certainly see good reasons for choosing her. (Of course, what do I know? When George W. Bush was elected president in 2000, while I was an ardent supporter of Al Gore, I said that at least Bush wouldn’t screw up the country …)

Since McCain’s announcement of Palin as his running mate, members of the Republican Party have utilized the choice of Palin to attempt to align their party and their nominees with rights and opportunities for women. Indeed, it appears that that was one of the reasons why Palin was chosen and, in line with that, many attempts have been made, by Republicans and by others, to portray Palin as a kind of legacy of the women’s rights movement. We have even seen in the past week that, as a woman, Palin faces rather explicit sexism in the United States, as her ability to perform on the job when she has a number of children at home has been called into question in a way that is seldom asked of a man.

Yet, if we want to identify Palin with the women’s rights movement, we might examine the depth of her understanding of that movement and the way in which it proceeded. In particular, I would ask that we look more fully at the way in which her speech in accepting the Republican nomination for vice president characterized the role of community organizers. At a couple of points, Palin’s speech suggested that community organizers do little real work. This was obviously meant as a direct reference to Barack Obama’s experiences as a community organizer. Yet, to disparage the work of a community organizer is to deny what has been a very important role in many movements for equality throughout the history of the United States. Community organizers have been key figures in the development of many social movements, including the Civil Rights Movement, the gay rights movement, and the women’s rights movement. Indeed, if it wasn’t for many community organizers throughout the history of the women’s rights movement, Palin herself might not have had the opportunity that she accepted tonight. By calling into question the work that community organizers do, Palin has failed to recognize the contributions of many women and men who have helped her occupy the position she is in today. Additionally, by extension, Palin has called into question the women’s rights movement that has depended on these community organizers’ work.

I tend to think that Palin did not mean to disparage the good work of these people. Her reference seemed to be meant as one of the several sarcastic one-liners that were included in the speech in an attempt to create a usable sound byte that challenged the qualifications of her political adversary—in this case questioning Obama’s experience. These kinds of remarks are a convention of the genre of a campaign speech. They are, basically, a part of politics as it is played in America. We should though, make note of the hidden politics that are reinforced in the process of playing such politics. While sexism takes its more explicit forms in the kinds of remarks that Palin has had to face, it also takes its more implicit forms in the many other ways in which the contributions of women and the struggle for equality for women go unnoticed. With that in mind, I would ask Palin to reconsider her use of this particular one-liner.