“We were liberated not only empty-handed but left in the power of a people who resented our emancipation as an act of unjust punishment to them. They were therefore armed with a motive for doing everything in their power to render our freedom a curse rather than a blessing.”
–From “The Reason Why the Colored American Is Not in the World’s Columbian Exposition“, Ida B. Wells, 1893
So we have our question, now we need a panel of experts.
As it happens, one of the sites to which I post is The Bilerico Project (“daily experiments in LBGTQ”), so I went to the site, posted the question (“What Would You Tell A Frustrated Gay Voter?“), and told the readers that I wanted to stand back and let them inform the conversation so that I could pass the message on to the larger Democratic and Progressive audience.
Most of what you’ll be reading in this two-parter will be those comments; I’ll be offering a few thoughts of my own, but my main effort will be to be “set the stage” for others.
So as we said, the big take-away here is that there is a portion of the LBGT community that feels like they have been “left behind”, if you will, by the very Democrats they helped to elect; Hannah offers an example of how that thinking manifested itself in the comments:
I don’t think many politicians really are pro-gay. Democrats will vote for gay issues, but the issue in question can’t stand alone. It needs to be attached to military spending or to credit card legislation, so that their constituents that don’t pay attention to detail will miss their pro-gay votes. When it gets there, I don’t think ENDA [the Employment Non-Discrimination Act] will be a stand-alone bill. I can’t even think about how DOMA [Defense of Marriage Act] will end.
Bill Perdue puts it a lot more strongly:
The ‘progressive’ wing of the Democrat party is a wet noodle. It has no – zero, nada, zilch – clout or influence. It’s barely tolerated as left cover and if it gets too pushy they call the cops…
The Democrats have a long and clear history of bigotry and of doing what they have to do to appease bigots and get their votes. Democrats voted for DADT [Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell] and DOMA in large majorities and a Democrat bigot signed both bills.
Rank and filers and supporters are welcome to donate time and money and even attend conventions to watch their betters maneuver and scheme but they have no power.
Gina9223 picks up part of Bill’s theme and runs a bit further with it:
Between the DNC [Democratic National Committee] and HRC [Human Rights Campaign, a pro-civil rights organizing group] they both use GLBT and our struggles for gaining equal rights ONLY to generate money for their bottom line. How often have you heard or seen the some ad hack saying ‘the fight has only begun and they need your dollars now!’??? A few weeks or months go by with the assurance that they’re “doing everything possible” to secure the passing of ENDA, but they had to let that fall to give support to repeal of DOMA but they had to let that go to run after repeal of DADT. But don’t worry, they’ll come around in the bus next time to pick up our money. Just not us.
Now comes to the table Alex Blaze (who often gets stuck with the yeoman’s work of editing the things I post to Bilerico) with a bit of realpolitik:
It’s a catch-22: If Dems do fine in November they’ll learn that ignoring LGBT people was great and they should keep on doing it. If they lose big, then they’ll think that they went too far to the left and they should do even less.
One would become suspicious about the fact that there’s no situation where they become more responsive to public opinion and more queer-friendly, but we obviously can’t question the Democrats’ commitment to LGBT rights. That just wouldn’t be polite.
Andrew W expands on Gina’s point that it’s not entirely a Democratic problem:
The frustration is warranted, but instead of simply singling out Democrats for not accomplishing something they never had the votes to accomplish, what about Gay Inc. and activist groups? A significant amount of money was spent in the last 2 years and we have nothing to show for it. GetEQUAL resurrected 1960s styled civil disobedience and protest – without any measurable results and mounting evidence that we’ve simply alienated our only “friends.” HRC spent millions lobbying Congress and yet they cannot show us a single vote they “changed.”
SoFloMo is of the opinion that a big part of the problem is staring at voters in the bathroom mirror each morning:
Too often we get indignant and then throw parties where politicians and/or Gay Inc. come to collect checks after everyone has found their way to the bottom of three or four cocktails.
I’ve been to events in South Florida where the house is packed to meet a gay-friendly celebrity or the head of a national LGBT organization. But few people will turn up to canvass on behalf of local candidates who have passed laws protecting LGBT rights. Few people will work the phones to defeat candidates supported by the Christian Coalition.
So I need to keep a handle on how long stories run, and “we’ve stated the problem, so let’s come back tomorrow and address some answers” seems like a reasonable plan for splitting the story in two…so that’s what we’re going to do.
Let’s bring this Part One to a close by restating the premise: there exists some number of LBGT voters who feel they have nothing to gain by voting this time, because they perceive no available political path to achieving forward progress on civil rights issues. There’s another group who feel Democrats are not a trustworthy partner in the effort to advance civil rights, and if they show up to vote at all this time, it probably won’t be for Democratic candidates.
Just as soon as I get this posted, I’ll be assembling Part Two; with the “question now asked”, we’ll be getting to answers-and I think you’re going to be surprised at the diversity of responses.
As I mentioned above, I’ve been in touch with a currently unnamed Member of Congress who has a significant LBGT constituency over the past 24 hours, and the Press Secretary over there has indicated that they’ll try to have a response for attribution in time for Part Two.
Between now and then, try on a thought exercise and see where it takes you: put yourself in the shoes of an LBGT voter, think about this election it it’s full context, and consider what advice would make sense to you-and then, after you’ve done that, consider how you’d pass along what you’re thinking to either the Democrats or the voters we’re talking about.
fake-consultant says
…it’s time to learn a lesson that, so far, does not seem to be well recognized.
daves says
Are you always the first to post a comment on your own diaries?
fake-consultant says
…where, if you don’t post first, they always post a “tip jar”, whether you like it or not.
<
p>beyond that, i post the same story to many sites, and it’s a chance to personalize the story to to each site.
kbusch says
There might be some tension among Democratic office holders as to whether LBGT issues deserve time or not or whether marriage equality goes too far but maybe civil unions are just right. Contrast the Republican Party. There are Republicans who think Anti-Sodomy Laws should be constitutional, who want no recognition of any kind of LBGT relationships, not even domestic partnerships recognized at private companies, and who think DADT goes too far toward special rights for gays.
<
p>Also things have changed a lot on this issue since 1990 when advocates for LGBT issues were exclusively LGBT. This stuff has been embraced by the liberal wing of party.
<
p>Alas, it is a sign of the general weakness of liberals even within the Democratic Party that the Administration and Congressional Democrats don’t see it in their interest to signal that they’re on the liberal side of this issue. No Republican President has shown the indifference — neigh hostility — to the conservative wing of GOP that Presidents Carter, Clinton, and Obama have shown to the liberal wing of the Democratic Party.
fake-consultant says
…i felt the same way as you when this first came up, and after i posted this to bilerico i came to realize that, for a lot of these voters, neither party is viewed as a reliable partner.
<
p>to those voters, democrats simply tell a friendlier story…but the results are the same.
<
p>what really struck me was the comment that it was clinton who signed dadt.
<
p>and, ultimately, it’s you’re third paragraph that sums it up for me…how do you retreat from so many winning positions…when they just got you a big ol’ fat victory?
<
p>i heard today that terry mcauliffe has reemerged to advise democrats on how to move forward…and if obama is looking to this guy to save him…we’re all doomed.
kbusch says
It’s not symmetric. Conservatives constitute a majority of Republicans; moderates, not liberals, constitute a majority of Democrats.
<
p>I read an exchange in The Nation a while back where Chris Bowers quoted a study that indicated Democratic voters, by a significant majority, like leaders who compromise; Republican voters do not like seeing their leaders compromise. Just like the Obama Administration and Congressional Republicans!
fake-consultant says
…was that roughly 2/3 of self-identified republicans prefer “no compromise” representatives–and the party is clearly in the middle of a “moderate purge”, suggesting that this will become a bit of a self-fulfilling situation.
kbusch says
fake-consultant says
…and it’s too bad that we just missed international talk like a pirate day (september 19th).