Liberal Colorblindness

Reading Frances Fitzgerald’s discussion in the New Yorker of the ChristianRadicalRight’s attempt to take over Ohio via the gubernatorial campaign of Ken Blackwell, “Holy Toledo,” I was reminded of the first play I ever saw on Broadway, No Time For Sergeants.

My mother took me to see it when I was around 11 or 12, on my first trip to New York (she was on a buying trip for our store in Alabama), and I think it was the first starring role for Andy Griffith, who went on to fame and fortune. He played a naive, never been to town hillbilly who was forced out of the mountains for the first time when he was drafted into the air force, where he proceded to have a series of humorous adventures.

In one of those adventures that has stuck in my mind, Griffith encountered a female officer for the first time. He was jaw-dropppingly overcome with how gorgeous she was, didn’t notice that she was an officer (his eyes were rivited on parts of her anatomy that did not display her officer’s insignia), and thus got himself in deep trouble for his failure to salute. He was told in no uncertain terms that the uniform obliterated all superficial differences of sex, race, etc. Later on, after some questions about his mental competence had been raised, he was being evaluated by a psychiatrist when that same female officer walked by. This time he sprang to attention and saluted smartly, which caused the psychiatrist further concerns (the following is from memory, not quoted):

“Son, didn’t you see that beautiful woman walk by? What did you think of her?

“Woman, sir? I didn’t see no woman. All I saw was a Second Lieutenant.”

The shrink of course thought he was crazy, or gay, and he almost got thrown out of the air force and sent back to the mountains.

I was reminded of this because Fitzgerald is so blinded by Blackwell’s conservatism that she virtually ignores the fact that he’s black. His blackness is occasonally noted, in passing, but it is completely irrelevant to her analysis. Fitzgerald’s article is another perfect example of what might be called the Clarence Thomas syndrome: a black ceases to be black, a Hispanic ceases to be Hispanic (remember Miguel Estrada?), a woman ceases to be a woman — in fact, race, ethnicity, and gender become completely irrelevant — if the person being discussed is (horrors!) a conservative, and being a RadicalRightChristian (this has become one word, like the “damnyankee” of my youth) obliterates just about everything.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the reason so many people who claim to like “diversity” go ballistic at David Horowitz’s call for ideological balance in universities is that considering partisanship and ideology would divert attention, even if momentarily, from the otherwise all-consuming focus on race, ethnicity, and gender.

Say What? (4)

  1. sharon July 25, 2006 at 7:08 am | | Reply

    There’s a fashionable fear of Christians right now, judging from the book titles out there and articles like this. Evidently, one shouldn’t let a little thing like one’s eternal faith influence one’s vote.

  2. Cobra July 25, 2006 at 7:07 pm | | Reply

    John writes:

    >>>”I was reminded of this because Fitzgerald is so blinded by Blackwell’s conservatism that she virtually ignores the fact that he’s black. His blackness is occasonally noted, in passing, but it is completely irrelevant to her analysis. Fitzgerald’s article is another perfect example of what might be called the Clarence Thomas syndrome: a black ceases to be black, a Hispanic ceases to be Hispanic (remember Miguel Estrada?), a woman ceases to be a woman — in fact, race, ethnicity, and gender become completely irrelevant — if the person being discussed is (horrors!) a conservative, and being a RadicalRightChristian (this has become one word, like the “damnyankee” of my youth) obliterates just about everything.”

    Well, if someone adopts the ideology of pro-white right winged conservative males, what would distinguish that person from pro-white right winged conservative males other than physical appearance?

    –Cobra

  3. David Nieporent July 25, 2006 at 9:12 pm | | Reply

    Well, if someone adopts the ideology of pro-white right winged conservative males, what would distinguish that person from pro-white right winged conservative males other than physical appearance?

    What is “the ideology of pro-white right winged conservative males”?

    Don’t you have your question backwards, Cobra? If a black man adopts this ideology, what would make this ideology one of “pro-white right winged conservative males”?

  4. John Rosenberg July 27, 2006 at 12:45 am | | Reply

    Well, if someone adopts the ideology of pro-white right winged conservative males, what would distinguish that person from pro-white right winged conservative males other than physical appearance?

    Funny, but “physical appearance” seems to be enough when preferences are being handed out….

Say What?