Excluding the Two-Party System
Quiz - why is it that the people with the most to win from diversity and inclusiveness are the most tribal and exclusive? It happened several weeks ago too at an event sponsored by the Communities of Color and other organizations at the same location (Roxbury Community College).
On this occasion (the Hispanic-sponsored Candidates Forum), Democrats Yancey and O'Connor were very late arriving so their chairs were empty. Independent Tony Schinella and I waited till the first round of introductions was ending and then we strode up on stage. I sat down on the floor between the reporters' table in the middle and the candidates' table on the right. Tony walked all the way over to the candidates' table on the left and sat down in the first empty seat (O'Connor's). Sandra Alvarado, the reporter closest to me, leaned over and indicated the other empty seat (Yancey's) to me, so I got up and took that seat.
When a rep of La Allianza Hispana tried to get me to come off the stage, I showed her the letter they'd sent me and she said, "That's a forgery." I finally figured out that what they had sent me was an invitation to a co-sponsoring agency but it was ambiguous enough to fool her, and it certainly fooled me against the background of all that publicity proclaiming "all the 8th District candidates." Of course, I refused to leave the stage, and she made the same unsuccessful attempt with Tony Schinella.
O'Connor didn't arrive till quite near the end, when they lifted up a chair for him and he sat next to Rodriguez on the other side. A Yancey rep showed up much earlier and they lifted up a chair and seated him at the audience end of our table. After awhile, I asked him if he would prefer to switch seats with me and he said yes, so I switched with him and sat on the other side of Bachrach, making our table, from leftstage front to centerstage back: me, Bachrach, Yancey's rep, Capuano, Tony, Gabrieli.
Did they include us at all? No. After the first round of questions, we stood up and asked to be included but were not. And ditto after the second round. A Hispanic reporter (Sandra Alvarado again, bless her!) tried to include us but was over-ruled. It was a graceless and ungenerous embarrassment for the Hispanic community, and all because of dictatorial organizers who have contempt for two-party democracy and are too rigid to go with the flow. Rodriguez apologized to us on behalf of the Hispanic community after it was all over, but he felt that they had neglected him too in directing the questions. In fact, his campaign manager had been so steamed he'd advised him to walk out in the middle! Minority candidate Yancey was also neglected though his lateness obscured the fact. Bachrach too was neglected for awhile - some candidates were getting second questions from the reporters before others had received their first. Orlando Lopez, a Hispanic official, also apologized to me at the end, but Carlos Martinez, the organizer, did not.
Their mistake was to give free rein to the reporters* in directing questions instead of following a principle of sharing as the other forums had done, such as asking each candidate in turn in order of seating or in alphabetical order. It seems the Hispanic press, despite their probable complaining about being ignored by the main stream, is insensitive enough to ignore their own Hispanic candidate in the event. The question for then becomes, if Hispanics ignore Hispanics, why do they expect anyone else to act differently?
* Oops, I just learned that the four people I thought were reporters from various Hispanic media were actually executive directors of four different Hispanic organizations. These people weren't even "news hounds" yet they favored some candidates over others - and did not even favor their own. This makes it all the more important to set up a system from the beginning to give all candidates equal time. Forum organizers, read this and learn.
Yet we cannot "go off" on these newcomers for not respecting our American ways, because - read below - the "conservative" newspaper (the Boston Herald) cosponsored a big TV forum with Channel 5 last week (8/11), billing it simply as a Candidates' forum until 24 hours before the event - and including only the Democratic candidates. What's that saying - "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance." Our organizations and media, far from "vigilant," have become lazy and cynical. Wake up, liberal voters. You no longer have a two-party system. And the next to go is the minorities within the Democratic system, despite your high-sounding rhetoric about "inclusiveness." A Polish lady in Chelsea reminded me of Dietrich Bonhoeffer's words on the Holocaust Memorial downtown - something like, First they came for the socialists, but I wasn't a socialist so I didn't speak out. Then they came for the Catholics, but I wasn't a Catholic so I didn't speak out. Then they came for me and it was too late to speak out.
Are Americans still worthy of freedom or have they lost it? Have our recent record numbers of immigrants arrived just in time for the decline of America? Are we turning into the world's first advanced, third-world nation? Have we turned our Presidency into a soap opera, as the British have done to their royal family? Is America going from world force to world farce - and doing it to itself? This is how it happens, folks, gradually, while you're not paying too much attention. Some "crazy" program like timesizing would at least give you the time you lack now to pay attention to what's happening to Massachusetts and the nation, while we sugarcoat ourselves with lofty rhetoric. But so many of us are serfs already - working 50-60 or more hours a week for a 40-hour salary. What's that but charity for the rich? And we've convinced ourselves that being busy makes us "important." "Having no time" means we're better than others who aren't stressed out. Pathetic!