Maybe Some More Than Others

Illinois Rep Mary Miller stepped in it earlier when she suggested the overturning of Roe v Wade was a “victory for white life”

Her office said that she said (or meant to say) “right to life” instead of “white life”. In her defense was a family photo:

I will always defend the RIGHT TO LIFE! pic.twitter.com/BUh5vnk5Vs

— Mary Miller (@Miller_Congress) June 26, 2022

Does having (and taking pride in) non-white grandkids exonerate her from being racist? I would argue that given additional evidence that it doesn’t, though honestly it does help, does affect my perceptions, and if she is racist it at least represents a more complicated interaction between race and racism than simple “white supremacy” as is often constructed. The argument here is of course just because her family isn’t lilly-white doesn’t mean that she’s not racist. Racism, of course, comes in many forms. Which is true, though this ends up being taken to somewhat cynical measures. Just because they have non-white children, just because their wife isn’t white, just because they aren’t white doesn’t mean they aren’t white supremacists. Scrape enough, you find out a lot of people define white supremacy as disagreement on a host of political issues.

But this is, of course, not just a stance on an issue. It is at best an utterance that should leave most people mortified if by accident and is a real problem if not by accident. And it is true that racists and white supremacists can have atypical biographies. One of the most racist people I knew in college seemed very, very, very interested in a cross-racial romantic partnership. It never happened (his romantic success in general was lacking for as long as I knew him) but if it had it might have been dismissed as his desire for a black girlfriend (in particular) was actually a manifestation of a desire to exert dominance or something else. Which I don’t know may be the case in some scenario but in his case it seemed to be pretty straightforward:

He was racist in the sense that his blank slate reaction to things happened around him were highly racialized in ways that were uncharitable or antagonistic towards non-whites. He at once wanted to defend these impulses – often doubling down on them – and was nonetheless very self-conscious about accusations of racism. In what I think was mostly a subconscious level, his interest in a cross-racial partnership a form of vindication for his self-assessment of not being racist. I don’t think that was all that was going on, and to be honest if he had a black wife I think he would have actually treated her very well. But he would have acted in other ways that would have been a problem. There is a good chance she would have gotten tired of being used as a shield.

Another case wherein I had a coworker who was always making comments – and getting in trouble for making comments – about immigrants. It was kind of surprising that his wife was a Mexican-American (one of the groups he singled out). I didn’t know him as well so I frankly don’t know what all was going on in his head, but it was likely more complicated than “dude just hates immigrants”. But it definitely wasn’t “not a racist bone in his body.”

I could go on, but the faces of racism I know are often more complicated than you would guess. Because people are, in fact, rather complicated. I think sometimes in the effort to craft over these complexities with a simple narrative about “white supremacist” or “couldn’t be racist” often don’t survive contact with the real world. Attempts to add nuance are wrong because complication is often used as cover. But recognizing that doesn’t make it go away.

As for Rep Mary Miller, the decisive factor for me with regard to whether it was a simple misspoken word involves a previous incident wherein she gotta-handed it to Adolf Hitler:

“Each generation has the responsibility to teach and train the next generation,” video shows Miller saying. “You know, if we win a few elections, we’re still gonna be losing unless we win the hearts and minds of our children. This is the battle. Hitler was right on one thing. He said, ‘Whoever has the youth has the future.’”

Now, sometimes bad people say very smart things and I am a believer in not letting that prevent you from quoting or citing them. Even evil can have piercing incites (it often is what causes them to succeed enough to warrant attention) but if you’re looking for a quote on something as anodyne as “kids are the future” and your go-to there is Hitler it certainly comes across like you’re mostly just looking a way to cite Hitler. Perhaps to normalize him. At best, you are indifferent to the fact that the people you are talking to are more likely to reject what you’re saying by citing such a person. Or perhaps you think that they won’t. Perhaps you’re right. Which is itself something to think about.

It also should not be lost on us that the two quotes together share a thread about future generations. Mary Miller’s vision for future generations may include a place for her grandkids, who I would guess that she loves very much, but embracing your grandkids while also not citing Hitler is a pretty low bar to clear and there is only so much benefit of the doubt loving your family gets you.

Now I’m just a guy, and I’m a guy that wouldn’t have voted for her under any circumstances. But if you want to make these accusations less credible generally, avoid unnecessary Hitler citations. Just start there. And maybe recognize why people freak out at “white life.”

As a start.