By Jason Sibert
The dedication of social democrats to the cause of racial justice makes me proud to be a social democrat. President Lyndon Johnson, despite not identifying as a social democrat, championed the Great Society, a program with social democratic tendencies, and abolished racial apartheid in the South through the signing of the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act. It is worth noting that his vice president, Hubert Humphrey, did identify himself as a social democrat.
The America we see today is a result of that landmark legislation. Non-whites have excelled in all the economic sectors of our country – the profit, non-profit, and governmental sectors. What we see in terms of racial integration is a testament to the effectiveness of this wise domestic policy, and it also played a significant role in the victory of democracy during the Cold War, because racial segregation was being used as a recruiting weapon by the Communist side in the Cold War.
I’m proud to be a member of an organization – Social Democrats USA – that stood on the right side of the civil rights argument. Bayard Rustin, a former member of the SDUSA, fought for the cause of civil rights during the heyday of the movement in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s. Rustin was a believer in using nonviolent tactics to end segregation, and he worked closely with Martin Luther King, Jr, another advocate of nonviolence. What’s interesting about Rustin’s life is that he rejected identity politics while simultaneously being a strong social democrat and civil rights advocate. Rustin also argued that the African American community was threatened by the rise of “black power”. He thought this position was a fantasy of middle-class black people that repeated the political and moral errors of previous black nationalists, while alienating the white allies needed by the African American community.
The Donald Trump Administration has been playing culture war games with Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion efforts as of late. According to the polls, DEI efforts have little support in our country. DEI doesn’t even have commanding support from minorities. On the other hand, civil rights legislation, such as the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act, enjoys near-universal support. Rustin supported civil rights legislation but opposed using quotas to achieve diversity, as he believed the true spirit of civil rights was equal rights for all, without any special rights for any group.
Isn’t DEI a betrayal of the principles of Rustin? I think that it is. Does the Asian-American, African-American, or Latino-American child of a millionaire deserve to be accepted to a first-rate school like Harvard due to his race? People who come from high-income households aren’t oppressed in any way. While fundamental civil rights should be protected, DEI should be dropped. Let’s checkmate Trump on the culture war side of things. Should we ignore the issue of race entirely? No, let’s consider an alternative vision regarding race. In “DEI Activists are Plotting a Comeback,”(The Telegraph, January 25, 2024) writer Michael Lind cites SDAers like Rustin and A Phillip Randolph: “In 1967, A. Philip Randolph and Bayard Rustin, organizers of the historic March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom on August 28, 1963, proposed “A ‘Freedom Budget’ for All Americans,” consisting of color-blind social and economic policies that sought to help disadvantaged Americans of all races.”
Contemporary social democrats should also draw from sociologist Lane Kenworthy’s book “Social Democratic America.” Mr. Kenworthy wisely wants to retain affirmative action, but he emphasizes the importance of family background, specifically growing up in a low-income household. If we were to replace all affirmative action (jobs and higher education) on race with family background (those who come from poor families), then we could help those at the lower end of the income spectrum of all races. Who would be helped the most in doing this? Non-whites would be the chief beneficiaries because they’re more likely to be poor.
Social democrats in the Democratic Party must return to the ideas of Rustin and Randolph if they expect to sell their ideas to the American public. Will they do this? Only time will tell.
Jason Sibert is the Lead Writer of the Peace Economy Project
I certainly admire Mr. Sibert for venturing where many would fear to tread. There may be an inherent difficulty with asking what Bayard Rustin would think about DEI (or any current social policy). Rustin had a decades long political career which included periods of both intense militancy and thoughtful compromise. The Rustin who opposed WW2 from a prison cell and called A. Phillip Randolph an “Uncle Tom” probably would have looked favorably on DEI. The Rustin who critically supported the Vietnam war and worked closely with Randolph on civil rights might have had no use for race, as opposed to class, based affirmative action.
One of these days I’m going to have to do a deep dive on Rustin and Randolph, two true giants of American history and social democracy.
Bayard Rustin did what he felt he needed to do to forward social democracy in an era when both African Americans and LGBTQ+ people were struggling for social acceptance of their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Now most Americans accept these truths, but a lot of white, straight Americans still want to pretend that everything’s all fair and level now. This era’s the time when we need to grieve over the institutionalized injustice that our ancestors put in place, and that we’ve allowed to continue. It’s time to grieve, listen to those affected, and make it right.
P.S. in my initial post, I left out other non-white people and people with disabilities, against whom there’s also been, and continues to be, institutionalized injustice.
THIS IS INSULTING. your article ignores women, people with disabilities, older workers, gay and gender non-conforming individuals, and many others who are discriminated against for reasons other than race. did you not have anyone read this before it went to press?