OPINION: The Apology Marcus Vaughn May Never Get

In the wake of the incident last Friday, first reported here, in which the Chair of the Democrat Town Committee of Wrentham berated Republican Rep. candidate Marcus Vaughn for being both Black and a Republican, there have been apologies from the candidate he is running against, Democrat Kevin Kalkut, who has said nothing like that should ever have happened and that such behavior is not what he wants to see. Some of Kalkut’s supporters have also expressed regret that the incident should have marred the otherwise civil tone of the campaign. The Chair, perhaps under pressure, even resigned from his post.

What has not been said by anyone, and probably never will be, is that it is simply wrong to suggest that African-Americans do or should owe an absolute allegiance to the Democrat party or that Republicans and African-Americans are or should be considered inimical. In fact, historically, nothing could be further from the truth. And that truth is an inconvenient one.

For most of its history, starting with Andrew Jackson, the Democrat party was the party of slavery and then of segregation. It was the party whose members built Jim Crow. To be sure, northern Democrats were not always comfortable with this aspect of their party but they tolerated it and – when it gave them electoral power – they embraced it.

The Republican party was created to resist the power of the Democrat slave holders. It steadfastly led the Union to a victory that brought the end of slavery in the United States, and it expended treasure and political capital in attempting to reconstruct the south in what turned out to be a short-lived racial revolution, supported largely by the bayonets of Federal troops.

Ultimately, of course, in the late 1960s the Democrat party mostly rid itself of segregationists and became a champion of civil rights while Republicans moved on to become, in their view, the party of economic opportunity and less government, which they view as important to the well-being of all, regardless of race, gender, or ethnicity.

Of course, none of this history is or should be relevant to how Vaughn is treated or viewed. For one or the other party to “claim” Vaughn as their own is, at minimum, a form of profiling and at worst, but a reflection of long-standing paternalistic white attitude toward a particular demographic.

Instead of profiling people like Vaughn or anyone with whom we hold differing views, we would be better served to engage and ask individuals why believe the things they do? The answers Vaughn would give as to why he is a Republican probably have less to do with history and more to do with his wants and concerns as a citizen of his town and neighborhood, as a parent, and as a taxpayer.

Certainly, it would be good if local, state, and national Democrats abjured the notion that they are unique in their concern for civil rights and that any individual or any demographic group owes them anything. But better yet, how about if all of us started treating each other with respect, as individuals, without making assumption about the intelligence, character or blood allegiance of anyone to anything.

This would be an important step toward a healthier democracy and a more civil society. It would take effort but the reward would be worth it.

But still, someone should offer Vaughn a more meaningful apology—and a substantive commitment to do better.