I have once again been shaken by the audacity and ignorance exhibited at Iowa State University.

On November 15, 1995, Dean Elizabeth Hoffman officially entered into the debate about Carrie Chapman Catt’s racist history.

Hoffman contends that Catt’s “allegedly racist remarks” are not problematic because “Catt and the other leaders of the suffrage movement had to make some very difficult choices — even choices that went against their own personal standards — in order to achieve success on a higher level”.

This “higher level” was white women’s suffrage. In short, Catt’s racist statements were simply part of a strategy to ensure that white women (not immigrant women or women of color) would have the right to vote.

Finally, Hoffman asks: “Is this nation better off today because of the decisions by Catt and others to gain passage of the 19th Amendment in 1920, thus setting the stage for future Civil Rights gains for others?”

Hoffman thinks the answer is an obvious “Yes”; and if we choose simplicity instead of truth, perhaps we could all simply nod our heads and forget about the whole thing. However, I think that there are other people who prefer to gain understanding even if they must admit that they were wrong.

Mistake #1: Let’s start from the beginning.

There is a distinction between prejudice, discrimination and racism. Prejudice is a personal thing. All of us have prejudices. Some may seem morally wrong and some may not. An individual may not like people who are tall or who smoke cigarettes or who have red hair.

Discrimination is acting on this prejudice. This person may not speak to tall people. She may not have friends who are smokers. Both prejudice and discrimination remain relatively harmless and benign because they are little more than personal preferences.

Racism, sexism, classism, ageism and able-ism are different. They are forms of oppression. The concept of power is inherent to the term oppression. While I may not like tall people or I may not choose to associate with red-haired people, my personal choices and preferences do not constrain or limit anyone from fulfilling his or her own needs or desires. (Unless that person wanted to associate with me to which I would ask why she would want to befriend anyone who had preconceived notions about her.)

My actions would reflect my beliefs and values and be manifested in only in my own life. They would not be imposed upon any one else.

Once again, power is the key concept in oppression. Each one of us has some degree of power over ourselves, but more importantly over other people. Each one of our actions has a different level of impact on the lives of others.

In our hypothetical case, I would have used my power in a way that prevented red-haired people from being my friend. Oppression occurs when an individual or group of individuals has access to the power to institutionalize limits or constraints on a group of people and chooses to do so. Racism, then, can be conceived as the use of power to institutionalize constraints and limits on a group on the basis of racial classifications.

Mistake #2: Carrie Chapman Catt, Strategies and Power

I am not going to spend my time wondering whether or not Catt was free from racial prejudice. It is really not germane to my point or the issue of her racism. The fact is that Carrie Chapman Catt had power, wielded that power in a way that excluded immigrant women and women of color, and subsequently, was a racist.

Strategy involves the use of power to obtain a goal. When the women of the suffrage movement were devising strategies to increase their own power, they used the power they already had to limit the participation of non-white and immigrant women. This is racism.

It really doesn’t matter if Catt and Mary Church Terrell were kissing cousins, Catt still wielded her power in a manner that limited a group of women of color.

In doing so, she may have gained passage of the 19th Amendment in 1920, but she also reinforced the institutionalized devaluation and marginalization of non-white and immigrant women.

Mistake #3: Do Your Homework.

Dean Hoffman, even those who would still attempt to ‘prove’ that Catt was not a racist would be highly skeptical of your claim that the 19th Amendment set the stage “for future civil rights gains for others.”

Almost every historian, women’s studies scholar, civil rights scholar and college student who has taken an introductory women’s studies course knows that the abolitionist movement provided a foundation for the suffrage movement. Many women in the suffrage movement were emboldened by and gained valuable skills from their participation in the abolitionist movement.

Please do not get the wrong idea, Dean Hoffman. You are not alone in your mistakes.

America blanches at the thought of discussing racism in any substantive fashion. We tend to create these impossible dichotomies that force us to embrace all or reject everything.

We should not discount the fact that Catt and other women in the suffrage movement made great sacrifices so that white women could vote. We should not deny the importance of the 19th Amendment.

Likewise, we should not remain ignorant of the fact that each of us has the power to fight oppression or to take on only the battles that serve our own interests.

So, I will pose a question to you and everyone else. How much different would the United States be if Catt had demanded the right to vote for everyone, including women of color and immigrant women?

Perhaps the 19th Amendment would not have passed in 1920, but we would have been able to truthfully say that she fought for women’s rights and not that she contributed to the oppression of women of color for the benefit of white women.

---

Laurisha McClarin is a senior in political science and philosophy. She is the Director of University Relations for the Black Student Alliance.