Why “Stronger Together” was insincere

I no longer feel safe in America. I’m terrified not only of the laws that a far-right Congress will pass, but also of our country’s widespread and powerful intolerance. The voters rejected Hillary Clinton’s message that we’re “stronger together” in favor of a platform of xenophobia, sexism, and not-too-subtle white supremacy. The central conflict of the election seems to have been between hatred of other groups and unity across differences, and the public chose hatred.

But I think that paints too generous of a picture for the Democrats because they, or I should say we, are not the party of true unity. We claim to welcome a diverse range of people, but let’s face it: “diverse” has come to mean women and minorities. In our noble effort to give them a voice, we have devalued the voices of white people and men. And it’s not racist or intolerant of them to push back.

To be clear, the ideology of Donald Trump’s most radical (and visible) supporters is evil. But what about his quieter, possibly more moderate supporters, the silent majority that pollsters didn’t expect to vote for him? I can imagine how the Democrats’ message might appear unwelcoming to them.

During the early days of the campaign, American politician Madeleine Albright said it was feminists’ duty to vote for Hillary Clinton because she was a woman. That is to say that feminist voters should favor her because she’s female. And in preparing to celebrate Hillary Clinton’s historic victory, some of my Democrat friends told me they were sick of men in the White House.

And I get it. I really wanted a female president. I wanted her to inspire girls and shatter stereotypes about female leaders. But sexism in favor of women is still sexism, just as racism in favor of minorities is still racism. Whites and men are not wrong for voting against that.

Bhaskar Roberts is a sophomore from Buffalo, NY. He can be reached at bhaskarr@princeton.edu