What began as my attempt to encourage and gauge public opinion on a small scale turned into something rather different. On my Facebook page and on several Democratic Party group pages, I wrote:
Nancy Pelosi is smart, experienced, and effective! Let her do her work as Speaker of the House!!!! What’s the big whoop?
People who supported my assessment were many, quite possibly the majority of respondents. They raised many issues: experience, consistency, effectiveness, loyalty, and unity among Democrats were consistent themes, for example:
Wrong time for a shift change.
Fix what is broke. She is not broke! She has huge amount of experience. Now is NOT the time to be trying to split the Democratic Party!
I don’t think there was anyone else at the time who could have whipped the votes for the ACA, she understands the game and knows better than anyone there how to play it. First, we have to right the house, then we can think about changes.
Why would anyone even doubt Ms. Nancy Pelosi after all the work she has done for the Democrats and the country. They still don’t get it. I pray she ignores all these negative people, focus and move the country forward. Enough is enough.
McConnell will continue to control the Senate and he is a master of manipulating the system. That mastery comes from years in the Senate and as the Senate Majority Leader. To fight that kind of mastery in the Senate, we need someone who also knows the system and can fight fire with fire as the House prepares to undertake its oversight responsibilities[, and to] pass legislation to actually help voters all the while trying to neutralize what McConnell comes up with in the Senate. Right now, we need her experience.
I just believe in unity on the Democratic side. All this progressive vs. moderate fighting that gets nowhere isn’t doing the party any good. If we are for good government, do it.
Some respondents raised issues of sexism:
If she was a man they would say he has the experience [and] strength [a] strong person [needs] to be speaker. She has earned it. What’s the fear in strong women[? W]e need to use her as an example of what [a] strong woman can do and become. Let’s raise our daughters [and] granddaughters to be strong. Let’s start with our daughters.
Many people who opposed Pelosi’s ascension to the Speakship raised concerns with what they perceived as differences over policy initiatives, some of whom provided no documentation for their allegations, including,
She killed single payer [health insurance coverage].
She has no interest in pushing for legislation to protect the environment and control climate change.
Legit progressive news outlets are reporting that she is willing to give in to Republican Nazis on a variety of issues. Sorry, that is not acceptable to me. She should be in there fighting for progressive values, full stop.
Yes she is gonna be Dump’s [Trump’s] puppet.
A recurrent theme emerged centering on Nancy Pelosi’s age. Some, though certainly not all of the comments entered the realm of ageism.
Just like term limits, changing who the Speaker is opens up opportunities for new perspectives and talent to emerge.
[S]he is 79 years old. Now really is the time [to step down].
Nancy is 78 … She will be 80 in 2020… It’s time for her to support a young leader…
She’s a dinosaur beholden to special interests. .it’s time for her to move on..maybe she, along with [Hillary] can move to an isolated island called dumbfuckistan (credit to I don’t remember who).
Her attitude right now reminds me of many people in my place of employment who are her age, constantly proclaim “I’m NEVER going to retire! 😄😄” and have kept qualified and eager individuals from pursuing opportunities and being built as the next generation of great higher ed professionals. The party has to be willing to change regardless of timing because each time we get some kind of clout, leadership is quick to say that “Now is not the time for change.
No. Change now. More people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are already beginning to get into public office, so it’s time to start building the next generation of leaders now, not later ‘when things are stable’.
Old and experienced vs. new and chance-taking is a perennial debate.
Commentary:
While some respondents raised important points and stuck to the issues, the discussion seemed always to revert back to Nancy Pelosi’s age.
This is not a Zero-Sum Game in which one cannot advance until another retires and fades away. This is the Machiavellian “divide and conquer” strategy, and it also smacks of ageism.
We can all win: those with experience and those who are coming into their own by keeping those with experience, talent, and commitment while delegating and mentoring the younger generation until it is their time to take over. We must not fall into the trap of placing people who still have a great deal to contribute onto a chunk of ice and float them out to sea with a loaf of bread and a final good buy.
“Ageism” is oppression against elders. “Adultism” is oppression against youth. Oppression exists on multiple levels: personal/interpersonal, institutional, and societal. I perceived ageism on the personal/interpersonal level in several comments.
While elders in most countries were once considered as wise and treasured members of their communities, in many contemporary societies, older people are often marginalized, stripped of their rights and responsibilities, their dignity, their voice, and the power over their lives. Todd Nelson summarizes the change in attitudes regarding elders resulting from two dramatic historical developments.
First, the advent of the printing press was responsible for a major change in the status of elders (Branco & Williamson). The culture, tradition, and history of a society or tribe now could be repeated innumerable times, in exact detail through books, and the status and power elders once had as the village historians was greatly reduced and, in many cases, eliminated.
The second major development in society that led to a shift in attitudes toward the elderly was the industrial revolution. The industrial revolution demanded great mobility in families—to go where the jobs were. In light of this new pressure to be mobile, the extended family structure (with grandparents in the household) was less adaptive. Older people were not as mobile as younger people (p. 207).
An early writer on the topic of oppression toward older people was Robert Butler who defines “ageism” as:
A process of systematic stereotyping of and discrimination against people because they are old…. Old people are categorized as senile, rigid in thought and manner, old fashioned in morality and skills…. Ageism allows the younger generations to see older people as different than themselves; thus they subtly cease to identify with the elders as human beings (p. 12).
Margaret Morganroth Gullette describes ageism as “the infliction of suffering by the mere fact of birthdate”
I definitely understand the frustration over people trying to keep a tight hold onto power. We must be clear, though, about the institutional structure that replicates an inequitable imbalance of power for power’s sake between people, and a smooth transition of power for the proper functioning of an institution.
If, for example, the Democrats were to raise Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to the speakership or even to the leadership of a House committee, that would be tantamount to presenting first-year students who were just admitted into college with doctorate degrees, without their ever attending classes or reading anything. I admire and support Alexandria’s politics, but she has to gain the needed experience to navigate the political firestorm that is Washington, DC. This applies also to the other newer members of Congress.
And yes, I am also thinking of this personally. As a 71-year-old with a lifetime of experience as a social justice educator and community organizer, I still have a lot to give in the classroom and to the community. If I were forced into pasture, I know I would die prematurely. And yes, this would be ageism.
In addition, if I had wanted to retire, with my current financial situation, that would be very difficult if not impossible.
We must work for a nation that guarantees a comfortable retirement for people who wish to retire. So many people remain at their jobs not because they love the work but because they can’t afford to leave. If they were guaranteed a good retirement, the generational conflicts in the workplace would be eased significantly, as would the Machiavellian divide and conquer effect.
But now, if many seniors were left to retire on Social Security and savings, they (we) would be forced to live in a third-rate senior community or nursing home. Social Security barely covers many of our modest rents, utilities, and supplemental health care insurance. And we still must pay a significant amount each month for Medicare. Contrary to popular belief, Medicare costs the people who are covered. And we must pay taxes on our Social Security income.
We all, youth and elders alike, must work for economic equity, a guaranteed minimum wage significantly above the poverty level and annual cost of living increases, wage equity, a fair and equitable progressive tax system with no loopholes for the rich and for corporations, quality primary and secondary education that is not dependent on local property taxes, and affordable higher education that won’t restrict graduates from developing economic independence earlier because of loan debt, plus truly affordable quality health care for all, and a guaranteed comfortable retirement.
This will take a basic restructuring of our economic system, but it is something we can all work for together. The current system has hurt and continues to hurt so many in our country. We must no longer fight for crumbs from an ever-shrinking pie between the generations. We must, instead, join in unity and fight for a bigger and more equitable pie.
References
Branco, K. J., & Williamson, J. B. (1982). Stereotyping and the life cycle: Views of aging and the aged. In A. G. Miller (Ed.), In the eye of the beholder: Contemporary issues in stereotyping (pp. 364–410). New York: Praeger.
Butler, R. N. (1975). Why survive? Being old in America. New York: Harper and Row.
Gullette, M. M. (2017). Ending ageism or how not to shoot old people. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
Nelson, T. D. (2005). Ageism: Prejudice against our feared future self. Journal of Social Issues,61(2), 207—221.
—
If you believe in the work we are doing here at The Good Men Project, please join us as a Premium Member, today.
All Premium Members get to view The Good Men Project with NO ADS.
A $50 annual membership gives you an all-access pass. You can be a part of every call, group, class, and community.
A $25 annual membership gives you access to one class, one Social Interest group, and our online communities.
A $12 annual membership gives you access to our Friday calls with the publisher, our online community.
Register New Account
Need more info? A complete list of benefits is here.
RSVP for Political Activism Calls
Join the Politics FACEBOOK GROUP here.
Photo Credit: Getty Images