10 of 23

Obama

Write now Article Tools

Election day is roaring up to us with all the civility of a rhino with hay fever. In the Democratic race for the nomination, mud-slinging has degenerated into vows to vote for the other party should the candidate a person supports not get the nod. Thus, while it can be devastatingto ponder the reality that Senators Clinton and Obama are, between them, losing the opportunity to get the easy win the Democrats should have had, we can at least enjoy the historical possibilities.

Namely, whether Senator Clinton or Senator Obama wins the Presidency, the event will still be historically important for our nation. However, before we discuss whose win would be more historically important, it can help for us to get a little perspective.

We are not the first county that has had the potential to have a woman president. India and the Phillipines, among several others, have already had elected female leaders. What is more, many countries of South and Central American have had presidents of African descent, or at least mixed descent.

So let's not feel too high and mighty and enlightened now that it is possible that the 'leader of the free world' may finally have a president who is female or black. Because really, it's about time.

But since we want to discuss which of Clinton and Obama would be the more historically important president, we can quickly come to the conclusion that it would be Obama.

Some might argue that Hillary Clinton, a woman, would be the historically more important president due to her gender. They could cite the fact that women had to fight for suffrage for decades. The Nineteenth Amendment, ratified and passed in 1920, was the result of many brave, dedicated women's work. President Woodrow Wilson had finally caved in to what was painfully obvious to much of the country.

Furthermore, it is true that, technically, black men of sufficient age could vote across the USA. However, the truth was that Jim Crow laws were still keeping the vast majority of potential black voters from the polls.

On the other hand, we need to consider the prejudice that has existed against both women and black people. Women in general were treated as chattel, having no right to property and little choice in the direction of their lives. Men were seen as the superior human.

Black people have historically been seen as less than human. As if they are a different, degenerate species. This prejudice is worse, is even more deeply entrenched, and took more time, effort and bloodshed to eradicate in our political system. Can we name any martyrs to the cause of suffrage? No, not really, although some women were willing to pay this ultimate price and others lived out their lives dedicated to the cause.

But the list of martyrs to the cause of destroying prejudice and segregation is long and tragic.

Which prejudice is worse? On one hand there is the belief that you are human, but significantly less capable in matters of politics and business, while still commanding respect in the home. On the other hand is the belief that you are less than human and congenitally incapable of a productive, human existence.

We choose the latter. Thus, having a black president in Senator Obama would be more historically important for this country.

Learn more about this author, Jared Garrett.
Click here to send author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about US elections 2008: Whose win would be more historically important: Obama or Clinton??
We want to hear your view. Write now!