(Disclaimer:  This is my first blog, please be gentle.)

Firestorms of opinion have been generated about how the Clinton and Obama campaigns should respond to the inflammatory words of Ferraro and Wright.  I can't help but find myself in agreement with almost everyone.  Like reading a voter pamphlet where arguments on both sides seem compelling, it is hard to come up with any clear sense of what's right and wrong.  All sides have a case to make, and any case can be refuted by the logic of another perspective.

Unfortunately, I’m not an expert on racial relations or the history of civil rights, but I sense that maybe a broader context is needed to understand and accurately digest what we're witnessing throughout this campaign.  What I lack in expertise, I make up for in passion on the subject, so, I’ll give it my best shot, understanding full well that I’m not the best man for the job.

The one thing that’s clear to me is - like violence - racism begets racism, and everyone is the victim, including racists themselves.  The other thing that’s clear, is there is a generational process at play here.

"There but for the grace of God go I."

In 1941, Wright had the misfortune of being born an African American, a child and growing up at a time in our society when racism was ran rampant.  He is very much a product of the 60’s; he lived what many of us from younger generations have only seen in grainy black and white news footage.  For those of us who never felt the pain, the bitter anger of being looked down upon, rejected, dismissed and hated, it is hard to even begin to relate to.  How many of us have lived under the threat of being lynched or worse?  How many of us have been attacked by dogs, hosed down or beaten simply because we wanted to be treated as equals?  It is a stretch for most of us to fully understand the mindset of one who has experienced such things.

It also takes a truly extraordinary individual to have experienced such things, and yet be able to set aside the negative emotions and love thy enemy.  MLK did this, and led a nation-changing movement while teaching others to do the same.  For that he is justly recognized as a major figure in American history.  But for many African Americans who've suffered the indignities of racism, letting go of the resentment is hard to do.  Clearly, Wright is among the latter category.  And in his resentment, he carries with him the seeds of reverse racism.  He can no better understand the perspective of a white person than a white person can understand his.  Wright may believe in his own mind that he is opposed to racism, but if so, he has become his own worst enemy.  (His anger certainly builds no bridges of trust!)  If he isn’t a reverse racist, then at a minimum his life experiences have robbed him of the ability to see white America and Europe as anything other than the enemy.  From that perspective, there is no way forward without the other side being the loser.  God Damn America?  Yeah, from his perspective, I get it.  I don't agree, but I understand how he could arrive at that sentiment.

Ferraro is from the same generation.  She fought her own fights as a woman in an era where women were also struggling for equality and fairness.  She believes that she's one of the good people out there fighting against discrimination.  I take her words at face-value - the anger we saw was real - that she really was offended that anyone would suggest she’s racist.  And yet, her own words reveal something, which, if it isn’t racism, was callously disrespectful to not only Barack Obama, but to any African American who has ever been discounted and overlooked because of their race or skin color.  At best, she’s grossly unaware of how her statements were insensitive and hurtful to African Americans and only reinforced racist thinking.  How could this come from woman who must personally understand being on the receiving end of discrimination?  How could she not see it?  Quite simply: her life experience as a white woman leaves her as blind to Reverend Wright’s mindset as his does to hers.

So what?

If I were either candidate, I would strive to point out that we’re seeing the echos of racism reverberating throughout our society, and that this is an opportunity to take another step forward in deepening our understanding of each other and write the closing chapters on racism in America.  Wright and Ferraro aren’t racists.  The the worlds they grew up in left an indelible mark on their characters, both positive and negative.  Both Ferraro and Wright have each, in their own ways, been champions in the fight against discrimination.   But lack of proximity or  familiarity to one another’s worlds leaves both ignorant of their own prejudices and to the harm some of their statements cause.  The words of Wright and Ferraro illustrate the gap between a wealthy white-person’s experience of the world, and the experience of many African Americans.  They can only see the world from limited perspectives... viewpoints inherited from - or at least immensely influenced by - the world in which they ‘cut their teeth’ 40-50 years ago.

But things have changed; it’s a different world today than it was in the 50’s and 60’s.  I’m not suggesting we’ve ‘arrived’ at full equality or that racism no longer exists, but, certainly, things have improved.  More to the point, matters of race are not as significant a factor for younger generations of voters (and this is as it should be if we’re looking for a sign that our society is on the right track to color-blindness).  The age of the 60’s civil rights activism is being replaced with a more pragmatic and conciliatory approach of younger generations.  We even see a divide in thinking between younger vs. older feminists.  Where the former look at things in more absolute and extreme ways, the next generation sees women’s issues in much broader contexts (e.g., they identify war as a women’s issue because of it’s impact on women and families).  While the older generation of feminists typically promote female candidates, the younger generation looks to promote candidates who best represent the interests of women, regardless of their gender.   The m.o. of the 60’s was riot, protest, fight, make demands - to rail against the establishment.  Todays generation seeks a more civic-minded, win-win approach - to win the fight from within.

While we should always respect those who came before us - recognizing the battles they fought and the benefits conferred upon future generations - should we be distracted by old fights of the past?  Shall we allow the comments of former leaders and candidates, who’s opinions and beliefs belong in another era, overshadow the comments of today’s candidates?  Do we descend into the fracas, or use this as an opportunity to gain a deeper understanding and move forward?

Yes, Obama needs to respond in a powerful way to reverend Wright’s fiery sermon.  But the response need not be to throw Wright under the bus.  In fact, the more powerful response is to elevate the dialogue by using Wright and Ferraro as the examples of what we, as a people, as a nation, are striving to leave behind.  And the challenge for Clinton, who is also from the older generation, will be to ‘find her voice’ in the present and future, instead of the past.

I’m sure many readers will find flaws in my essay, and I welcome constructive criticism.  As I said, I’m no expert on the subject, and I have limited time to put my thoughts into writing.  To be honest, I’m not 100% confident about everything I wrote - this is just me working out my own thoughts in public.  But, even if some of my assumptions are a stretch or some of my details are off, I think the key points remain valid.