Helen Gym's Union League Gaffe
A problematic cocktail party, "white Philly progressives," and the spectre of anti-Blackness
Preface. I did not write this. My fingers typed all the words you’re about to read, but it wasn’t my brain sending the signals. One moment I was in control; next thing I knew, I awoke in a pool of sweat, laptop open on my desk, polished essay shining on its screen — signed with an ominous salutation:
Sincerely Yours,
The Spirit of Anti-Blackness
The Union League of Philadelphia is a private club founded during the Civil War by supporters of President Lincoln. But friends of Lincoln were not necessarily friends of the race freed from chattel slavery by his wartime leadership. After he signed the Emancipation Proclamation, it would be another 109 years until the League admitted its first black member. Today, the Broad Street building just south of City Hall is considered a haunt of moneyed, conservative elites. Joining the League costs you $7,500 up front, after which you owe yearly membership dues of $6,227. Casual dress is permitted on weekends, though even then shirts must be collared and “trousers must be in good condition.”
While the Republican Party of today may fall a bit shy of the bar set by the men of Lincoln’s generation, its leadership has not lost the League’s esteem. It first gave a gold medal, the club’s highest honor, to the man many still consider the greatest American president. Last week, it bestowed that same honor upon the man many hope will be the nation’s next president, if not its greatest — Ron Desantis.
Philadelphia, being the Democratic stronghold it is, was not fond of the League’s decision. Protestors gathered on Broad Street the day of the ceremony, shouting “shame” at those entering the building and chanting “sexist, racist, antigay, Ron Desantis go away.” The Florida governor is no ordinary Republican; he’s the champion of a host of “anti-woke” initiatives in his home state, including bills banning “critical race theory” from public school classrooms, along with content related to gender identity and sexual orientation. For these and other reasons, Desantis ranks highly on the public enemy list for progressives nationwide.
No surprise, then, that Philadelphia’s most progressive mayoral hopeful, Helen Gym, tweeted in solidarity with the Union League protestors:
Philly will always stand against the racism, homophobia, xenophobia, and the bigotry that The Union League decided to honor today. Hate has no home here. #ByeDeSantis.
The following week, Gym was endorsed by Philadelphia’s most progressive political party, the Working Families Party. She accepted the endorsement in person wearing a tan collared blazer and black dress pants in good condition. Which was smart, on her part, because that way she wouldn’t have to stop home for a snazzier outfit before heading to 140 S Broad — after all, primary season means packed schedules, so she only had a few hours before it was time to sip cocktails with the General Building Contractor’s Association at the Union League.
Mr. Ernest Owens, of Philly Mag, is a man with connections. When Jeff Brown — who’s also running for mayor — distributed misleading campaign fliers that made it seem like Michelle Obama had endorsed his candidacy, Ernest Owens was on the case. He spoke with the former first lady’s team; turns out, not only had Mrs. Obama not endorsed Brown for mayor, his team didn’t even get her approval to run the ad, which featured past footage of her praising Brown for his work combatting food deserts by opening grocery stores in poor, majority black neighborhoods. From this episode, Philly mayoral hopefuls should have learned that if they slip up, Owens is watching, and Owens will put you on blast.
Helen Gym did not learn. Instead, she condemned the Union League for honoring racism, homophobia, xenophobia, and bigotry one week, and then went to that very hall of hatred for a cocktail party the next. When she did, Owens was watching. Before long, he’d acquired a picture of her, tan blazer-black pants and all, mingling at the annual meeting of the GBCA:
Just like that, Gym’s fledgling campaign was mired in controversy. But not just her campaign, and not just for the hypocrisy of condemning or hanging out at the League as self-interest dictated. No, Owens took his critique further:
The next morning, for good measure, he followed up with:
Owens tried his best to shift the narrative from the mundane “politician declares and then discards principle in pursuit of power,” to the dramatic “white progressives stay silent when beloved non-Black politician courts racists.” Suddenly, for a Philadelphia progressive to not dogpile on the most progressive mayoral candidate was to “perpetuate anti-Blackness.” And to get mad when someone says you’re perpetuating anti-Blackness by not publicly criticizing the woman you believe will do the most good for marginalized people in Philadelphia… why, that’s white fragility, of course!
Either you sing along to Ernest’s tune, or you, like Union League members for another 109 years after the Emancipation Proclamation, are not a friend of the race it freed from chattel slavery.
Helen Gym was, of the nine mayoral candidates who participated in a January 19 forum on gun violence, the one who most clearly articulated the stance that Philadelphia’s police budget should not grow. It’s not 2020 anymore, and for the last two years, Philadelphians have been murdered in unprecedented numbers — so even with images of police brutality in Memphis fresh in our minds, no candidate who wants to win will be saying the word “defund.” Gym, then, used the most progressive language she could get away with in 2023, saying now was the time to “stabilize” police funding. Elsewhere she’s emphasized the need to reduce crime through a stronger police presence, but to do so without “rolling back the clock on civil rights.” She’s walking a rhetorical tightrope, trying to assure Philadelphians at large that she’ll do what’s needed to stop the surge of homicides — without sending her progressive base into anti-cop hysterics.
In the absence of data, let’s assume Owens is right that Gym’s base — at least the part of it that’s vocal on Twitter — is largely white. And, no assumptions necessary, let’s observe that Philadelphia at large is minority white; the biggest demographic group is black, comprising around 38% of the population. Further, let’s note that in April 2022, the Inquirer reported that, of any racial group, black Philadelphians were by far the most likely to believe the city needed more police — only 5% believed it needed less. White residents, meanwhile, were more than twice as likely to say the City needed fewer cops. That’s almost certainly because a lot of educated white progressives believe ardently that policing is an inherently “anti-Black” institution; meanwhile, majority black neighborhoods all over this City are bearing the brunt of the homicide surge.
What this means is that, on the mayoral campaign trail, Helen Gym has effectively asked her core following of vocal white progressives to put their anti-cop instincts on the backburner so that she has a shot to secure the black vote. Her base has been willing to do so because they don’t have a better option. In their mind, policing aside, Helen Gym will do the most for marginalized Philadelphians, most of whom are black. They might not get exactly what they want on law enforcement strategy, but they can tolerate that, because to them solving crime isn’t about policing anyway — it’s about investing in under-resourced communities. With better housing policy, more funding for schools, improved mental health services, fully staffed libraries and rec centers, stronger workforce development initiatives, etc. — all of which they trust Gym to secure — and with time to let these investments work their magic, Philadelphia’s roughest neighborhoods will be entirely transformed. After eight years of Helen Gym, the logic goes, no one will even be talking about hiring more cops or being tougher on crime. Crime will drop because, with better options available in poor majority-black neighborhoods, people will no longer feel the need to resort to it.
This, roughly, is what a lot of “white Philly progressives” think. This is why they support Helen Gym. This is why they aren’t eager to join with Owens in slamming her, even if they were disappointed to see her at the Union League, which they undoubtedly were, and even if they agree her actions were insensitive to the many black Philadelphians who despise Ron Desantis, which they undoubtedly do. Their silence is not the product of anti-Blackness, and their anger at being labeled anti-Black is not the product of white fragility.
They’re just, well, progressives, and they want to win, and they’re willing to accept that Union League cocktail parties might be part of a victorious campaign.
Holding power to account is a phrase I saw a lot after Owens’ exposé. And, to be fair, he was holding Gym accountable for her hypocrisy. But if this is the bar for holding power to account, then Philadelphia has a long, dark road ahead of it.
Our current mayor has taken little to no meaningful action to stop a historic surge in gun violence, to break up the largest open air drug market on the East Coast, to reverse a major municipal staffing shortage, to prevent illegal dumpers from treating our poorest neighborhoods like garbage cans. Holding power to account should mean making sure our leaders have to answer for failures on these fundamental quality of life issues. Making them answer for cocktail party hypocrisy is fine, too, but that’s the lowest of expectations. And when people overlook such minor offenses in the interest of delivering sorely needed material relief to the Philadelphians who need it most, it’s absurd to label them anti-Black.
Racial politics should be tightly tethered to the material conditions of demographic groups, not to bad optics on the campaign trail. And I’m not even a member of Gym’s white progressive base! Just a Philly resident who’d like to see our mayoral hopefuls, and their supporters, evaluated on matters of substance instead of bludgeoned with sloppy, racially charged rhetoric.