HOME



Digby's Hullabaloo
2801 Ocean Park Blvd.
Box 157
Santa Monica, Ca 90405



Facebook: Digby Parton

Twitter:
@digby56
@Gaius_Publius
@BloggersRUs (Tom Sullivan)
@spockosbrain



emails:
Digby:
thedigbyblog at gmail
Dennis:
satniteflix at gmail
Gaius:
publius.gaius at gmail
Tom:
tpostsully at gmail
Spocko:
Spockosbrain at gmail
tristero:
Richardein at me.com








Infomania

Salon
Buzzflash
Mother Jones
Raw Story
Huffington Post
Slate
Crooks and Liars
American Prospect
New Republic


Denofcinema.com: Saturday Night at the Movies by Dennis Hartley review archive

January 2003 February 2003 March 2003 April 2003 May 2003 June 2003 July 2003 August 2003 September 2003 October 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 March 2004 April 2004 May 2004 June 2004 July 2004 August 2004 September 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 February 2005 March 2005 April 2005 May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 June 2009 July 2009 August 2009 September 2009 October 2009 November 2009 December 2009 January 2010 February 2010 March 2010 April 2010 May 2010 June 2010 July 2010 August 2010 September 2010 October 2010 November 2010 December 2010 January 2011 February 2011 March 2011 April 2011 May 2011 June 2011 July 2011 August 2011 September 2011 October 2011 November 2011 December 2011 January 2012 February 2012 March 2012 April 2012 May 2012 June 2012 July 2012 August 2012 September 2012 October 2012 November 2012 December 2012 January 2013 February 2013 March 2013 April 2013 May 2013 June 2013 July 2013 August 2013 September 2013 October 2013 November 2013 December 2013 January 2014 February 2014 March 2014 April 2014 May 2014 June 2014 July 2014 August 2014 September 2014 October 2014 November 2014 December 2014 January 2015 February 2015 March 2015 April 2015 May 2015 June 2015 July 2015 August 2015 September 2015 October 2015 November 2015 December 2015 January 2016 February 2016 March 2016 April 2016 May 2016 June 2016 July 2016 August 2016 September 2016 October 2016 November 2016 December 2016 January 2017 February 2017 March 2017 April 2017 May 2017 June 2017 July 2017 August 2017 September 2017 October 2017 November 2017 December 2017 January 2018 February 2018 March 2018 April 2018 May 2018 June 2018 July 2018


 

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Hullabaloo


Tuesday, April 18, 2017

 
Racism and authoritarianism go hand in hand

by digby



I wrote about some of the latest poli-sci numbers crunching about what led to the election result for Salon this morning:


I don’t think I’ve ever experienced an election when after the fact there was so much disagreement about what led to the result. The postmortems are endless this time and we don’t seem to be getting any closer to a consensus. It’s understandable that people would be intensely curious to figure out why there was such a pronounced and unprecedented split between the winner of the popular vote and the winner of the Electoral College tally. That has been an exceedingly rare occurrence (in the era of popular elections, it happened only twice before 2000) but it is suddenly the norm for Republican presidential victories. Something isn’t working quite right in our democracy, and it stands to reason that people would want to find out what it is.

Much of the debate on this issue has been whether the reason for Donald Trump’s narrow victory in certain states was because of economic anxiety or racism, xenophobia, sexism and resistance to the changing demographic makeup of the nation. The main question centers on the whites without a college education who had voted for President Barack Obama twice but opted for Trump in 2016.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign has been criticized for her spending too much time talking about “identity politics” and not enough time talking about economics, which made members of the white working class who felt particularly anxious about their futures turn to the man who promised to “bring back jobs.” Considering the long-term degradation of the manufacturing base and the recent economic catastrophe associated with the 2007 financial crisis and ensuing Great Recession, it’s not unreasonable to make that assumption.

On the other hand, it’s impossible to ignore the blatantly racist, xenophobic and sexist appeal of the Trump campaign and dismiss the likelihood that this was central to his win. His campaign was organized around demonizing “the other” from the moment he descended that golden elevator and declared that Mexicans were rapists and criminals. From then on his entire pitch was aimed at foreigners or American “bad dudes,” whom he pledged to deport, defeat, demoralize or destroy. His “American carnage” worldview was a white nationalist refrain aimed directly at the ugly American racist id.

Political scientists have been busily crunching numbers and analyzing data and we’re finally able to get a sense of the attitudes that shaped the race. Obviously, it’s still the early days and there will still be intense disagreement about how to interpret the results but at least we have something to go by. A new study by John Sides, Michael Tesler and Lynn Vavreck, published in Journal of Democracy (and soon to become a book) has concluded that voters were not angry about the economy and actually were growing more optimistic. According to the authors’ data, throughout the Obama presidency, politics became more racialized, with non-college-educated whites developing less and less favorable attitudes toward African-Americans and moving toward the Republican Party.

Race played a much bigger part in this election, compared with what transpired in Obama’s two elections, mainly because Trump played it up as an issue in ways that Sen. John McCain and Gov. Mitt Romney refused to do. The voters who flipped from supporting Obama to backing Trump held strongly negative views on immigration. (Philip Klinkner’s analysis from the Los Angeles Times bore out that conclusion as well. The numbers are stark and obvious.) In other words Trump’s hard sell on race and ethnicity was what sold this group of non-college-educated whites.

Thomas Wood at the Washington Post’s Monkey Cage blog reported that the 2016 American National Election Study has been released, and he offered a similar analysis based on the data provided. He doesn’t delve too much into the question of economic anxiety except to note the unusual fact that poorer whites gravitated to Trump while “the degree to which the wealthy disdained the 2016 Republican candidate was without recent historical precedent.” That’s an interesting way of looking at this question I hadn’t heard before. Too bad he doesn’t elaborate.

Woods focused on a different question, frankly an odd one: Was it racism or a longing for authoritarian leadership that constituted the greatest appeal for Trump voters? His analysis showed that Trump voters were actually slightly less authoritarian than Republicans in general, but that someone with attitudes that correlate with racism was 20 times more likely to vote for Trump. So he concluded that authoritarianism was not a determining factor.

I think that may be misleading. In American culture, authoritarian attitudes and racism go hand in hand. And while the test designed to scope out authoritarian leanings is probably accurate, it seems to me that it’s impossible to separate the two impulses. Institutional racism in America exists at all levels of society, but government authority and criminal justice have always been at its center.

In order to determine someone’s predilection for authoritarianism, which is defined in the questionnaire as a fear of chaos and a desire for strong leadership, voters are asked about their child-rearing beliefs. In this test, Trump voters were less likely than Republicans generally have been in the past to say they believe in being “obedient.” That may normally be a signifier of an authoritarian personality, but it’s also possible that at the moment Trump voters see “obedience” as capitulation to “political correctness,” to which they are very much opposed. In any case, Republicans of all stripes, including Trump voters, are strongly authoritarian. The data shows they hold anti-authoritarian views only when it comes to being “well behaved,” as they amply demonstrated at Trump’s campaign rallies and the Republican National Convention.

The fact of the matter is that Trump’s proclamation “I am the law and order candidate” was a direct throwback to President Richard Nixon and Gov. George Wallace’s thinly veiled racism of the 1960s. Trump’s constant references to inner-city violence and promises to empower the police, the border patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to “get the job done” were part and parcel of his racist appeal. His voters not only agreed with his dark racial views; they also enthusiastically endorsed his promises to do something about it.

By the way, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Trump’s most serious henchman and a living embodiment of racist authoritarianism, is working day and night to make sure that even if the new president flip-flops on everything else, his pledge to crack down on people of color will be honored.


.