Blog
05
Dec

Here’s another in a series of articles exploring What the Heck Happened on November 8, particularly where it involves that […]

Here’s another in a series of articles exploring What the Heck Happened on November 8, particularly where it involves that vaunted White Working Class voter. According to The Atlantic article, Clinton didn’t lose their votes because she didn’t deliver an economic message but rather, they didn’t/couldn’t/didn’t want to hear it.

Trump’s white voters do support the mommy state, but only so long as it’s mothering them. Most of them don’t seem eager to change Medicare or Social Security, but they’re fine with repealing Obamacare and its more diverse pool of 20 million insured people. They’re happy for the government to pick winners and losers, so long as beleaguered coal and manufacturing companies are in the winner’s circle. Massive deficit-financed spending on infrastructure? Under Obama, that was dangerous government overreach, but under Trump, it’s a jobs plan by a guy they know won’t let Muslims and Mexicans cut in line to get work renovating highways and airports.

The writer isn’t too explicit about what the apparent cognitive dissonance among White Working Class voters is about, so we’ll make it: They’re afraid that the benefits of a liberal social democracy, benefits they would like for themselves, are going to “Those People,” AKA, immigrants and people of color. So, instead of voting for more for everyone, including themselves, they will vote against Those People having more (and, though the writer doesn’t say this explicitly, possibly screwing over themselves).

 

Elections are about a lot of things, obviously. People vote for a variety of reasons, obviously. But when you have […]

Elections are about a lot of things, obviously. People vote for a variety of reasons, obviously. But when you have white nationalists (AKA white supremacists) jumping for joy at the election of someone who they think will “bring their world view into being,” you really have to sit up and take notice.

One prominent white nationalist says plainly that the election of Trump was about white identity:

That concept would be that white Americans, as whites, have collective interests that are legitimate — just as blacks and Asians and every other group have collective interests that are legitimate. One obvious legitimate interest of whites is not to be reduced to a minority.

Now, I don’t think Donald Trump really thinks in those terms. But for those of us who have been trying to slow the dispossession of whites, all of his policies — at least, those pertaining to immigration — align very nicely with the sorts of things we’ve been saying for many years.

I think that is almost — well, probably entirely — an accident. He does not arrive at these views because of any kind of sense that white Americans deserve to be a majority in their own country. I don’t think he thinks in those terms.

White nationalists, again AKA, white supremacists, are overjoyed and energized. Their attendance doubled, the Washington Post reports, at their key national conference last week.

In the wake of Trump’s win, attendance more than doubled from last year’s Washington gathering of the group, which the Southern Poverty Law Center places in the vanguard of “academic racism.” The Institute’s core belief, according to the SPLC, “is that ‘white identity’ is under attack by multicultural forces using ‘political correctness’ and ‘social justice’ to undermine white people and ‘their’ civilization.”

Political correctness. You remember that phrase spat out by EVERY Trump supporter interviewed in the mainstream media in the last 18 months. If it wasn’t clear then what they meant, it should be clear now. They – white Americans who espouse these views – want the ability to shout their grievances that they have lost their dominance and they want it back.

We should listen to them, carefully. We should have listened to them. But, then, listening is not the same as condoning. Regarding race, we’re entering a very dark period in the U.S., pun not intended.

12
Nov

Wait. Keep reading. We know that elections have a lot of moving pieces and there are many ways to explain […]

Wait. Keep reading. We know that elections have a lot of moving pieces and there are many ways to explain a “loss”: we put that in quotes because Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, possibly by more than two million when all from California are counted.

But we’ve commented many times on the “Make America Great Again” slogan. Do its adherents have any idea exactly what date when America was last great? 1956? Before they were born? What has been making America not so great?

There are many answers these voters have been giving. They’ll blame NAFTA, they’ll blame ISIS – which is a minimal threat within America’s borders, but whatever – and they’ll blame the “elites” (gee, who did you think you voted for? Joe the Plumber?)

But what many have said – many white men – have said, explicitly and covertly, is that they’re losing their power. From The Nation magazine:

Indeed, when these voters scream about the economy, when Trump appealed to them, over and over, by claiming that the government was wasting their money, a big part of that was the perception that government money was going to help African Americans, single mothers, and the white people in their neighborhoods they deemed lazy. Trump ally Roger Stone said in September, about his candidate’s appeal to black voters: “When you are trading your vote for a welfare check, yes, that is a form of slavery. Yes.”

Again, not just loss of white privilege, but white male privilege. The Nation continues:

They were voting against an economy they believed was giving women a step up. In July, David Frum, in The Atlantic, compiled all of the conversations and interviews he’d done with Trump voters into an anti-elite screed written from their perspective. “In our America, the gender gap closed a long time ago—and then went into reverse,” he wrote. “Obama in the Oval Office was humiliating enough. But Hillary will be worse: We’re going to lose any idea at all that leadership is a man’s job.” I looked into this and it isn’t true. Everywhere in the country, women do worse than men in both job-market participation and in salaries. If there’s a tiny pocket of the country where women do better than men, it is not large enough to measure or make even a tiny difference in what we do measure. What is true is that women had been gaining ground. Men in rural communities across the country are unable to perceive that as anything but a loss to their own advantages.

So. Will America be great enough for them after four years of the new administration? We have to doubt that.

22
Oct

The shrinking world of white men

POSTED BY Admin POSTED IN Uncategorized POST TAGGED bigotry, racism

Make America great again? Has the candidate with that slogan ever asked what was the last year America was great? […]

Make America great again? Has the candidate with that slogan ever asked what was the last year America was great? We haven’t heard it. But for his supporters, that year might have been the last time they had an unquestioned dominance in the body politic and in culture. Still, we don’t know when that was; it’s been known for a while that the white share of the population is shrinking.

This piece in the Chicago Tribune adds to the analysis of what makes the GOP candidate’s supporters – the white male voters – tick. This passage with a quote from a Texas talk show host frames the narrative:

“I want America to be America,” he says. “I want some semblance of what this country used to be. It’s worth protecting. It’s worth defending. I don’t recognize this country anymore.”

This is a white male voice preaching to a largely white male audience that has expressed many of the same sentiments, in dribs and drabs, in hushed watercooler conversations and boisterous barroom exchanges, around kitchen tables — and most of all, in the course of a presidential campaign in which Trump has become their champion and their hope.

Certainly, not all white males agree. But at this moment in American history, to be white and male means, for many, to question what happened to the opportunities once theirs for the taking, to see others getting ahead and wonder why, to feel centuries of privilege and values slipping away.

“They’re taking everything from us,” says one of the day’s callers, Stephen Sanders. “I don’t want my community changed.”

The callers express resentment of immigrants who came here illegally, suspicion of Muslims, disdain for gays. They rail against a coarsening of culture, while backing a man who brags about making unwanted sexual advances. They voice bitterness toward a society they see as rallying to save an endangered animal or to lobby for the bathroom rights of transgender children, while seeming to ignore their own pain.

Can someone say to them, “Okay, fine, I feel your pain”? And then tell them to knock off the bigotry?

Do read the rest of the piece. There is nothing about slipping economic clout or insecurity about economics. There may be some scapegoating in the “I want my country back” chants. But let’s call it what it is. For the most part this is nothing more than, with apologies to Dylan Thomas, rage, rage against the dying of the White.

06
Oct

From the “what the hell?” files, comes this painful segment from Fox News. Watters approaches a number of men and […]

From the “what the hell?” files, comes this painful segment from Fox News.

Watters approaches a number of men and women in the street, some of them elderly residents who do not speak English. He then silently mocks them for their inability to answer his questions—many of which wander from the presidential race to lame caricatures of Asians masquerading as humor.

“Is food in China just food?”

“Do you know karate?”

Toward the end of the clip, when O’Reilly said it appeared that most of the people understood the dynamics of the current election, Watters laughed: “You thought people knew what was going on?”

“They’re such a polite people,” he said, invoking yet another stereotype. “They won’t walk away or tell me to get out of here. They just sit there and don’t say nothing!”

Yeah. This is not The Daily Show, which is actually funny and makes sure the audience is in on the joke when one of their comedy reporters acts like a doofus or interviews a doofus. No, this was meant to be serious.

It is important to note that Fox News is conservative-leaning. This won’t help in bringing Asian-Americans, who, we now see, are moving quickly into the Democratic camp and where Democrat Hillary Clinton holds a 41-point lead over Donald Trump.

Maybe conservative Fox News knows that this group is lost and their aim now is to punish and ridicule them?

29
Sep

The problem with colorblindness

POSTED BY Admin POSTED IN Uncategorized POST TAGGED psychology, race, racism

Fascinating article in Psychology Today that suggests “colorblindness” is really a form of racism. Many people think colorblind ideology is […]

Fascinating article in Psychology Today that suggests “colorblindness” is really a form of racism.

Many people think colorblind ideology is the same as equality; that is, everyone will be treated the same, and their skin color doesn’t matter (or can’t be seen). The author has a different view on this:

Racism? Strong words, yes, but let’s look the issue straight in its partially unseeing eye. In a colorblind society, White people, who are unlikely to experience disadvantages due to race, can effectively ignore racism in American life, justify the current social order, and feel more comfortable with their relatively privileged standing in society (Fryberg, 2010). Most minorities, however, who regularly encounter difficulties due to race, experience colorblind ideologies quite differently. Colorblindness creates a society that denies their negative racial experiences, rejects their cultural heritage, and invalidates their unique perspectives.

Instead of colorblind ideology, she has a better idea:

The alternative to colorblindness is multiculturalism, an ideology that acknowledges, highlights, and celebrates ethnoracial differences. It recognizes that each tradition has something valuable to offer. It is not afraid to see how others have suffered as a result of racial conflict or differences.

We guarantee your reaction to this will be: why didn’t we hear about this before? Imagine, it’s the Jim Crow […]

We guarantee your reaction to this will be: why didn’t we hear about this before?

Imagine, it’s the Jim Crow South, mid-20th century. Black girls – women but they were called girls then – were working at Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia. But they weren’t maids or service staff. They were doing the math that made planes safer and, in a few years, they were the human computers that helped put men on the moon. As black women at the time, they had two glass ceilings to break through. Math was considered “women’s work,” if you can believe it.

Listen to this NPR interview with Margot Lee Shetterley, a Hampton, Va., native and daughter of a former Langley scientist, who discusses her new book Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race. The book has already been adapted for big screen; the film starring Taraji P. Henson, Octavia Butler and Janelle Monae premieres in January.

From the interview:

You know, the Russians had got a real head start into space, America was playing catch up. And this was also a moment where electronic computers were taking over the task of much of the calculating that was necessary for these increasingly complex missions.

But as sort of a hand off moment between human computers and electronic computers, John Glenn asked Katherine Johnson — he actually asked “the girl” — all of the women working at that time were referred to as “girls.”

And he said: “Get the girl to do it, I want this human computer to check the output of the electronic computer and if she says they’re good, you know, I’m good to go as part of one of my pre-flight check lists.”

So the astronaut who became a hero, looked to this black woman in the still segregated south at the time as one of the key parts of making sure his mission would be a success.

 

 

There are some unmistakable trends in the latest Pew Research Center Study, which analyzes U.S. Census Bureau data. – Asian-American […]

There are some unmistakable trends in the latest Pew Research Center Study, which analyzes U.S. Census Bureau data.

- Asian-American population is now the fastest growing segment of the U.S., overtaking the growth rate of U.S. Latinos.

- U.S. Hispanic population slowed, growing annually on average by only 2.8 percent between 2007 and 2014. In the years between 2000 and 20007, the rate was 4.4 percent.

- The Asian/American population has been growing at a steady 3.4 percent between 2007 and 2014.

- The growth rate of Asian/Americans was driven by increased immigration from Asian countries, especially from South Asia and China.

Pew had some conclusions about why this shift is happening. First is immigration: The Immigration rate from Latin America has slowed substantially compared to the highpoint of Latino immigration in the 1980s and 1990s (though you wouldn’t know that from the heated anti-immigrant political rhetoric). In fact immigration from Mexico has now reversed: there are now more people moving to Mexico from the U.S. than coming north.

Right now main driver of Latino population growth is U.S. births. But even there, a change is afoot. Throughout much of the early 2000s birth rates of Hispanic women ages 15 to 44 were about 95 births per 1,000 women, reaching a peak of 98.3 in 2006. However, since the onset of the Great Recession, their birth rates have declined, steadily falling to 72.1 births per 1,000 Latino/American women ages 15 to 44 in 2014.

Unlike Hispanic population growth, the growth of Asian-Americans is still driven by immigration. Since 2000, more immigrants were coming from Asia than from Latin America.

According to the U.S. Census, the Asian/American proportion of the total U.S. population is is around 6 percent. The largest ethnic groups represented in the census were Chinese (3.79 million), Filipino (3.41 million), Indian (3.18 million), Vietnamese (1.73 million), Korean (1.7 million), and Japanese (1.3 million).

13
Sep

Who are the “deplorables”?

POSTED BY Admin POSTED IN Uncategorized POST TAGGED election, racism, Trump

By now everyone has heard about Hillary Clinton’s comment about half of her opponent’s supporters falling into a “basket of […]

By now everyone has heard about Hillary Clinton’s comment about half of her opponent’s supporters falling into a “basket of deplorables” – sexist and racist mostly.

The pushback from her opponent and his surrogates has been hard and unrelenting. But unless we’ve missed it, none of these surrogates or Trump himself have refuted the claim. None of them have said, “no, most of my supporters are not racist at all.”

Because it wouldn’t be true.

Of course it’s political season, and lies are flying fast and furious. But the framing of the counter-attack on Clinton is telling. Trump has been courting racists and alt-right white nationalists since the beginning.

Dana Milbank in the Washington Post says what everyone in the U.S. should already know; that a good percentage – okay, we can quibble about the exact percentage - are bigoted or racist:

In June, the Pew Research Center found that 79 percent of Clinton voters believe the treatment of racial and ethnic minorities is an important issue, while only 42 percent of Trump supporters feel that way. As I wrote previously, earlier Pew research found that Trump supporters were significantly less likely than other Americans (and supporters of other Republican presidential candidates) to think that racial and ethnic diversity improves the United States.

Research by Washington Post pollsters and by University of California at Irvine political scientist Michael Tesler, among others, have found that Trump does best among Americans who express racial animus. Evidence indicates fear that white people are losing ground was the single greatest predictor of support for Trump — more, even, than economic anxiety.

So, okay, maybe deplorable is an loaded term. It might be more accurate to say, “Trump does best among Americans who express racial animus and white people who fear they are losing economic ground, therefore they blame people of color.” It’s a little wordy, though, right?

What we can say for sure is, it’s going to be a very long 53 days until this election is over.

Source: www.electionproject.org Election 2016 is entering the home stretch (and not a minute too soon), and voters are going to […]

CPS_race

Source: www.electionproject.org

Election 2016 is entering the home stretch (and not a minute too soon), and voters are going to be casting their votes by mail in some states in just a few weeks.

Hispanics and Asians could be crucial, and their percentage of the U.S. population is growing. This year  Hispanic and Asian voters will form 16% of the eligible voter pool, and will continue growing each year. But voter turnout rates among Hispanics and Asians is relatively low, according to Pew Research and the U.S. Elections Project.  In the 2012 presidential election, 64% of non-Hispanic white eligible voters cast ballots, as did 67% of black eligible voters. But the voter turnout rate was 48% among Hispanics and 47% among Asians.

One possible reason for lower registration (and turnout) rates among Hispanics is that they tend to be younger. In fact 44% of all Hispanic voters are millenials. But even that doesn’t explain it fully, because even among millenials, Hispanic/Asian registration trails significantly. Language barriers might be an issue. Also, Hispanic and Asian voters are concentrated in non-competitive states like New York and California and Texas. Or it may come down to the lack of a “family tradition” of voting in US elections.

We hope that more people who have the right to vote will do so. And from a demographic perspective, we would be fascinated to learn why Asian-Americans and Hispanics lag behind other groups in registration and voting habits.