Familiar Pattern

November 13, 2016 9:14 AM

Rev. William Barber’s Moral Message Moving Forward, a post-election press call ( Youtube, 45 min audio only. Barber previously ) covers a lot of ground, built around his observation that the “…victory has been heralded as an unprecedented political upheaval. But we must understand history and know that the reactionary wave that swept across America this past Tuesday is not an anomaly in our history. It is instead an all too familiar pattern in the long struggle for American reconstruction.”

Barber’s wide-ranging precedents bring together 1 Samuel 8, the Mississippi Plan, the compromise that came out of a previous electoral/popular vote split, Plessy vs. Ferguson, the White House screening Birth of a Nation, and Langston Hughes call to “Let America Be America Again”. Thirty minutes of history and paths forward, followed by fifteen minutes of Q&A.

posted by bendybendy (27 comments total)

I'm having a hard time handling the pain that accompanies engaging with current events, but I'd never seen that Langston Hughes poem before, and it resonates well. Thanks for posting it.
posted by Gorgik at 9:19 AM on November 13, 2016 [7 favorites]

we've got a duty.....Russell Brand on our current nadir
posted by Wilder at 9:46 AM on November 13, 2016 [2 favorites]

"When he told White Americans that he was their last chance to make America great again, he was touching a wound passed down since the "Lost Cause" religion of the 19th century."
posted by tonycpsu at 10:16 AM on November 13, 2016 [5 favorites]

Barber is incredible and after this week I needed this kind of historical perspective - I'd seen this piece on the end of Reconstruction/Redemption but hadn't really tied it together. Thank you for sharing this.
posted by mdonley at 10:18 AM on November 13, 2016 [1 favorite]

Stay with this for the Q&A section -- Barber's words are even more profound when he's speaking off the cuff. The minority party in this country would do well to get him as involved in their strategy discussions as his time allows for.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:22 AM on November 13, 2016 [6 favorites]

we've got a duty. ....Russell Brand on our current nadir

Brand is talking out of his arse. The idea that Trump was elected by desperate people who have been cheated by liberalism is simply not supported by even the most cursory examination of who actually voted for him. If you want a simplistic model that's actually somewhat accurate, try "Trump was elected because white people want to keep non-white people down". That's not quite as amenable to being fixed through a load of non-specific "consciousness-changing" hippy bullshit, though.
posted by howfar at 10:37 AM on November 13, 2016 [13 favorites]

The idea that Trump was elected by desperate people who have been cheated by liberalism is simply not supported by even the most cursory examination of who actually voted for him. If you want a simplistic model that's actually somewhat accurate, try "Trump was elected because white people want to keep non-white people down".

I really don't think you can discount the "desperate people cheated by liberalism" argument, though. Rather, I think that the desperation is what has driven many people to swallow the racist mindset. I mean, if most white people were living large, there wouldn't be any driving need for them to keep anyone down.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:49 AM on November 13, 2016 [6 favorites]

howfar Except that Hillary lost where Obama one because of white people jumping ship to Trump. There's a piece in The Atlantic from January all about how middle-American white people are in seriously fucked up economic straits. Now, that said, this does not mean racism wasn't involved. Racism was a huge factor in why Trump was elected, and anyone who says otherwise is trying to sell something. Racism was Trump's easy answer to the huge problems facing the white working class, and they ate it up with a spoon. Partially, because the Democrats didn't have any response, and partially because of, yes, pre-existing racist views that Trump gave license to express.

The racism of middle-America and the economic despair of middle-America are interlinked, and you can't talk about one without talking about the other.
posted by SansPoint at 10:52 AM on November 13, 2016 [7 favorites]

Well, that's the problem, right? A lot of people seem to think that if you address the economic problems, the racism will resolve itself as well. That's a comforting myth, since the economic problems are way more tractable, but it really is just a myth.
posted by tobascodagama at 10:55 AM on November 13, 2016 [9 favorites]

so are we going to spend the next four to eight years arguing between bigotry and economic angst, instead of fighting both
posted by Apocryphon at 10:56 AM on November 13, 2016 [10 favorites]

We don't yet know for the votes because counting still hasn't finished. Hillary is as of this moment only a few thousand away from 61 million votes, which is not that far from Obama's record-breaking 65,915,795 votes in 2012.

Hillary is winning the popular vote. This rhetoric that she lost it is simply untrue. (Not debating the electoral votes. The popular vote.)
posted by fraula at 10:57 AM on November 13, 2016 [4 favorites]

tobascodagama: Yup. That's the problem. I'd like to think that, in theory, if you can lift everyone's boat, we'll at least be able to make them less likely to be suckered by racist demagogues. I have no idea if that's the case, though.
posted by SansPoint at 10:58 AM on November 13, 2016 [1 favorite]

To add on to my last comment: Basically, I think you'll have an easier time getting people to abandon dangerous, toxic beliefs about other groups, when those people aren't struggling to make ends meet.
posted by SansPoint at 11:05 AM on November 13, 2016 [3 favorites]

Racism was Trump's easy answer to the huge problems facing the white working class, and they ate it up with a spoon.

Yes, but so did lots of white people who aren't working class, aren't poor, and aren't living in difficult economic or social conditions. Economic fear is certainly a factor, but I think it's tempting to overstate its significance. There are a lot of white people, at the moment, who, like Brand, want to pretend that race is one factor among many here. I think it's important that we understand that white racism is fundamental to the insanity that is taking hold in Western politics. The conscious and deliberate use of racism across the spectrum of the right and centre-right is not just an opportunistic response to a climate of uncertainty and fear - it is deliberately creating such a climate. It is saying "if you hear an accent you don't recognise when you buy a coffee, be afraid, they'll have your job next; if you see a family in unfamiliar clothes move in next door, be afraid, they're going to claim benefits and steal your pension". It tells people that an influx of migrants are swamping their country, and that the only way to be safe, personally and economically, is to keep them out. Yes, this message is made more effective by real economic vulnerability, but it doesn't require real vulnerability in order to be effective.
posted by howfar at 11:15 AM on November 13, 2016 [10 favorites]

I've been living in NC for 30+ years now, and it seems like Rev. Barbar was always around raising hell. I was glad he was doing what he did but didn't give him much thought. But I really started seeing and hearing him a lot during the Moral Monday marches which he started four years ago to protest the GOP led voter disenfranchisement efforts and other hateful legislation. I was watching him in CNN the other night and I'm glad he's really got a national voice. He really is an inspirational leader. I love him.
posted by marxchivist at 11:19 AM on November 13, 2016 [4 favorites]

howfar: Agreed. It's a chicken and egg problem. I'm of the view that racism already existed in the populations the right and center-right have been playing to, and that playing to those racist views as they relate to the existing economic anxiety has been a successful tactic in winning over their support. It doesn't matter if you're afraid of the other keeping you from what is your right, or if you're afraid of the other taking away what you've earned, it's two sides of the same coin, and both can be exploited by racist rhetoric.
posted by SansPoint at 11:23 AM on November 13, 2016 [1 favorite]

I voted for Obama twice.
I voted for Bernie in the primary (which was nice, voting FOR someone, and not against someone)... and came fairly close to voting for Trump... but pulled back and voted against him, because of the sheer incompetence he displays...

It wasn't about race at all for me, I get that it was for many, but really, the working class in this country have been ignored by the Democrats since Jimmy Carter, and we've had enough.
posted by MikeWarot at 11:25 AM on November 13, 2016 [1 favorite]

It wasn't about race at all for me, I get that it was for many, but really, the working class in this country have been ignored by the Democrats since Jimmy Carter, and we've had enough.

You can't use this line literally the sentence after you tell us you thought about voting Trump, unless you are trying to convince people that you literally never knew anything about Trump before you saw his name on the ballot.
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:27 AM on November 13, 2016 [11 favorites]

MikeWarot I don't think you're wrong about the Dems, but I'm glad you didn't vote for the racist demagogue, despite the reasons. However, you can't support Trump without supporting racism. John Scalzi calls it "The Cinemax Theory of Racism". Essentially:

Let’s say you want HBO. So you go to your local cable provider to get HBO and the only way they’ll let you get HBO is to sign up for a premium channel package, which includes HBO but also includes Cinemax. Now, maybe you don’t want Cinemax, and you don’t care about Cinemax, and maybe never personally plan to ever watch Cinemax, but the deal is: If you want HBO, you have to sign on to Cinemax too. You have to be a Cinemax subscriber to get HBO. And you go ahead and sign up for the premium channel package...

This election, you had two major Presidential providers. One offered you the Stronger Together plan, and the other offered you the Make America Great Again plan. You chose the Make America Great Again plan. The thing is, the Make America Great Again has in its package active, institutionalized racism (also active, institutionalized sexism. And as it happens, active, institutionalized homophobia). And you know it does, because the people who bundled up the Make America Great Again package not only told you it was there, they made it one of the plan’s big selling points.

So even if you didn't agree with Trump's racism, it's intrinsically linked to Trump's platform, and supporting him for the "right" reasons still tacitly endorses all the wrongness he carries with him.
posted by SansPoint at 11:46 AM on November 13, 2016 [8 favorites]

It's a mistake to pound the nail of racism when misogyny was central. People forget the GOP ran Palin after it seemed like Clinton would take the primaries. That's how fast a "dark horse" Obama was. The wilderness of Not Only White Guys is so thick, its predictability from the privacy of the voting booth so difficult, "fighting fire with fire" was considered a rational choice-- disgusting.

In the first debate, when Trump joked that a Fox blondie (their most successful) was on the rag, and it worked, it was so sickening I swooned.

So, choose your bigotry and leverage against "right" and "wrong" reasons all you like, but it's complex and not simply complicated.

What too many miss is the Gettysburg speech. The first 1/3 ignores social issues altogether-- it is term limits and lobby regulations. What too many miss is a demographic of voters to which Drain the Swamp became paramount.

I'm not seeing much promotion or reportage of a "million man" march of women on D.C. By the third debate, I'd have had Clinton standing mute with 100 women coming to the stage to breast feed and amplified suckling noises to drown out this particular predator-select.
posted by lazycomputerkids at 12:08 PM on November 13, 2016 [3 favorites]

Thank you so much for this, bendybendy. I haven't listened yet, but I am really seeking sources of hope and inspiration right now (and I know a lot of other people are too), and this is really what I need. Thank you.

I am kind of amazed that so little of the post-election analysis is talking about abortion. I was amazed at the numbers of women who voted for Trump, and then I saw that more than 80% of white evangelicals voted for him. Why was that? I really believe that most voters' reasons are complex and entangled, but it seems like the desire to overturn Roe v Wade must have been hugely motivating for a lot of white evangelicals - who make up 29% of the US population.

As we move forward, I'd like to see some ads in key states - in the midterms, maybe? - emphasizing that abortion rates go down under Democratic presidents. It surely wouldn't sway everybody, but if it swayed even a few percentage points of that 29% of the US population, that could make a real difference in outcomes.

But I think if we say it was one thing - only racism, or only economics, or only misogyny - we will miss the opportunity to address all the different voters with all their different perspectives. America needs to do better in so many ways - which of course was one of the things that most drew me to Hillary. She wanted to make the country better for everybody, in every way. (I really believe she would have demonstrated better leadership on Native American issues after being elected than she did when she was running.)

I think embracing that vision is both the right thing to do and the best chance for victories in the future. We need to be one community, one movement, that wants to make a better nation for everybody - blacks, women, LGBTQ persons, Native Americans, immigrants, poor whites, upper middle class whites, veterans, evangelicals, Latinx, EVERYONE. OF COURSE many of those groups need more and faster change than others, but we need to convince all those groups that it doesn't have to be a zero-sum game; we can listen to everyone, and find ways - impossible as that may sometimes seem - to try to address everyone's concerns.

I hope.
posted by kristi at 12:51 PM on November 13, 2016 [3 favorites]

I'd like to see some ads in key states - in the midterms, maybe? - emphasizing that abortion rates go down under Democratic presidents.

Abortion rates go down when there is more
1) Education about sex,
2) Contraception available,
3) Maternity leave, and
4) Support for families with small children.

Canada, which has exactly the "abortions-on-demand" system that evangelicals in the US scream about, has many fewer abortions than we do - because (1) women are less likely to get pregnant accidentally and (2) giving birth doesn't mean losing a job, access to school, or living in poverty for the next decade or so.

Evangelicals need to pushed into the awareness that "laws against abortion" aren't what prevents abortion - pregnancy prevention (which they also often object to) and support for mothers and babies prevent abortion.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 3:55 PM on November 13, 2016 [11 favorites]

John Scalzi calls it "The Cinemax Theory of Racism".

Someone in the comments on that post came up with a pithier example:

You go to the hardware store because you want to buy a bucket. However, they don't sell empty buckets. But they DO sell nails by the bucketful. So you buy a bucket of nails, with the intention that you'll just dump the nails out when you get home and use the bucket.

True or false - did you buy nails?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:34 PM on November 13, 2016 [6 favorites]

Well, they're either nails or very pointy, potentially injury-causing trash.
posted by oneswellfoop at 4:39 PM on November 13, 2016

Which you still did buy, right?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:53 AM on November 14, 2016

Evangelicals need to pushed into the awareness that "laws against abortion" aren't what prevents abortion - pregnancy prevention (which they also often object to) and support for mothers and babies prevent abortion.

I don't believe that they actually care how many abortions happen.
posted by Pope Guilty at 5:46 AM on November 14, 2016 [5 favorites]

The end of Reconstruction has been on my mind for a little while now (since the gerrymandering of 2010, at least). The fact that so much of that history isn't taught in schools is probably part of the reason we're in this mess. It's easy to exploit history out of context when you can assume most people aren't actually familiar with it. (I can't access the talk at work, FWIW, so feel free to ignore this if it's really covered by TFA.)

It's occurred to me that, for all its rhetoric, the South as a whole doesn't have much experience with actual democracy. Prior to the Civil War, it was effectively a police state, and, after Reconstruction ended, it adopted a government controlled in no small part by state-supported terrorism. The short periods of democracy it's experienced have literally been the result of military and judicial action.

It's easy to point to the failures of the North when it comes to racism, but I think the "pox on both houses" is a dangerous (if politically beneficial) way to ignore history. The North has a much stronger tradition of democracy in theory even if not in practice. That may be partially due to the lack of a large minority population, but I think there are other factors (likely, in part, the religious and cultural divides that originated long before the Civil War) involved as well.
posted by steady-state strawberry at 8:36 AM on November 14, 2016 [7 favorites]