How might a friend talk to a country about your attitude to race?
July 9, 2021 3:23 PM Subscribe
A piece in Cambridge University's American Political Science Review, Activating Animus: The Uniquely Social Roots of Trump Support is unpacked on Twitter (or ThreadReaderApp) from the version framed in the language of the science journal: there are swathes of the population who aren't loyal to a party but are loyal to White Christian America, who flocked to 'Make America Great Again'. As a friend, how do we talk about "white Christian supremacy versus a fully multi-racial democracy" that would throw away democracy itself? From the tweets: "It draws our attention away from the faction and forces us to 'both-sides' democracy v. anti-democracy." "As long as they can hide behind party labels they are protected by 'bipartisanship' and the both-sides implications of 'polarization' research. It's time to bring this faction out of the protection of party labels and the veil of political civility, and into the discussion."
Another opinion piece I just read along these same lines: The Christian Right Is in Decline, and It’s Taking America With It
posted by thandal at 3:36 PM on July 9, 2021 [8 favorites]
posted by thandal at 3:36 PM on July 9, 2021 [8 favorites]
An extremely valuable term I've found useful when anyone starts to "both sides" anything is Asymmetric Polarization.
It's not fucking both sides. The theocratic, racist faction has found that they can keep walking further and further so long as they keep saying "meet me in the middle" at each step, the likes of (for example) Manchin will just do it.
Abandonment of comity and bipartisanship in response to the other side's explicit abandonment of same is the only way to avoid getting steamrolled.
posted by tclark at 3:48 PM on July 9, 2021 [57 favorites]
It's not fucking both sides. The theocratic, racist faction has found that they can keep walking further and further so long as they keep saying "meet me in the middle" at each step, the likes of (for example) Manchin will just do it.
Abandonment of comity and bipartisanship in response to the other side's explicit abandonment of same is the only way to avoid getting steamrolled.
posted by tclark at 3:48 PM on July 9, 2021 [57 favorites]
This is a tiny aside: APSR is published by Cambridge University Press, but its editorial board and its authors are mostly scholars in America, and APSR is considered the main academic journal of political science in the United States. Just want to establish that this is not the British take on American political science; it's the American take on American political science. There are many other journals dealing with political science in the USA, but this is the top one.
posted by gum at 4:35 PM on July 9, 2021 [22 favorites]
posted by gum at 4:35 PM on July 9, 2021 [22 favorites]
I genuinely think this is an interesting analysis and I largely agree with their conclusions. But in their argument that this pattern doesn't exist in the Democratic party, from the PDF...
Of course, it's not like we have a major corpus of non-white, non-Christian, national political figures of enough tenure and notability to generate this kind of data. That's not a coincidence, so ironically the lack of data also reinforces these conclusions.
I wonder what we might've seen if "men" was also treated as a Republican-aligned group for the purposes of this analysis.
posted by Riki tiki at 4:53 PM on July 9, 2021 [14 favorites]
Of [Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Chuck Schumer, and Nancy Pelosi] only Bernie Sanders and Chuck Schumer have even mildly positive relationships with animosity toward Republican-linked groups [whites and Christians]....and from Twitter:
Hating Christians and White people doesn't predict favorability toward any Democratic figures or the Democratic Party.The thing is, Clinton and Pelosi are white Christians. So it, uh, makes sense that animosity towards those groups doesn't align with support for them. And Sanders and Schumer are white, but not Christian. So it kinda makes sense that those two break even.
Of course, it's not like we have a major corpus of non-white, non-Christian, national political figures of enough tenure and notability to generate this kind of data. That's not a coincidence, so ironically the lack of data also reinforces these conclusions.
I wonder what we might've seen if "men" was also treated as a Republican-aligned group for the purposes of this analysis.
posted by Riki tiki at 4:53 PM on July 9, 2021 [14 favorites]
This is a tiny aside: APSR is published by Cambridge University Press, but its editorial board and its authors are mostly scholars in America, and APSR is considered the main academic journal of political science in the United States.
To expand on this, the APSR is owned and run by the American Political Science Association and the editors are chosen by the APSA board. I haven't sat on the APSR's board, but if it's similar to other arrangements with big publishers, CUP's role is almost entirely limited to production and marketing.
For the curious, the other main general journals are owned and run by notionally-regional associations -- AJPS is run by the Midwest PSA, JOP by the Southern PSA, PRQ by the Western PSA. Likewise, the primary journals in many subfields are owned and run by organized sections of APSA.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 5:53 PM on July 9, 2021 [3 favorites]
To expand on this, the APSR is owned and run by the American Political Science Association and the editors are chosen by the APSA board. I haven't sat on the APSR's board, but if it's similar to other arrangements with big publishers, CUP's role is almost entirely limited to production and marketing.
For the curious, the other main general journals are owned and run by notionally-regional associations -- AJPS is run by the Midwest PSA, JOP by the Southern PSA, PRQ by the Western PSA. Likewise, the primary journals in many subfields are owned and run by organized sections of APSA.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 5:53 PM on July 9, 2021 [3 favorites]
Before I logged in, whatever ad network the site uses tried to sell me on a “What is critical race theory?” ad from PragerU based on this page’s content.
The internet was a mistake.
posted by FallibleHuman at 5:59 PM on July 9, 2021 [13 favorites]
The internet was a mistake.
posted by FallibleHuman at 5:59 PM on July 9, 2021 [13 favorites]
The thing is, Clinton and Pelosi are white Christians. So it, uh, makes sense that animosity towards those groups doesn't align with support for them. And Sanders and Schumer are white, but not Christian. So it kinda makes sense that those two break even.
It's a neat paper, and a nice example of how some relatively simple analysis of the right data can land you an APSR paper.
But, and this is no knock on the authors because the dataset is what it is, the surveys they're using can't get at the reverse very well. If you wanted to do that, you'd want more plausible targets than whites and Christians. I suspect if you asked about hicks or rednecks, you'd get at least a little response, but that you'd never get anything like they found with respect to Trump.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 6:02 PM on July 9, 2021 [1 favorite]
It's a neat paper, and a nice example of how some relatively simple analysis of the right data can land you an APSR paper.
But, and this is no knock on the authors because the dataset is what it is, the surveys they're using can't get at the reverse very well. If you wanted to do that, you'd want more plausible targets than whites and Christians. I suspect if you asked about hicks or rednecks, you'd get at least a little response, but that you'd never get anything like they found with respect to Trump.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 6:02 PM on July 9, 2021 [1 favorite]
Mod note: Before I logged in, whatever ad network the site uses tried to sell me on a “What is critical race theory?” ad from PragerU based on this page’s content.
There's lots of blech stuff in Adsense's inventory, unfortunately. If you see a gross ad, you can copy the link it's pointing to and send that along in to the contact form and I'll get the domain blocked.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:59 PM on July 9, 2021 [39 favorites]
There's lots of blech stuff in Adsense's inventory, unfortunately. If you see a gross ad, you can copy the link it's pointing to and send that along in to the contact form and I'll get the domain blocked.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:59 PM on July 9, 2021 [39 favorites]
I really liked this piece when I read it a few days ago, but the summary (and keywords) for the FPP really miss the point. It's really about how Trump is unique in his mass support from a certain large cohort, spread among both parties & apolitical independents, whose main distinguishing feature is animosity towards Latinos, Muslims, African-Americans, and LGBTQs.
The article confusingly refers to these four as "Democratic groups" or "Democratic-aligned", which (1) they are not consistently, and (2) is very confusing when discussing the subset of that large cohort who are Democrats. I found it clearer, while reading, to substitute an abbreviation "LMBQ" which I came up with.
The really significant point is that people in the cohort defined by animosity towards LMBQ love Donald Trump but do not have any loyalty towards Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan, and have positive feelings towards the Republican Party only so far as they see it as the Trump Supporting Party.
This is why getting enough Republicans to impeach Trump was the most important task faced by Congress. Cutting him out of the picture is critical to disempowering the mob.
posted by Harvey Kilobit at 8:00 PM on July 9, 2021 [12 favorites]
The article confusingly refers to these four as "Democratic groups" or "Democratic-aligned", which (1) they are not consistently, and (2) is very confusing when discussing the subset of that large cohort who are Democrats. I found it clearer, while reading, to substitute an abbreviation "LMBQ" which I came up with.
The really significant point is that people in the cohort defined by animosity towards LMBQ love Donald Trump but do not have any loyalty towards Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan, and have positive feelings towards the Republican Party only so far as they see it as the Trump Supporting Party.
This is why getting enough Republicans to impeach Trump was the most important task faced by Congress. Cutting him out of the picture is critical to disempowering the mob.
posted by Harvey Kilobit at 8:00 PM on July 9, 2021 [12 favorites]
There's lots of blech stuff in Adsense's inventory, unfortunately. If you see a gross ad, you can copy the link it's pointing to and send that along in to the contact form and I'll get the domain blocked.
Or better yet, click the ad and have PragerU kick some money over to Mefi.
posted by ocschwar at 9:10 PM on July 9, 2021 [5 favorites]
Is there anything we can click to have Prager and his U kicked in the balls?
posted by wildblueyonder at 12:23 AM on July 10, 2021 [6 favorites]
posted by wildblueyonder at 12:23 AM on July 10, 2021 [6 favorites]
>It's really about how Trump is unique in his mass support from a certain large cohort, spread among both parties & apolitical independents, whose main distinguishing feature is animosity towards Latinos, Muslims, African-Americans, and LGBTQs.
So, as a Brit (and we have our own problems with in-group and out-group politics) how do I raise with you that you've got a nasty problem and talking about it is harder? The rhetoric -- saying 'Trump is unique in his support' is part of it -- doesn't improve the behaviour of this chunk of people who acted for an insurrection to stop the next president being voted in earlier this year.
The support will be there for a demagogue to lead. It won't be Tucker Carlson while Trump is alive, I figure. Denial of platforms and airtime for agitators is contrary to USA views on freedom of speech. You suggest "disempowering the mob" when the mob are complaining they're disenfranchised and the people to disempower are those seeking power by means of steering this bracket of the population. People over here have proposed social populism, focusing on improving the lot of everybody and righting the wrongs even for this disenfrachised tranche.
posted by k3ninho at 1:26 AM on July 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
So, as a Brit (and we have our own problems with in-group and out-group politics) how do I raise with you that you've got a nasty problem and talking about it is harder? The rhetoric -- saying 'Trump is unique in his support' is part of it -- doesn't improve the behaviour of this chunk of people who acted for an insurrection to stop the next president being voted in earlier this year.
The support will be there for a demagogue to lead. It won't be Tucker Carlson while Trump is alive, I figure. Denial of platforms and airtime for agitators is contrary to USA views on freedom of speech. You suggest "disempowering the mob" when the mob are complaining they're disenfranchised and the people to disempower are those seeking power by means of steering this bracket of the population. People over here have proposed social populism, focusing on improving the lot of everybody and righting the wrongs even for this disenfrachised tranche.
posted by k3ninho at 1:26 AM on July 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
Well. No shit, Sherlock. I suppose it has some merit that they have treated the question with some methodological rigor and tracked the behaviour of the voters over time. But it seems disingenuous to claim that We haven't really talked about them - except in extreme and isolated ways like talking about the KKK. But Trump served as a lightning rod for lots of regular people who hold white Christian supremacist beliefs. We neglect to name and identify them at the peril of democracy.
That was true of the mainstream media and the mainstream political class five years ago, and maybe even still two years ago (my sense of time has been blurred by COVID-19), and it may well be that the claim is a leftover from then because of the glacial process of academic publication. But today, there is almost a critical story about Christian supremacist beliefs on the front pages of WaPo and NYTimes every day, and on CNNs newsfeed every day. It's good, and it is also as if they need to compensate for their previous failures.
Trump has definitely changed something, compared to earlier Republican leaders, by saying the quiet parts out loud, and by openly embracing the radical right. Maybe some people who were too stupid to even figure out the dogwhistles and who have felt excluded from polite society have become more interested in voting and politics. And there is also a change in scale of the already existing fact that for Republicans, white Christian supremacy is more important than any form of truth, honesty or piousness.
But we were just discussing the lies of the Bush-era in an other thread. G. W. Bush and his corrupt coterie of advisors led the US and world into a terrifying endless war against brown people and arguably mainstreamed bigotry against Muslims, not only in the US, but also in most of Europe.
It is good that this research has been done. Thank you. But there is a lot of hard work to be done out there.
posted by mumimor at 3:32 AM on July 10, 2021 [6 favorites]
That was true of the mainstream media and the mainstream political class five years ago, and maybe even still two years ago (my sense of time has been blurred by COVID-19), and it may well be that the claim is a leftover from then because of the glacial process of academic publication. But today, there is almost a critical story about Christian supremacist beliefs on the front pages of WaPo and NYTimes every day, and on CNNs newsfeed every day. It's good, and it is also as if they need to compensate for their previous failures.
Trump has definitely changed something, compared to earlier Republican leaders, by saying the quiet parts out loud, and by openly embracing the radical right. Maybe some people who were too stupid to even figure out the dogwhistles and who have felt excluded from polite society have become more interested in voting and politics. And there is also a change in scale of the already existing fact that for Republicans, white Christian supremacy is more important than any form of truth, honesty or piousness.
But we were just discussing the lies of the Bush-era in an other thread. G. W. Bush and his corrupt coterie of advisors led the US and world into a terrifying endless war against brown people and arguably mainstreamed bigotry against Muslims, not only in the US, but also in most of Europe.
It is good that this research has been done. Thank you. But there is a lot of hard work to be done out there.
posted by mumimor at 3:32 AM on July 10, 2021 [6 favorites]
I don't often praise opinion pieces from the NYT, but the one thandal links to above is a really good take on this issue.
posted by gimonca at 6:26 AM on July 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by gimonca at 6:26 AM on July 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
Trump really just seems like Reaganism writ large, without the veneer of affability. Reagan began his campaign with the dog-whistle of "states rights" and went on to wage war against the non-existent "welfare queens." He was equally chummy with Falwell's "moral majority," which was Christian dominionist and birthed from segregationist roots.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 6:28 AM on July 10, 2021 [16 favorites]
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 6:28 AM on July 10, 2021 [16 favorites]
From thandal's link (NYT, Wayback): "“It’s hard to overstate the strength of this feeling, among white evangelicals in particular, of America being a white Christian country,” said Jones. “This sense of ownership of America just runs so deep in white evangelical circles.” The feeling that it’s slipping away has created an atmosphere of rage, resentment and paranoia."
posted by MonkeyToes at 8:11 AM on July 10, 2021 [11 favorites]
posted by MonkeyToes at 8:11 AM on July 10, 2021 [11 favorites]
It's been forever and a year since I've been on MeFi at all, and I found myself here. And I'm fascinated by the lack of mention of antisemitism as one of the facets of the animosity being discussed. It's arguably the easiest example to point to in terms of cross-party animosity, since the (extreme, antisemitic) left equates Jews with "Whites" now. (I've only read the linked thread, not the NYT op-ed.)
As an Israeli-American Jew in academia I'm utterly immersed in this issue right now, with the overlap of Israel and the problematic layering of Jews as an ethno-religious group that includes POC and Jews by choice.
posted by yiftach at 3:36 PM on July 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
As an Israeli-American Jew in academia I'm utterly immersed in this issue right now, with the overlap of Israel and the problematic layering of Jews as an ethno-religious group that includes POC and Jews by choice.
posted by yiftach at 3:36 PM on July 10, 2021 [1 favorite]
Extreme, antisemitic left? Who are you talking about?
posted by thedamnbees at 6:41 PM on July 10, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by thedamnbees at 6:41 PM on July 10, 2021 [2 favorites]
Also many Jewish people do identify as white in addition to being Jewish, and I'm not aware that there is anything antisemitic about it. Personally I've thought that's similar to how people can be Hispanic and white?
posted by MiraK at 12:37 AM on July 11, 2021
posted by MiraK at 12:37 AM on July 11, 2021
yiftach, I'm not sure I can parse your comment accurately, but at this point in time, it is probably taken very much as a terrible given in this thread that Trumpism has reintroduced old-style pre-WW2 anti-semitism to the public discourse. The latest example is that he told Mike Kelly that "Hitler did good things", which I am pretty certain that a lot of his cultists agree with. At Charlottesville, the hoodlums were literally shouting "Jews will not replace us". And the old stories of blood libel and cosmopolitan conspiracy narratives have returned in the form of Q-anon. What I mean is, I don't think anyone is ignoring this, it's just part of the huge volcano of white supremacy that has gone into eruption during Trump.
But do read Michelle Goldbergs opinion piece, it is scary, but it is very good. From the article:
But do read Michelle Goldbergs opinion piece, it is scary, but it is very good. From the article:
White evangelicals once saw themselves “as the owners of mainstream American culture and morality and values,” said Jones. Now they are just another subculture.posted by mumimor at 1:08 AM on July 11, 2021 [3 favorites]
From this fact derives much of our country’s cultural conflict. It helps explain not just the rise of Donald Trump, but also the growth of QAnon and even the escalating conflagration over critical race theory. “It’s hard to overstate the strength of this feeling, among white evangelicals in particular, of America being a white Christian country,” said Jones. “This sense of ownership of America just runs so deep in white evangelical circles.” The feeling that it’s slipping away has created an atmosphere of rage, resentment and paranoia.
QAnon is essentially a millenarian movement, with Trump taking the place of Jesus. Adherents dream of the coming of what they call the storm, when the enemies of the MAGA movement will be rounded up and executed, and Trump restored to his rightful place of leadership.
I'm fascinated by the lack of mention of antisemitism as one of the facets of the animosity being discussed. It's arguably the easiest example to point to in terms of cross-party animosity, since the (extreme, antisemitic) left equates Jews with "Whites" now.
What "extreme, antisemitic left" are you talking about? Most of the extreme anti-Semitism I've seen has been on the right; it was tiki torch Nazis marching in Charlottesville and chanting "Jews will not replace us", not "leftists". All those George Soros conspiracy theories? Also not leftists.
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 2:59 AM on July 11, 2021 [2 favorites]
What "extreme, antisemitic left" are you talking about? Most of the extreme anti-Semitism I've seen has been on the right; it was tiki torch Nazis marching in Charlottesville and chanting "Jews will not replace us", not "leftists". All those George Soros conspiracy theories? Also not leftists.
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 2:59 AM on July 11, 2021 [2 favorites]
There can still be antisemitic left within that bunch identified by this research as not being left or right but the "temporarily inconvenienced cultural gatekeepers of the USA" -- though this thread isn't about dividing, isolating and conquering the left (which I'm rooting here in the east-versus-west of the cold war and mapping left to a preference for communities-over-individuals rather than individuals-over-communities).
There can still be an antisemitic left which believes that the workers are oppressed by global capital and mistakenly thinks the workers' oppressors are some stereotype of c.19 Jewish moneylenders.
There can still be an antisemitic left even after you've clarified whether criticism of the present-day state of Israel is allowed to take the label 'antisemitic' without that being a tactic to silence conversations about the state of Palestinian people in that hotly-contested territory.
How might a friend find a way to have those conversations? TBH, maybe in another FPP, memail me a link, Yiftach.
posted by k3ninho at 4:19 AM on July 11, 2021 [3 favorites]
There can still be an antisemitic left which believes that the workers are oppressed by global capital and mistakenly thinks the workers' oppressors are some stereotype of c.19 Jewish moneylenders.
There can still be an antisemitic left even after you've clarified whether criticism of the present-day state of Israel is allowed to take the label 'antisemitic' without that being a tactic to silence conversations about the state of Palestinian people in that hotly-contested territory.
How might a friend find a way to have those conversations? TBH, maybe in another FPP, memail me a link, Yiftach.
posted by k3ninho at 4:19 AM on July 11, 2021 [3 favorites]
It's arguably the easiest example to point to in terms of cross-party animosity, since the (extreme, antisemitic) left equates Jews with "Whites" now. (I've only read the linked thread, not the NYT op-ed.)
Roughly 25% of American Jews voted for the jailing and ethnic cleansing of POC, stripping LGBTQ people of their human rights, removing the right to vote and freedom of speech from anyone left of Trump, destroying anti-racism and anti-LGBTQ materials and research, and a permanent one-party dictatorship based in white supremacy. Meanwhile, the leading Jewish umbrella organization in the US refuses to kick white nationalists out, while refusing diverse left-of-center Jews a seat at the table. Every major Jewish American publication has published at least one article that posits that critical race theory is not only bad but an existential threat to Judaism, and one of the biggest "inclusive" Jewish groups in the country (the American Jewish Committee) openly republishes anti-CRT propaganda from a far-right white nationalist think tank.
By far the biggest problem here isn't that anyone, least of all a nebulous "left," are equating Jews with being white; the problem is that many of the Jews that consider themselves white have decided that the policies that targeted us in the 1930s are perfectly fine in the 2020s. They not only have the support of American white supremacists, they also have 75%(!) of Israeli Jews willing to join them in supporting the rise of these bigots and fascists. My only hope is that these Jews recognize the paths we have already taken in recreating the events of Martin Niemöller's famous poem before Jews like me end up in the same place as many of our ancestors, but at this point the outlook is very, very grim.
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 6:15 AM on July 11, 2021 [6 favorites]
Roughly 25% of American Jews voted for the jailing and ethnic cleansing of POC, stripping LGBTQ people of their human rights, removing the right to vote and freedom of speech from anyone left of Trump, destroying anti-racism and anti-LGBTQ materials and research, and a permanent one-party dictatorship based in white supremacy. Meanwhile, the leading Jewish umbrella organization in the US refuses to kick white nationalists out, while refusing diverse left-of-center Jews a seat at the table. Every major Jewish American publication has published at least one article that posits that critical race theory is not only bad but an existential threat to Judaism, and one of the biggest "inclusive" Jewish groups in the country (the American Jewish Committee) openly republishes anti-CRT propaganda from a far-right white nationalist think tank.
By far the biggest problem here isn't that anyone, least of all a nebulous "left," are equating Jews with being white; the problem is that many of the Jews that consider themselves white have decided that the policies that targeted us in the 1930s are perfectly fine in the 2020s. They not only have the support of American white supremacists, they also have 75%(!) of Israeli Jews willing to join them in supporting the rise of these bigots and fascists. My only hope is that these Jews recognize the paths we have already taken in recreating the events of Martin Niemöller's famous poem before Jews like me end up in the same place as many of our ancestors, but at this point the outlook is very, very grim.
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 6:15 AM on July 11, 2021 [6 favorites]
roughly 25% of American Jews voted for the jailing and ethnic cleansing of POC
That sounds like roughly the same percentage of non-Black POC who voted for the jailing and ethnic cleansing of PoC. Marginalized groups, including Jews, do not earn their place in the Left's agenda by being "good" voters. They earn their place by being marginalized.
posted by MiraK at 8:46 AM on July 11, 2021 [3 favorites]
That sounds like roughly the same percentage of non-Black POC who voted for the jailing and ethnic cleansing of PoC. Marginalized groups, including Jews, do not earn their place in the Left's agenda by being "good" voters. They earn their place by being marginalized.
posted by MiraK at 8:46 AM on July 11, 2021 [3 favorites]
Not sure what my comment has to do with who deserves support, I'm pointing out that "calling Jews white is antisemitism" is ridiculous on its face when many Jews and Jewish organizations support open white nationalism, and that by doing so they actually contribute the the marginalization of Jews as well as other groups.
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 9:02 AM on July 11, 2021
posted by Glegrinof the Pig-Man at 9:02 AM on July 11, 2021
« Older Why libertarians embraced fascism | “It’s gonna be a bitchin’ year! 66! A bitchin’... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by glonous keming at 3:32 PM on July 9, 2021 [1 favorite]