The Revenge of the White Man

Published in El País
(Spain) on 3 October 2016
by Diego Beas (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Jamie Agnew. Edited by Danielle Tezcan.
Trump is the first U.S. presidential candidate to flirt with the idea of white supremacy and has placed it at the center of his rhetoric. With this he has brought into the mainstream the ideas of reactionaries fearful of social change who previously found themselves marginalized in the political system.

Of all the polls and stats published about next month's U.S. presidential election, there is one group of figures that stands out and provides one of the key clues in helping us understand one of the most important elections in the country's history. One analyst has classified the election as an “extinction level event”; that is, an event which has the potential to erase all that we know about the U.S. According to figures from ABC/Washington Post, among white voters, Trump leads Clinton by 12 points. If we break this down further to white male voters, that lead increases to nearly 30 points, and among white male voters without a college education to 40 points. If, on the other hand, we look at the preferences of non-white voters of either sex, the difference is reversed dramatically with Clinton holding close to a 60-point lead over Trump.

Although the GOP has for the last 50 years been winning a large proportion of the white middle and lower middle class vote – above all in the south and in rural areas where many still have not forgiven the Democrats for passing the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act in 1964 and 1965 respectively - the configuration of and motivation behind the vote this time around have various points of interest that are worth further consideration.

Just what has changed? What does Donald Trump have that the “compassionate conservatism” of George W. Bush, the friendly charisma of Reagan and the astute political sectarianism of Richard Nixon did not to warrant such a high share of the vote from this demographic?

Trump has become the first presidential candidate with a realistic chance of winning to have openly flirted with the idea of white supremacy and has made it the cornerstone of his public discourse. Author Philip Roth wrote about a similar fictional scenario in the 1940 presidential election in his extraordinary 2004 book “The Plot Against America.” White supremacy is a current of American political thought as old as the country itself but has never been used so directly by someone running for office, nor at such a high level of politics.

Never before has a presidential candidate from one of the two main parties articulated a proposal based on the political ideals and priorities of such a limited group – white, Anglo-Saxon Protestants. Nor has any done so with the celebrity, high profile style so particular to and effective for Donald Trump – he defames, he verbally attacks, he incites violence, he divides, and, depending on the reaction, adjusts his comments to limit the damage and avoids taking any responsibility whatsoever for anything he says. He has waged a verbal war on the press which has greatly degraded the quality of public debate in the U.S. and has led some observers to label the phenomenon that of a “post truth democracy.” That is to say, a democracy in which political discussion ceases to be in the facts and instead takes account of only the ideological narratives of the corresponding faction.

Trump has not only broken these unwritten rules of presidential elections; he has given this trait pride of place in his electoral strategy. As rigorous analyses from the likes of FiveThirtyEight, The Upshot and the New York Times have already shown, Trump has just one viable path to the White House – significantly increasing his support among white voters. Above all, he must target the votes of white males without a college education – a demographic that traditionally votes in low numbers. Only by significantly increasing his support among those voters would Trump be able to win the election from his position of ideological extremity, thus defying the country's institutional architecture which is designed to channel the vote toward the center ground.

One of the most accurate explanations of this phenomenon can be found in a book published this summer, whose title nicely sums up the question at hand – “The End of White Christian America” by Robert P. Jones, director of the Public Religion Research Institute in Washington, D.C. The book opens with an obituary and closes with a eulogy and also takes the end of white predominance as a given. It explains the white Protestants’ abandonment of the center ground, in political, demographical and cultural terms, and outlines the rapid transformation of the U.S. into a country in which a majority are Hispanics, Asians and have no religion. While in 1993 53 percent of Americans identified as white Protestants, in 2014, just one generation later, that figure had fallen to 32 percent - a huge change in the country's social composition.

The general profile of the average Trump voter is that of a conservative, white, Anglo-Saxon Protestant – not necessarily from a poor background – who sees in Trump the last chance to stop and even reverse the changes that the country has experienced in recent decades. Without a doubt, one of the most important characteristics is the rage that many still feel at the election of the first black president in 2008 – this is the racist hand that Trump played to launch his presidential campaign.

However, it would be wrong to think that the Trump phenomenon has sprung up out of thin air. Trump's main achievement has been to take advantage of the gradual intellectual hollowing out of a stagnant Republican Party – a party reduced to standing for just two main causes: lowering taxes for the rich and putting into practice the famous Reagan quote that the government isn't the solution to the problem but the problem itself. In the context of this barren political wasteland, Trump took the party by storm and is currently in the process of turning it into an ethnic nationalist movement, something that is unprecedented in U.S. history.

One final dangerous figure that completes the picture of the election on Nov. 8 is the number of Republican voters who say they would trust the results if their candidate loses – just 11 percent according to the Pew Research Center. Whether Trump wins or loses, the social reality that has propelled the candidate to this point has been revealed, and has now taken on its own identity and political force. This will be his true legacy. Trump has brought in from the political cold and given a voice to reactionaries whose views were previously considered unacceptable and had been sidelined.

To paraphrase the recent words of Swedish ex-Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, a candidate for the presidency of the United States of America has himself become the greatest threat to Western security. Four weeks out from the election, the country and the entire international system that it has championed since World War II are staring into the abyss.


La revancha del hombre blanco

Trump es el primer candidato a presidente de EEUU que flirtea con la idea de la ‘supremacía blanca’ y la coloca en el centro del discurso. Con ello normaliza a fuerzas reaccionarias que temen los cambios sociológicos y se situaban al margen del sistema

De todas las encuestas y números publicados sobre la elección presidencial en Estados Unidos el mes que viene, hay un grupo de datos que saltan a la vista y proporcionan una de las pistas clave para entender el fondo de uno de los ciclos electorales más trascendentes de la historia de ese país (un analista calificó la elección de “extinction-level event”, es decir, un evento con el potencial de extinguir lo que conocemos como Estados Unidos). Según cifras de ABC/Washington Post, entre votantes blancos Donald Trump adelanta a Hillary Clinton por 12 puntos. Si lo subdividimos en votantes blancos, hombres, el porcentaje aumenta a casi 30. Y si lo subdividimos aún más, en blancos, hombres y sin estudios universitarios, el porcentaje a favor de Trump es de 40 puntos. Si, por el contrario, consideramos las preferencias entre votantes no blancos (de ambos sexos), la diferencia se invierte dramáticamente: Clinton adelanta a Trump por casi 60 puntos.

Aunque el Partido Republicano lleva medio siglo obteniendo buena parte del voto blanco de las clases medias y medias bajas (sobre todo del sur y de zonas rurales, donde muchos siguen sin perdonar a los demócratas la aprobación de la ley de los derechos civiles y del derecho al voto, de 1964 y 1965, respectivamente), la configuración y motivación detrás del voto en esta elección tiene varias particularidades sobre las que merece la pena detenerse.

¿Qué ha cambiado? ¿Qué tiene Donald Trump que no tuvieron ni el “conservadurismo compasivo” de Bush hijo, el carisma campechano de Reagan o la astucia política sectaria de Richard Nixon para concentrar a un número tan alto de votantes de este grupo?

Trump se ha convertido, en pocas palabras, en el primer candidato a la presidencia con posibilidades de ganar que flirtea abiertamente con la idea de la “supremacía blanca” y la coloca en el centro del discurso público (Philip Roth fabuló con un escenario similar en la elección presidencial de 1940 en su extraordinaria La conjura contra América de 2004). Una corriente del pensamiento político estadounidense tan antigua como la propia república que, sin embargo, no se había utilizado con fines electorales tan directos y en esferas tan altas como hasta ahora.

Nunca un candidato a la presidencia de uno de los dos grandes partidos había articulado una propuesta que girara en torno a unos ideales políticos y prioridades de un grupo tan delimitado: blanco, anglosajón y protestante (WASP, por sus siglas en inglés). Y, además, desde esa manipulación mediática tan particular y eficaz para los intereses de Trump: difama, agrede verbalmente, incita a la violencia, divide y, dependiendo de las reacciones, ajusta sus comentarios para hacer control de daños y no responsabilizarse plenamente de nada de lo que dice. Una dialéctica con la prensa que ha degradado terriblemente la calidad del debate público en Estados Unidos y ha llevado a que algunos observadores llamen a este fenómeno “post truth democracies”. Es decir, democracias en las que la discusión política deja de girar en torno a los hechos y en las que solo dominan las narrativas ideológicas de las diversas facciones.

Trump no solo ha roto estas reglas no escritas de las elecciones presidenciales, ha situado esa precisa característica en el centro de su estrategia electoral. Como ya han demostrado análisis rigurosos de sitios como FiveThirtyEight o The Upshot, de The New York Times, Trump tiene una sola vía para ganar la elección: que aumente significativamente el número de votos blancos. Y sobre todo, los votos de hombres blancos sin estudios (un segmento con muy baja participación electoral). Solo ampliando significativamente el “techo” de esos votantes Trump podría conseguir desafiar la arquitectura institucional del país —diseñada para encauzar el voto al centro— y ganar la elección desde la polarización ideológica.

Una de las explicaciones más certeras sobre el fondo del fenómeno —y de por qué trasciende al personaje— la encontramos en un libro publicado durante el verano cuyo título categórico resume bien la cuestión: The End of White Christian America, de Robert P. Jones, director del Public Religion Research Institute de Washington, DC. El texto, que abre con un obituario y cierra con un panegírico, asume el fin de la predominancia blanca como un hecho consumado; y explica la pérdida de centralidad —política, demográfica y cultural— de los blancos protestantes y la rápida transformación en un país con más hispanos, asiáticos y personas que declaran no pertenecer a ninguna fe religiosa. Mientras en 1993 el 51% de los estadounidensed se identificaban como blancos protestantes, en 2014, solo una generación después, solo lo hacía el 32%. Un cambio estructural en la composición social del país de dimensiones mayúsculas.

El perfil general del votante medio de Trump, por tanto, es ese WASP conservador crispado (no necesariamente de bajos recursos) que ve en el candidato la última oportunidad para frenar y revertir los cambios que el país ha experimentado en las últimas décadas. Uno de los más importantes, sin duda, es la rabia que todavía provoca a muchos la elección del primer presidente negro en 2008; la baza racista que utilizó Trump para lanzar sus aspiraciones presidenciales.

Dicho todo esto, sería un error pensar que el fenómeno Trump se engendró en el vacío. Si alguna virtud ha tenido el candidato ha sido saber aprovechar las casi tres décadas de paulatino vaciamiento intelectual de un Partido Republicano petrificado, convertido, en esencia, en estandarte de dos causas: la rebaja de impuestos a los ricos y hacer valer esa famosa sentencia de Ronald Reagan que decía que el Gobierno no era la solución a los problemas, era el problema. En el contexto de ese erial político, Trump tomó por asalto al partido y está en proceso de convertirlo en un movimiento nacionalista étnico sin precedentes en la vida política del país.

Una última cifra que completa el peligroso cuadro de la elección del 8 de noviembre es la del número de votantes republicanos que dicen confiar en los resultados en caso de que sean adversos: solo el 11%, según Pew Research. Gane o pierda Trump, la realidad sociológica que ha impulsado al candidato hasta aquí ha sido revelada; y ahora cuenta con identidad y fuerza política propia. Ese será su verdadero legado. Trump ha normalizado la entrada en política y dado voz a fuerzas reaccionarias que solían ser consideras inaceptables y estaban relegadas a los márgenes del sistema.

Parafraseando palabras recientes del exministro de Exteriores sueco Carl Bildt, un candidato a la presidencia de Estados Unidos se ha convertido súbitamente en la mayor amenaza a la seguridad de Occidente. A cuatro semanas de los comicios, el país y el sistema internacional impulsado por este después de la Segunda Guerra Mundial se asoman al precipicio.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Ireland: Irish Examiner View: Would We Miss Donald Trump and Would a Successor Be Worse?

Germany: The President and His Private Army

Australia: Donald Trump Is Taking Over the US Federal Reserve and Financial Markets Have Missed the Point

Canada: Minnesota School Shooting Is Just More Proof That America Is Crazed

Topics

Peru: Blockade ‘For Now’

Japan: US President and the Federal Reserve Board: Harmonious Dialogue To Support the Dollar

Austria: The EU Must Recognize That a Tariff Deal with Trump Is Hardly Worth Anything

Mexico: The Network of Intellectuals and Artists in Defense of Venezuela and President Nicholás Maduro

Hong Kong: Cordial Cross-Strait Relations Will Spare Taiwan Trump’s Demands, Says Paul Kuoboug Chang

Germany: The Tariffs Have Side Effects — For the US Too*

Ireland: We Must Stand Up to Trump on Climate. The Alternative Is Too Bleak To Contemplate

Canada: Carney Takes Us Backward with Americans on Trade

Related Articles

Peru: Blockade ‘For Now’

Japan: US President and the Federal Reserve Board: Harmonious Dialogue To Support the Dollar

Germany: The Tariffs Have Side Effects — For the US Too*

Ireland: We Must Stand Up to Trump on Climate. The Alternative Is Too Bleak To Contemplate

Canada: Carney Takes Us Backward with Americans on Trade