David Brooks |
Brooks opines that the G.O.P. of today would never have supported the 1964 act that, per Wikipedia, "outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. It prohibited unequal application of voter registration requirements, racial segregation in schools, employment, and public accommodations."
What's changed? The G.O.P., writes Brooks, has "become more of a white party in recent years ... the Republican Party has changed since 2005. It has become the vehicle for white identity politics."
Brooks says:
Recent surveys suggest that roughly 47 percent of Republicans are what you might call conservative universalists and maybe 40 percent are what you might call conservative white identitarians. White universalists believe in conservative principles and think they apply to all people and their white identity is not particularly salient to them. White identitarians are conservative, but their white identity is quite important to them, sometimes even more important than their conservatism.
It's a huge step in the wrong direction, not just for Republicans but for the country as a whole. Brooks:
... white identity politics as it plays out in the political arena is completely noxious. Donald Trump is the maestro here. He established his political identity through birtherism, he won the Republican nomination on the Muslim ban, he campaigned on the Mexican wall, he governed by being neutral on Charlottesville and pardoning the racialist Joe Arpaio.
"Things," moreover, "will get uglier." And it all may lead to the dissolution of the party of Lincoln. "When you have an intraparty fight about foreign or domestic issues, you think your rivals are wrong. When you have an intraparty fight on race, you think your rivals are disgusting. That’s what’s happening. ... It may someday be possible to reduce the influence of white identity politics, but probably not while Trump is in office. As long as he is in power the G.O.P. is a house viciously divided against itself, and cannot stand."
Next: "Whither White Identity Politics? (Part 2)" ...
No comments:
Post a Comment