Thoughts on politics, cities and the state of American life, culture and economics, from the perspective of a pragmatic lefty historian.
"Chants Democratic" comes from "Leaves of Grass" by Walt Whitman, the avatar of American Democracy.
I am Associate Professor and Chair of the History Department at the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth. I am also the Academic Director of the Clemente Course in the Humanities, in New Bedford MA.
Author of "Social Security and the Middle Class Squeeze" (Praeger, 2005) and the forthcoming "Saul Alinsky the Dilemma of Race in the Post-War City" (University of Chicago Press), my teaching and scholarship focuses on American urban history, social policy, and politics.
I am presently writing a book on home ownership in modern America, entitled "Castles Made of Sand? Home Ownership and the American Dream." I live in Providence RI, where I have served on the School Board since March 2015. All opinions posted here are my own.
Below
are Eric Garner's final words, before his life was snuffed out by a New
York City cop. It reads like a dark unwritten sequel to Langston
Hughes' "I, Too, Sing America" --the sequel that ends not with ashamed
whites welcoming him to the table, but rather with him kicking the table
over, and understanding that white supremacy is beyond shame.
"Get away [garbled] for what? Every time you see me, you want to mess
with me. I'm tired of it. It stops today. Why would you...? Everyone
standing here will tell you I didn't do nothing. I did not sell nothing.
Because everytime you see me, you want to harass me. You want to stop
me [garbled] Selling cigarettes. I'm minding my business, officer, I'm
minding my business. Please just leave me alone. I told you the last
time, please just leave me alone. please please, don't touch me. Do not
touch me. [garbled] I can't breathe. I can't breathe. I can't breathe. I
can't breathe. I can't breathe. I can't breathe. I can't breathe. I
can't breathe. I can't breathe."
I am a white man. All my adult
life I have tried, in my own stumbling way -- and with all of my
limitations -- to be a race traitor. What do I mean by that? I don't
mean trying to be 'color blind,' which really amounts to nothing more
than complicity with oppression. White man, don't tell me you 'don't see
race.' What the hell are you looking at? And by 'race traitor' I don't
mean trying to get right with God by cleansing my mind and soul of bias.
What good is it to have one's conscience clean, and one's hands dirty?
What good is it to walk away from Omelas? What does that change? No. To
be a traitor is not to walk away from something you reject. To be a
traitor is to walk right up to what you reject, and kick it over.
Treason to whiteness, as Noel Ignatiev once wrote, is loyalty to
humanity. And treason, by definition, is a political act. NONE of
us will breathe, until white Americans collectively recognize the
devastating power that racial subordination has over daily life in this
country, and how implicated we are in it. We'd best dis-enthrall
ourselves, and quickly. As sickened as I've been by the reactions of so
many whites to recent events, I have been truly inspired by the
willingness of so many people to get out in the streets. I'm trying to
hold on to the belief that the moral arc of the universe does in fact
bend toward justice. But holy shit is that arc long, and I fear I lack
the vision to see over the far horizon.
A few brief thoughts on this week's Voting Rights and affirmative action rulings, as a down-payment on a much longer piece on the myth of 'color-blindness' which underpins them. I don't know what they're going to say today on gay marriage, but the
combination of the Voting Rights Act and affirmative action rulings
certainly has me disappointed. Without getting too deep into the
intricacies of each, the majority opinion in each case seems to be based
on two inter-related fallacies:
1. That race as a factor in
determining life chances is behind us -- we now live in a color blind
America, and our laws (and their enforcement) should therefore ignore
the existence of race
2. That laws and enforcement mechanisms that
do not accept #1 do greater harm to either white people or states'
rights than they do justice to people of color.
Neither of these
things is even remotely true. The first one is the key, and it is the
one that is most obviously false. Any reasonable person would agree
that one could think about #2 on a case by case basis, as long as you do
NOT accept #1. If you do accept #1 (as the majority in the Supreme
Court has for some time, and as many white Americans do), then virtually every law or practice designed to
further or protect civil rights will fail the test of #2. On this basis the
court has essentially eviscerated both the Voting Rights Act and the use
of race in college admissions in the past few days, all
constitutional circumlocutions aside. People who think the court saved
affirmative action the other day are mistaken. In the past decade the
Court has narrowed, step by step, the Constitutionally permissible
grounds under which race can be taken into account in pursuit of a state
(public) interest. Decades of rulings did this with K-12 school
segregation, too, starting with 1974 Milliken v. Bradley and culminating
in the Louisville/Seattle case of a few years ago. As a consequence,
while the historic 1954 Brown v. Board of Education ruling says that
separate is inherently unequal, there no longer exists any
Constitutionally acceptable mechanism for actually addressing or fixing
it, other than in states which have the appropriate language in their own constitutions. The Court hasn't overturned Brown -- that would be too
controversial. But they've rendered it toothless, much like the
southern Jim Crow states did with the 14th and 15th amendments from the
1870s until the mid-1960s. The Court just did the same thing with the
Voting Rights Act -- and thus, in a sense, with the 15th amendment. In the next year or two, when the right case reaches
them, they will do the same with affirmative action in college
admissions. There is a reckoning coming in the next decade or two
with all of this. I don't know if it will be peaceful and easy, or
periodically ugly and violent. But the fact of the matter is that
demographic change will soon render those folks we've generally called
'white' a minority in this country. It is well
known that by the middle of this century, 'whites' (as Americans have
come to define them since World War II) will no longer constitute a
majority of the population of the United States.
On the eve of the financial
crash, the U.S. Census Bureau announced that non-Hispanic whites would
become a minority in the country in 2042, eight years earlier than had
previously been estimated. In many places, and among people
under the age of 40 or so, this has already happened or been peacefully
accepted. Its even happening in large parts of the South -- Virginia,
North Carolina, increasingly Florida, and eventually even Texas.
To me,
the rightward drift of the GOP, the emergence of the Tea Party, and the
push for voter ID laws is part and parcel of a rearguard resistance
movement by (mostly older, mostly privileged) whites who refuse to
accept what the country is becoming. Its quite similar to the way
millions of white Americans reacted to the huge wave of immigrants from
Southern and Eastern Europe in the late 1800s and early 1900s (which
included my family). They tried desperately to hold back the tide, in
ways that were ultimately inconsistent with many of their OWN values --
and finally, in the 30s and 40s, lost. Southern whites continued to
fight the same fight, this time against blacks, after that. Much
of this white resistance now is limited to the South, and to older
folks nationally. But because they have a stranglehold on one of our two national
parties, and because our decentralized federal system has so many veto
points that allow a small group of like-minded people to stop what they
don't like, what could be an opportunity for the US to model tolerance and multiracial democracy
to the rest of the world may become something else entirely.
The collision
of the Great Recession with demographic change has lent our
already-polarized national politics a discomforting flavor of racial
apocalypse, diverting many Americans -- and most of the Republican Party
-- away from the inequalities that truly matter, and toward a paranoid
defense of the favored racial quarter. We can see this in our daily
lives, as American metropolitan areas re-segregate by race, while
economic segregation metastasizes across the national landscape. We can
see it in the racialized rhetoric of the Tea Party. And we can see it
in the 'pull-up-the-ladder-of-opportunity' policies that the GOP
increasingly recommends.
And sadly, we can see a more 'genteel' version of it in the civil rights rulings of the Roberts court.
White
Americans, of course, aren't monolithic. While a lot of whites seem to be hunkering down in the Republicans'
racial redoubt (particularly older whites), those who continue to
define themselves as Democrats increasingly share the views of most
blacks and Latinos not only on economics, opportunity and the role of
government, but also on the issues of immigration, affirmative action and social programs. This is particularly true for younger white voters.
My fear is that as the
death rattle of white privilege gets louder, the group of white American
dead-enders who continue to rage at the dying of the light will get too
large and too influential, and the Republican Party will have boxed
itself in. Rather
than occasionally winning elections and governing the polity in the
presence of a loyal minority, they will instead choose to change the nature of
the polity itself. The temptation to pull up the ladder,
close the doors, and slam shut the ballot boxes as the new day dawns
will be too hard to resist.
The result may be an effort to deprive
these new Americans of their access to the levers of economic and
political power, by changing the laws (through legislation and through
the courts), by undermining the institutions that provide such access,
and by underfunding, eliminating or 'drowning in the bathtub' the public
institutions and programs that shape and underpin the opportunity
structure. It has happened
before -- resistance, and the contraction of freedom and opportunity.
As school children we are taught that the American story has involved a
gradual-but-inevitable opening up of freedom and access, from the
Revolution to the present. We have slowly if somewhat reluctantly
included an ever-larger group of people into the American family,
granting civil and voting rights, it is said. The problem with this triumphalist narrative is that it isn't true. Particularly
with regard to the vote, there has been a hard fought ebb and flow, as
Alexander Keyssar makes clear in his brilliant book The Right to Vote.
The first time this nation faced massive changes to its demography and
identity, in a broader context of rising inequality and insecurity, was
in the period between the end of the Civil War, and the Great
Depression. And while the reaction of some was to try to humanize
industrial capitalism, and welcome the emergence of a polyglot and
contested America, there was an equally strong pull in the other
direction -- toward limitations on the franchise (Jim Crow in the South,
voting obstacles in the North), toward immigration restriction, toward
judicial doctrines and rulings that hampered government and protected
capital, and toward an intense and often violent effort to protect and
reinforce white privilege (lynching in the South, racially restrictive
covenants, riots, and segregation in the North) and capital
(strike-breaking and repression by police, state militias, the US
military, and court injunctions).
It was only when the Great Depression
so thoroughly de-legitimized many of these rear-guard actions that a new
path became possible. But there was nothing inevitable about the
outcome, and we would be living in a very different country today if the
herrenvolk nation that millions of 'white' Americans had struggled so
mightily for had carried the day, or if the United States had become the
'company town' that so many representatives of capital had sought.
The panic of the pale and privileged will surely go the way of
all flesh eventually. My hope is that they will
not take the nation with them. As long as
whites in positions of power continue to believe that we now live in a color-blind nation, we face the possibility that what should otherwise be a peaceful and positive transition to a new America may instead endanger our democratic institutions.
White Americans can bring the temple down upon all of us. Or they can
strengthen it, so it protects everyone, themselves included.
We will either
have a multiracial and just democracy, or we will not have a democracy.
Nor, it should be said, will we deserve one.
Off to see Louis CK tonight in Boston, with a jolly caravan of folks.
Here's one of my favorites -- I use it in my Color Line in Modern
America class. Most white males seem to intuitively get the latter
part, about losing privilege. Most white males don't seem to get the
first part, about having privilege.
Call me crazy, but watching the GOP over these past few years (and tonight) seems to be inducing a bit of self-hatred in me.
I am pretty much all done with privileged white men. My god, what a whiney group of narcissists. OK, if you're a bit panicked at the thought of becoming a numerical minority in the US in a few years, I think I get that. But do you really need to take over the Party of Lincoln and TR, and bring the whole damn temple down with you?
Personally, THIS privileged white man is looking forward to the new, young, and diverse America that the GOP is so desperate to vilify, indenture lock up and lock out. Perhaps then, this nation can finally redeem its soul, and -- to paraphrase Langston Hughes -- let America be America again.