Tag Archives: racism

Echoes Of Infamy

Trump’s promise to MAGA –as I’ve noted before, the only promise he has kept–was to Make America White Again, with all that promise entails. (It isn’t just skin color that marks some citizens as “Other”– just being female or practicing the “wrong” religion will remove you from MAGA’s “Real American” category…)

The administration’s hysterical war on DEI and “woke-ism” has been unrelenting, underscoring the belief of MAGA folks that efforts to reduce discrimination against women and/or minorities are really discrimination against White males–that “inclusion” of women and minorities is really just code for exclusion of White “Christian” men.

Historians tell us that the Nazis were inspired by Jim Crow, that they “borrowed” from the legal structures that disadvantaged Black folks in the American south to craft the Reich Citizenship Law and the Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honor– the Nuremberg Laws that laid the  groundwork for the persecution of the Jews during the Holocaust and World War II.

Imitation is said to be the sincerest form of flattery, and the Trump administration is now returning the favor.

As many of us have recognized–and as the New York Times has recently documented–the administration’s social media posts have increasingly adopted the terminology of Nazi racist propaganda. Its posts increasingly echo neo-Nazi literature, use terminology approving of ethnic cleansing and even QAnon conspiracies, and have “promoted lyrics from an anthem bellowed by the far-right militants of the Proud Boys.”

Their authors are not on society’s fringe. They are in the offices of the White House and the departments of Homeland Security and Labor, using official government accounts.

To some people, the administration’s posts sound patriotic. Others might sense at most a faint dog whistle to extremists. Some posts may just look odd. But those well-versed in the abstruse codes of right-wing extremism hear klaxons.

Some of us noticed this in the advertisements recruiting for ICE.  Ads on Instagram, Facebook and X all used an overlay with the words “WE’LL HAVE OUR HOME AGAIN.”

That’s also the name of a song, written by members of a self-described “pro-White fraternal order,” that has been embraced by the Proud Boys and other white-nationalist groups. Hundreds of explicitly neo-Nazi and white-supremacist accounts have shared the song on Telegram, an encrypted messaging app, since 2020. The white supremacist who killed three Black people at a Jacksonville, Fla., dollar store in 2023 included lyrics from the song in his writing.

Most Americans would miss the significance, but White Supremacists (and those who study them) understand the message.

I’ve posted previously about other ads and social-media posts that have included pictures and symbols associated with far-right extremist groups, and websites excluding previously pictured women and Blacks. The Labor Department has posted an image with the words “TRUST THE PLAN”– a central catchphrase of QAnon, and the White House’s X account has posted a photo of Trump and the word “remigration.” The Times article points out that “remigration” is a “decades-old European concept centered on the expulsion of nonwhite people and immigrants deemed unassimilated.”

Tens of thousands of Germans protested the concept two years ago after the country’s far-right Alternative für Deutschland party secretly met with neo-Nazis to discuss plans to implement it. (More than a dozen AfD politicians have reposted Mr. Trump’s “remigration” photo on X.)

The Labor Department has also posted a video captioned “One Homeland. One People. One Heritage,” a caption that clearly and ominously echoes a Nazis slogan from World War II, “Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer,” or “One People, One Realm, One Leader.”

Experts cited in the Times article appeared confident that the apparent allusions were not accidental. One sociologist pointed to the use of “secret codes and numerological clues” in the ICE recruitment ads, which he believes have been designed to appeal to “a very specific segment” of Americans. These are “young men who live online and are disaffected by what they see as unwanted changes in American life.” The thuggish behavior of that cohort in Minneapolis would seem to confirm his conclusion.

Let’s be honest: this country has always had a significant number of Nazi and “Nazi-adjacent” citizens. In the 1930s, the the German American Bund had tens of thousands of members and held rallies with Ku Klux Klan members. In 1959, George Lincoln Rockwell founded the American Nazi Party; it employed a “White Power!” slogan and insisted that Nazism was “American patriotism.” The National Alliance, founded by the author of The Turner Diaries, spewed  white supremacy and antisemitism.

We’ve had bigots in the White House before, but never one who was such an enthusiastic descendant of those organizations.

Comments

Cutting Through The C**p

If I see another “study” attempting to describe the different motives of those who support Donald Trump, I will once again engage my (not-so-inner) potty-mouth.

The most recent example I’ve come across was a description of a study purporting to describe four different varieties of Trump voter. Here’s the crux of the study’s “scholarly” conclusion:

About 29 percent of 2024 Trump voters are what we call the “MAGA Hardliners.” These are the fiery core of Trump’s base, mostly composed of white Gen Xers and Baby Boomers, who are animated by the belief that God is on their side in America’s existential struggle between good and evil. Then there are the “Anti-Woke Conservatives” (21 percent): a more secular and affluent group of voters deeply frustrated by what they perceive as the takeover of schools, culture, and institutions by the progressive left. Another 30 percent are the “Mainline Republicans”: a more racially diverse group of middle-of-the-road conservatives who prioritize border security, a strong economy, and cultural stability. Finally, we have the “Reluctant Right” (20 percent). Members of this group, unlike the other three, are not necessarily part of Trump’s base; they voted for him, but have ambivalent feelings toward him. Only half identify as Republicans, and many picked Trump because he seemed “less bad” than the alternative.

Any reasonable look at those “differences” will note the common thread that unites them, the overwhelming grievance that allows them to ignore–or even cheer–Trump’s ignorance and venality, his increasing dementia, and his destruction of America’s constitution at home and influence abroad. 

That common thread is a deep-seated racism. 

Let’s look at all four of those categories. The first, the MAGA Hardliners, are described politely; they are rather clearly White “Christian” nationalists. Project 2025 mapped out their preferred society–a society where God has installed  White males in positions of authority, where women are returned to the kitchen and bedroom, and people of color who are allowed to remain in the country are properly subservient.

“Anti-woke conservatives” are assigned to a second, presumably separate category. Everything we need to know about them is in the “anti-woke” descriptor. They are only different from the White “Christian” nationalists because they don’t attribute their racism to a god. They may be more educated and more secular, they may even be more circuitous when expressing their hatreds, but they are every bit as racist as the MAGA Hardliners.

Calling the third group “Mainline Republicans” is a slur on those who could formerly have been described that way– genuinely traditional “mainline” Republicans have mostly departed from today’s GOP, leaving the “mainline” moniker to those who were formerly on the fringe. They are, according to the description, concerned with “border security, a strong economy, and cultural stability.” Border security and “cultural stability” are the give-aways here: securing the border means “keep Black and Brown folks out of the U.S.” “Cultural stability” is code for keeping White Christian male status dominant.

And that fourth group–the voters who chose to give the nation’s nuclear codes to a clearly unfit buffoon who had been found guilty of multiple felonies and rape because he was the “lesser of two bad choices?” Come on! Kamala Harris was only a lesser choice to people who could not bring themselves to vote for a Black woman (a Black woman married to a Jew, no less!)

These aren’t different constituencies. At most, they’re different varieties of racists.

And credit where credit is due: the one promise Trump has kept is his promise to emulate the Nazis. He hasn’t brought down the price of eggs or other groceries, hasn’t kept America out of foreign military engagements, and certainly hasn’t made America great. He and Stephen Miller and the assortment of clowns, misfits and outright psychopaths he has assembled have pursued an unrelenting attack on DEI, on “wokeness,” on accurate history, and on anyone perceived as an enemy of the would-be King of (some) White folks.

Now, Trump’s administration has unleashed its very own Gestapo–directed at cities in Blue states that failed to vote for him. Actually, Trump has gone one better than Hitler– Gestapo thugs didn’t wear masks.

Sane-washing takes lots of forms. For far too long, the media has tried to portray insanity and corruption as just one set of political positions, while academics have attempted to “slice and dice” MAGA supporters into more and less reprehensible categories. Those efforts are another kind of mask–one that keeps us from seeing the extent of the fascism we face.

Purveyors of “making nice” need to cut the crap and face up to the very ugly evidence of where we are right now.

Comments

I Have A Litle List…

Given the fire hose of illegality, unconstitutionality and immense stupidity coming out of the Trump administration on a daily if not hourly basis, people might be forgiven for failing to notice the effort to access and amass all kinds of data.

But control of data is important–and the nature of the information the administration is stockpiling is chilling.

As the Bulwark recently reported, the administration isn’t just compiling lists of immigrants in order to unleash ICE on them. It is busy collecting a wide variety of other information– lists of people with developmental disabilities, lists of “dissidents”—and lists of Jews.

The administration’s effort to collect such data may seem counter-intuitive; after all, it has been busy deleting and censoring any information that it finds inconsistent with its efforts to promote White Supremacy. (As a political science friend recently pointed out, the only campaign promise Trump has kept is his promise to MAGA to re-institute racism.) In addition to its ideologically-motivated elimination of statistics on climate change, hunger, trade and sexual orientation, it has methodically deleted photos of nonwhite people who have excelled in various areas, and even photographic evidence that nonwhites have served in the military from government websites. 

But now it’s becoming clearer that some of the most disturbing developments don’t involve data the administration is suppressing, but rather data it’s collecting—in some cases illegally—and the ways those data can be weaponized against perceived enemies.

It isn’t only nonwhite folks who are being targeted, it’s any group that MAGA fears and/or hates. The administration has actually sued the University of Pennsylvania because that institution has refused to hand over a list of its Jewish faculty, staff, and students. (Penn quite correctly has refused, but last year, Barnard complied with a similar demand.)

As the Bulwark article points out–and as every Jew knows–there are good historical reasons to worry when an authoritarian  leader is trying to compile a registry of Jews–especially when that leader has referred to Jews as “disloyal,” and that leader’s coalition has many outspoken Jew haters and Holocaust deniers.

It isn’t simply an effort to compile a list of individuals that MAGA considers “Other.” The administration’s war on diversity–on people and places that aren’t lily-White “Christian” enclaves–extends to entiire Blue states–states that Trump obviously considers enemy territory. The AP has recently reported that executive branch agencies have been ordered to compile a list of monies being sent to Blue states.

President Donald Trump’s budget office this week ordered most government agencies to compile data on the federal money that is sent to 14 mostly Democratic-controlled states and the District of Columbia in what it describes as a tool to “reduce the improper and fraudulent use of those funds.”

The order comes a week after Trump said he intended to cut off federal funding that goes to states that are home to “sanctuary cities” that resist his immigration policies. He said that would start Feb. 1 but hasn’t unveiled further details.

The obvious purpose of these lists–the only reason to acquire this data–is to differentiate between those MAGA considers “real Americans” (Whites, certain “Christians,” residents of Red states) and those who must be considered enemies. Other.

There are a number of recent “remakes” of Gilbert and Sullivan’s “I have a little list…”  In all of them, the chorus is the same: “They never will be missed”….

Shades of Joe McCarthy.

Comments

Bring Me A Pitchfork

A recent, lengthy screed from Lincoln Square argued that voters in 2024 had “signed up for the myth of the businessman president,” an assertion with which I take issue. I do, however, agree with the ensuing observation that what those voters got was the guy who “bankrupted casinos and decided the solution for a hurting country was to blow up the economy for a jacked-up economic theory from the 17th century, build a ballroom, and hide the books.”

I also agree that Trump’s economic incompetence is enraging voters, and that “None of the culture war crap, the performative yelping about the Deep State, the liberal media, or whatever else tickles MAGA Twitter’s happy place” will save Republicans in 2026, when they will encounter “the oldest rule in politics and business: eventually, the mark realizes he has been conned.”

And when that happens, it is not just the con man who pays the price. It is everyone foolish enough to stand next to him when the lights come up, and the check arrives.

Trump is too old to pay that bill…and doesn’t pay his bills in any case.

But the MAGA GOP sure as hell will. That sound they hear in the distance is a mob, hungry and furious, approaching their palace.

With pitchforks…

I am increasingly convinced that the author is correct about voters’ current fury, but I am equally confident that Trump’s narrow victory in 2024 was not founded on his economic promises. Political science research overwhelmingly points to a different–and very depressing–reason people voted for Trump: racism.

Adam Serwer addressed that racism in the Atlantic, in an article titled “Why Doesn’t Trump Pay a Political Price for His Racism?” The article was triggered by Trump’s publicized rant, during a Cabinet meeting, calling Somali immigrants “garbage” that we don’t want in our country. Serwer noted that no one in the Cabinet reacted negatively to this latest expression of gutter racism, and worse, that “Vice President J. D. Vance enthusiastically banged on the table.”

This expression of animus toward all Somali immigrants came in response to the shooting of two National Guard officers by a Somali, and a fraudulent episode involving some Somalis living in Minneapolis. Rather than decrying the criminal actions of those individuals, Trump reacted with his usual racist stereotyping.

Serwer points to the obvious: we don’t hold White Americans as a whole responsible for Trump’s dismantling of the federal  capacity to fight white-collar crime and corruption, for his “doling out of pardons for people who donate money or commit crimes on his behalf, or his scandalous profiteering.” Most Americans don’t look at Donald Trump or the collection of clowns and grifters with whom he’s surrounded himself and conclude that their behaviors are due to something inherent in White culture. We simply–accurately–see them as reprehensible individuals.

Watching Trump’s repeated attacks on Somalians—the latest group of Black immigrants to be targeted by the president—I can’t avoid the conclusion that the government of the United States of America is in the hands of people who believe that they can apply a genetic hierarchy to humanity, and that American laws and customs should recognize and serve that hierarchy…

The logic of this racism is relatively simple—the individual bears the guilt of the whole, and the whole bears the imprint of some alleged crime that deserves collective punishment. Blaming the egregious behavior of men such as Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on their German or Norwegian backgrounds would sound comical to the same people who treat the president vomiting out similar generalizations about Somalis as sound observation.

This reaction is consistent with Trump’s constant Hitler-like accusation that immigrants with “bad genes” are “poisoning the blood” of the nation. As Serwer concludes, the fact that he’s paid virtually no electoral price for his very overt racism says something shameful about today’s America.

The U.S. abolished immigration restrictions based on nationality in 1965, recognizing that such restrictions were inconsistent with who we purport to be as a country. Until that change, promising scientists from Asia would be rejected in favor of illiterate farmers from Germany, because immigration laws considered race, national origin and culture to be immutable traits inherent in the populations of entire countries. Accordingly, entire (usually non-White) nationalities were deemed unfit for American citizenship.

Trump wants these racist (and ridiculous) assumptions to once again govern U.S. immigration policy, and his MAGA voters enthusiastically agree.

I’m ready to buy my pitchfork and march on the castle. Metaphorically speaking, of course…

Comments

Heritage, Again

As Trump continues to disintegrate before our eyes, and special elections confirm what the polls have been telling us, I think Americans can begin to breathe again. Granted, this evil and incompetent administration will continue to wreak havoc for three more years, but there’s reason to believe that the midterms will put a halt to much of the destruction, and that the political pendulum will swing back from Trump’s gulag to support of something more closely resembling the America we thought we inhabited.

What happens then, however, will depend upon what we’ve learned from this horrifying episode. What rot within the body politic allowed the ascent of people so morally and intellectually unfit for public office? I think there are three interrelated answers to that question. An unfair, “gilded age” economy and a fragmented, politicised media landscape have combined to facilitate the re-emergence of bigotries that had been suppressed but obviously not eliminated.

Research has confirmed that the single most potent predictor of support for MAGA and Trump is racial resentment. But racism is almost always accompanied by other hatreds: of women, of Jews, of Muslims, of immigrants (at least those with Black or Brown skin). Those attitudes haven’t just been fostered and encouraged by “Christian” nationalist churches, publications and social media posts, but also by (mis-named) think tanks. The election of America’s first Black President lit the flame of the rancid ideology they had carefully nurtured during more civil times.

And that brings me to the Heritage Foundation.

With the publication of Project 2025, Heritage shed its disguise as a research institution, and identified itself as a purely ideological enterprise, intent upon remaking American society into one dominated by White Christian males. Minorities aren’t the only elements of the population who would lose status should its fever dream be realized–women would be returned to subservient status too.

The Atlantic has recently documented Heritage’s misogyny. As the article noted, Heritage’s current unmasking may have begun with Kevin Roberts’ defense of anti-Semitism, but disclosure of the nature of the “Heritage” it is trying to protect includes the recent decision to hire Scott Yenor to lead its Kenneth Simon Center for American Studies. The author says the choice “poses serious questions about the institution’s beliefs concerning the equality of women in the workplace and perhaps even as citizens.”

In a 2021 speech at the National Conservatism Conference, Yenor labeled professional women “medicated, meddlesome, and quarrelsome.” He frequently uses the term AWFLs (short for “affluent white female liberals”). He was ejected from a position as chair of the University of West Florida’s board of trustees when even Florida’s MAGA Republican-controlled state Senate wouldn’t confirm him.

Yenor believes that employers should be legally permitted to discriminate against women in the workplace, and has advocated for legal changes that would allow businesses “to support traditional family life by hiring only male heads of households, or by paying a family wage”—that is, denying women jobs solely on the basis of their sex or paying men more for performing the same job as women. He also believes that “governments should be allowed to prepare men for leadership and responsible provision, while preparing women for domestic management and family care.”

Yenor’s ideas are rather obviously outside both the American and conservative mainstreams–and not just his opinions on employment discrimination. He has also dismissed women’s suffrage as “a feat of social engineering.” Feminism, he has asserted, weakens the all-important institution of marriage–a situation that calls out for policy change.

So Heritage now faces an uncomfortable question: Does it agree with its new director of American studies?

What makes the question particularly pressing is Heritage’s “one voice” policy. “While other organizations may have experts advocating contradictory points of view,” the institution explains, “Heritage employees are always rowing in the same direction.” If this is Yenor’s view, and he’s now a Heritage director, does that make it Heritage’s official view?

Heritage was founded in 1973 by Edwin J. Feulner, Jr., Joseph Coors, and Paul Weyrich. Despite the obvious political ambitions of those founders, until very recently the media has portrayed it as a legitimate, albeit Right-wing, think tank. And that brings me to the role played by the media in MAGA’s capture of our government.

One of the thorniest problems we will face as we try to repair the systemic flaws that allowed bigotry and misogyny to drive  political behavior will be what to do about a media landscape that abets false equivalences–a landscape that allows Americans to avoid “inconvenient” realities and  choose “news” that confirms their biases.

I have no idea what we do about that.

Comments