Too Short for a Blog, Too Long for a Tweet XXXVIII
Here are three excerpts from an article I recently read, "A Republican Intellectual Explains Why the Republican Party is Going to Die," at Vox.com:
***
***
Goldwater opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. He
himself was not especially racist — he believed it was wrong, on free
market grounds, for the federal government to force private businesses
to desegregate. But this “principled” stance identified the GOP with the
pro-segregation camp in everyone’s eyes, while the Democrats under
Lyndon Johnson became the champions of anti-racism.
This had a double effect, Roy says. First, it forced
black voters out of the GOP. Second, it invited in white racists who had
previously been Democrats. Even though many Republicans voted for the
Civil Rights Act in Congress, the post-Goldwater party became the party
of aggrieved whites.
“The fact is, today, the Republican coalition has
inherited the people who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 — the
Southern Democrats who are now Republicans,” Roy says. “Conservatives
and Republicans have not come to terms with that problem.”
***
He expands on this idea: “It’s a common observation on
the left, but it’s an observation that a lot of us on the right
genuinely believed wasn’t true — which is that conservatism has become,
and has been for some time, much more about white identity politics than
it has been about conservative political philosophy. I think today,
even now, a lot of conservatives have not come to terms with that
problem.” This, Roy believes, is where the conservative
intellectual class went astray. By refusing to admit the truth about
their own party, they were powerless to stop the forces that led to
Donald Trump’s rise. They told themselves, over and over again, that
Goldwater’s victory was a triumph.
But in reality, it created the conditions under which
Trump could thrive. Trump’s politics of aggrieved white nationalism —
labeling black people criminals, Latinos rapists, and Muslims terrorists
— succeeded because the party’s voting base was made up of the people
who once opposed civil rights. "[Trump] tapped into something that was latent in the
Republican Party and conservative movement — but a lot of people in the
conservative movement didn’t notice,” Roy concludes, glumly.
***
For the entire history of modern conservatism, its ideals
have been wedded to and marred by white supremacism. That’s Roy’s own
diagnosis, and I think it’s correct. As a result, we have literally no
experience in America of a politically viable conservative movement
unmoored from white supremacy. I’ve read dozens of conservative intellectuals writing
compellingly about non-racist conservative ideals. Writers like Andrew
Sullivan, Ross Douthat, Reihan Salam, Michael Brendan Dougherty, and too
many others to count have put forward visions of a conservative party
quite different from the one we have. But not one of these writers, smart as they are, has been able to explain what actual political constituency
could bring about this pure conservatism in practice. The fact is that
limited government conservatism is not especially appealing to nonwhite
Americans, whereas liberalism and social democracy are. The only ones
for whom conservatism is a natural fit are Roy’s “cranky old white
people” — and they’re dying off. Maybe Roy and company will be able to solve this problem.
I hope they do. America needs a viable, intellectually serious
right-of-center party. Because we now know what the alternative looks like. It’s Donald Trump.
Comments