Study Shows Anti-Racist Messages Hurt Democrats
Category: News & Politics
Via: john-russell • 3 years ago • 50 commentsBy: Jonathan Chait (Intelligencer)
So, the gist of it is, many Americans do not want to hear about racism, they are
.
By pointing out ongoing racism, Democrats risk political defeat, because parts of white America are 'uncomfortable'.
This is a Catch-22 for the Democrats, isnt it?
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Beginning about a decade ago, the Democratic Party went through two important changes related to racism. The first is that the backlash against Barack Obama made far more white liberals aware of how deeply racial resentment inspired American conservatism. (Black people had by and large realized this all along.)
The second is that the party, which in previous years had painstakingly avoided the impression its agenda was mainly designed to help minorities, began emphasizing this very point. That change occurred in 2016, when Hillary Clinton started infusing her rhetoric with conscious appeals to racial equity. And it continued in 2020 — even though Joe Biden employed less race-conscious rhetoric than his more progressive rivals, he still cast some of his plans as explicitly anti-racist.
But is it working? Yale political scientists Micah English and Josh Kalla have found that adding explicitly race-conscious ideas to Democratic messages reduces their support. English and Kalla's experiment borrows real-world messages from Democratic politicians and tests them with both a race-conscious component and a mix of race and class messaging. In either instance, telling subjects that a proposal would reduce racial inequity makes them less likely to support it:
This is not a completely novel finding. Vox reporter Jerusalem Demsas, working with polls from Data for Progress, found that describing measures to permit more housing construction as a way to reduce segregation and promote racial justice made respondents much less likely to support them:
What's odd about this result is that it shouldn't come as a surprise. Indeed, the conclusion that race-conscious messages backfire is a direct corollary of the premise that racism is a potent force in American life. Of course Republicans are going to try to convince voters that any Democratic proposal is mainly designed to help Black people. And of course those messages, sometimes subtle, will push white people away from the Democrats, even if those white people aren't explicitly identifying as racists. Racism is a potent force in American life.
The mechanism that has led Democrats to embrace race-conscious messaging seems to be entirely internal. As white liberals have grown more aware of racism, they have rewarded politicians who cater to their newfound awareness by explicitly promising racial justice. This has opened the door to redefining large swaths of the Democratic policy agenda. After all, many problems in American life disproportionately harm Black people: unemployment, lack of health insurance or child care, exposure to environmental harm, and so on. Most reforms that increase equality in general also increase racial equality.
Obama was well aware that creating more access to health insurance would disproportionately benefit minorities. He rarely mentioned that in public. It was Republicans who went out of their way to make white people think of health-care reform as a transfer to Black America. ("This is a civil rights bill, this is reparations, whatever you want to call it," said Rush Limbaugh. "I think Mr. Obama allows historical grievances — things like slavery, bad treatment for Native Americans and U.S. exploitation of Third World countries — to shape his economic thinking …" warned Bill O'Reilly. "He gives the bad things about America far too much weight, leading to his desire to redistribute wealth, thereby correcting historical grievance.")
Describing Democratic policies as a redress of racism makes perfect sense within progressive spaces. Many of these race-conscious messages are designed by progressives for the benefit of other progressives. (Matthew Yglesias argues that competition for progressive funding dollars, some of which are earmarked for anti-racist causes, is a motivating factor.) And framing one's position as anti-racist certainly feels righteous and good to people with liberal views on race.
But the only world in which that strategy is going to be effective is one in which most non-Black people are very happy to make sacrifices in order to promote racial justice — which is to say, a world in which racism has been largely eradicated. But that isn't the actual world we live in. Somehow, white liberals becoming more aware of racism has driven the Democratic party to start acting as if racism isn't real.
Tags
Who is online
101 visitors
Newsflash - People do not like their sins exposed...
If now is not the time to end racism , when will be? another 50 or 100 years? That is where it is headed.
How do you end racism? The problem for Democrats is that they are stoking the fires of rampant systemic racism...for which there is no evidence
Racism among individuals, or promoted by small and isolated groups, will always be with us and grab the headlines. Some members of NT seem eager to exploit the lie.
Perhaps what we are seeing is a growing dose of white liberal guilt of trying to foist this non-crisis pack of lies on US citizens.
But all this race card playing and baiting is not doing well in in Rio Linda....or anywhere else in the US.
That is damn foolish talk. Black people and minorities will do well to speak up for themselves- and to "hell" with those who can't endure sound 'doctrine' or real truth. If some conservatives want to put/keep their blinders and shields up, well let them - until they can't anymore.
Who cares really?
For the record a strong delusion is still a delusion.
Denying the true is still living in denial.
You can't provide any evidence for the lies of rampant systemic racism that is being promoted by the left.
Cherry picked and often false news stories about the rare bad interactions between minorities and law enforcement is not evidence, nor is it convincing.
It's not the Republicans who blunder through life with blinders on and truth denying shields up.
Many on the left should be ashamed for the harm they are doing to our country.
Saying stupid shit does not make for sound reasoning. I won't waste 'daylight' trying to sell some conservatives on anything. The best thing for minorities to do is to stay the course and reject stupid republican contrarian leadership. And for the record, if we need to be lied to, we can "select' better liars than that lying oranged-dyed in the sun fool named Donald J. Trump. That horse's ass is so blatant a liar that he 'glows' beyond the horizon.
glad to see Americans don’t support more racism. But, as the Democrats existence shows, sadly there is room in America for a party obsessed with race and who can’t view the world except through a racist lens. Hopefully polls like this will help move the Democrats out of the 1950s and Stop their support of perpetual racial determination and discrimination.
The Democrats seem to have never grown out of their racist Jim Crow, George Wallace, segregationist, whites only days. Remember, it was the Republicans who drug the recalcitrant Democrats across the finish line to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Thankfully, most Americans know the Dems history of racism and are not fooled.
Complete nonsense. You give even fake news a bad name.
Apparently, you can't handle the truth...all you have to do is read the history of the bill and which party was against it.
Your ignorance about the Civil Rights Act is astonishing.
I have seeded a particular article about this issue at least a dozen times over the years.
When you separate for geographical region, a higher percentage of Democrats than Republicans voted yes on the Civil Rights Act in both the northern states and the southern states. There was not a single southern Republican who voted for the bill.
The opposition to the Civil Rights Act was almost entirely based on geographical location , not party lines.
There are many millions of white racists in the US. Many millions.
Why would it bother any fair person to have this truth brought to light?
If the shoe doesnt fit you, don't wear it. The ones who the shoe does fit must be made aware and brought to change.
The idea that anyone is preventing you or anyone else from shining a light on racism is preposterous. Our academic, media, entertainment and corporate industries are fully aligned with your messaging.
If the shoe doesnt fit you, don't wear it.
Because more racism is not the answer to reducing racism. All it does is make the problem worse and push people back into their respective tribes. Do you think a tribalized America hyper focused on race is going to end up good for anyone?
Pointing out racism is not racism. That is absurd.
Your point of view verifies the accuracy of the seeded article.
There are many millions of white racists in the US.
I have rarely seen you back up your statements or provide evidence of your absurd assertions.
Like the one above.
Pointing out racism is not racism.
First, Democrats are doing alot more than "pointing out racism." From, in the words of the head of a progressive school that indoctrinates kids with "anti-racist" ideology, "demonizing white people for being born" to actively promoting racially discriminatory actions by the government and private industry, democrats are, in fact, explicitly racist themselves. But yes, examining every interaction and outcome through the focus of race and race alone is also racist. The progressive/Democrat worldview is essentially racist. There's no other way to describe it.
Now that's rich. So predictable. Some conservatives would like to get out from under the bull patty they perpetuate when they get caught and called out more and more for being about it. Next you will be telling us about the "White struggle" for justice (in White dominated society no doubt). . . . I laugh at the thought of it.
Social reform is supposed to provide positive feedback. Celebrating achievements and progress encourages further effort. But that is not what the country is experiencing.
According to the Black population the civil rights efforts of the United States have been a complete and utter failure. The only thing the country has gotten from civil rights efforts has been negative feedback. The message being delivered to the country is that conditions are getting worse and not better. The civil rights messaging is that the United States is becoming more racist, becoming Fascist, becoming more third world. The country is being told there isn't anything to celebrate about civil rights.
In a marriage, irreconcilable differences result in separation. There isn't any motivation to invest more effort into the relationship. The same is happening with civil rights. If the differences voiced by the Black population are irreconcilable then there isn't any motivation to invest more effort into civil rights. The end of civil rights efforts are as inevitable as an irreconcilable separation under those conditions. The Black population is only attempting to obtain a favorable settlement from the inevitable separation.
Foolish rhetoric for "itching ears" I guess. When White conservatives start speaking up for minorities, we're let you know and you won't have to delude yourselves on ability. Emphatically.
Though in one way you are correct. If the 'stupid' people in this country would act on 'one accord' we could put down the negative race affiliation and commentary once and for all. What of the chances of that happening? Especially when some conservatives view privilege as an advantage they alone need to covey?
Why do white anythings need to speak for minorities?
Yawn. See me when you really want to discuss a matter and set aside the usual bull patty. I don't want unsophisticated, oblique, 'missing the mark' chatter.
You don't want to discuss--as clearly evidenced by your reply.
Don't keep peeing on my leg about it.
What is evidenced by my reply is I won't waste time on 'texan' bull patty. Get serious or in British vernacular: 'piss off.'
I clearly stated what was evidenced by your reply.
Do I need to repeat it for you?
Yep, divorces can be messy.
What are the shared accomplishments of civil rights? What are the shared successes of civil rights that would encourage investing more effort into the relationship?
Minorities of color, women, and LBGTQ organizations are not going to divest themselves of their strength in inclusion and diversity. So the silly notion that some conservatives have of self-deluding themselves into believing their numbers are swelling will smack up against the piercing pin of minorities not going anywhere but here where we are as much citizens as some conservatives AND their children.
This country does not belong to you; it belongs to its whole population.
So there, how is that for your thoughts of divorcing liberals from their diversity Cause?
That doesn't seem to suggest that minorities need support of the white majority. In fact, that attitude suggests that the white majority isn't needed at all.
Which is an argument for mutual support and encouragement. Since the country belongs to the whole population then the whole population should share the burdens and rewards of civil rights.
What are some of the shared successes, achievements, and progress of civil rights in the United States? How has civil rights benefited the country as a whole?
Er' diversity, hello?
Your questions are not relevant to the scope of civil rights (and its lack) in the U.S. for this topic. That is, I have no interest in being overlong with you on the history of civil rights and its development in our nation's political history.
LGBT organizations are not diverse because they are only for LGBT. Minority organizations (based on color or ethnicity) are not diverse because they are only for minorities. These organizations are not inclusive because they are based on unique and exclusive identity.
The strength of diversity and inclusion can only be achieved by avoiding segregation based upon unique and exclusive identity.
A diverse and inclusive society gains strength through mutual support and encouragement. A society segregated by unique and exclusive identity only becomes weaker.
Civil rights can only succeed by establishing relationships that overcome differences between unique and exclusive identities. If irreconcilable differences separates us then there isn't any motivation in invest more effort in the relationship. Focusing attention on irreconcilable difference weakens the relationship and separation becomes inevitable.
Foolishness. Setting some conservatives 'off' to themselves will not grant you an significant diversity, nor can a component ever equal its whole. So 'divorce' away! We will either all heal together or finally wilther away into relative oblivion-ness and irrelevance to the rest of the world.
The world will just have to get along without its hateful 'experiment' country/land.
If you could get rid of bias and bigotry, you may have a point.
I sure hope Democrats continue to shoot themselves in the foot!
Minorities need:
White Majority by definition has sufficient support for its select activities, agendas, and programs.
Okay, what specific activities, agendas, and programs are you referring to?
Or is this just another of those broad, sweeping generalizations without specifics, again?
No one on this site should answer your questions.
Many usually can't, and end up deflecting.
Questions must be too tough.
I'll work on asking easier ones which might have a chance at real answers.
The 'dude' is trolling and 'dispersing' discussions with unsophisticated 'noise' which is not meant to remedy or advance discussion.
Minorities have always needed the support of the majority; evenas some conservatives 'cry aloud' for more minorities to join their party. Foolish as it is, because their party stands for the worst human character in leadership traits in recent U.S. history! Blacks predominantly hate the rot some conservatives love. Thus, these conservatives can chaff and are vexed at their poor minority membership 'showing.'
I apologize for asking you hard questions.
I'll try to lob nothing but softballs your way in the future.
Oh please. Everyone on this site, even your friends , know that you ask questions constantly because you can't discuss the issues in any other way.
You want OTHER people to spend endless amounts of times doing research and copying and pasting, while you dont do jack shit.
I would describe that in a more colorful way but I would probably get deleted.
I'd be happier-est if some conservatives simply stop trolling. . . or some conservatives just 'piss off.' No apology necessary!
Observe that while we are 'compelled' to hold some conservatives' 'sacs' - the topic goes wanting!
Lots of words and you STILL can't even answer the simplest of questions.
But you are good at deflecting, I'll give you credit for that at least.
Well, it isn't my responsibility to make you happy.
Nor is it my job to merely accept your stale, tired rhetoric about advancement when you can't define what you yourself wrote.
You could not even conceive of a question I can't answer. I don't answer you because all you do is ask questions. It is really annoying.
It's always easy to claim something without ever having to explain or prove it.
I asked specific questions related to a specific post for clarification.
If that offends, tough fucking shit.
Doesn't the white majority need support and encouragement, too? A one-sided relationship ain't healthy.
What kind of question is that? What are you not taking account of with the question? You can't flip every script, Nerm. That is not healthy either.
It's a relationship question. Doesn't mutual support and encouragement strengthen relationships?
Yes, mutual support and encouragement strengthens relationships.