RSN May Fundraising
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Toure writes: "But for now, as the GOP paddles furiously trying to stay viable as an all-white party, we must shine a harsh light on their attempts to use old racial stereotypes to win votes."

A civil rights protester attacked by a police dog in Birmingham, Alabama, in 1963. (photo: Bill Hudson/AP)
A civil rights protester attacked by a police dog in Birmingham, Alabama, in 1963. (photo: Bill Hudson/AP)



How to Read Political Racial Code

By Toure, Time Magazine

09 September 12

 

art of my job when I speak about politics is to speak up for black people and say things black people need said. This mission has rarely felt so necessary as it has when racial code words recently entered the Presidential election. These code words are ancient racial stereotypes in slick, modern gear. They are linguistic mustard gas, sliding in covertly, aiming to kill black political viability by allowing white politicians to say 'Don't vote for the black guy' in socially-acceptable language. Sometimes the code comes directly out of a candidate's mouth. Sometimes it comes from supporters, or can be found in advertisements.

Do not be fooled by the canard that both parties do it. That was former RNC Chairman Michael Steele's response when I asked him about it on my MSNBC show "The Cycle." Using certain words to invoke racialized fear and scare white working class voters is a long-established part of the Republican playbook. The GOP is a 90% white party and has been for decades. According to Ron Brownstein of the National Journal, Mitt Romney will need over 60% of white people to vote for him or he will lose. "That," Brownstein says, "would be the best performance ever for a Republican Presidential challenger with that group of voters." Given that math, in a base turnout election where Romney has a big lead among white, non-college educated men, it's understandable why he'd try to motivate those voters with code words that remind them of their racial difference with Obama and stigmatize that difference. In this effort a word like "welfare" is extremely valuable. Sure there are more white than black Americans on welfare, but when a candidate says 'welfare' many whites think of their tax dollars being given to blacks.

So when Romney began running ads about Obama "dropping the work requirement from welfare" - ads which are still running even though the claim has been thoroughly debunked - he was merely updating Ronald Reagan's old "welfare queen" meme. Both are designed to create racial resentment around entitlements. This tactic is bolstered by the classic stereotype of blacks as lazy. A recent Pew Research Center poll, for example, found that 57% of Republicans believe people are poor because they don't work hard. When a recent Washington Post poll asked "Why do most black voters so consistently support Democrats?" the second reason given by Republicans was "black voters are dependent on government or seeking a government handout" while for Democrats it was that "their party addresses issues of poverty." (The top answer for members of both parties was "Don't know".)

Another classic code word - that hasn't cropped up in this election yet - is "crime." Like welfare, even though more whites commit crimes than blacks, the word is more associated with blacks who have historically been stereotyped as wild, violent, animalistic and immoral. As Michelle Alexander writes in The New Jim Crow, "What it means to be criminal in our collective consciousness has become conflated with what it means to be black, so the term white criminal is confounding, while the term black criminal is nearly redundant." The classic example is President George H. W. Bush's famous ad using inmate Willie Horton as a way to portray Massachusetts governor Michael Dukakis as soft on crime and thus unable to protect us from wild black criminals.

There's also the cornucopia of terms and concepts created to de-Americanize Barack Obama, from calling him "Muslim" or "Socialist" to Romney surrogates like John Sununu saying things like, "I wish this President would learn how to be an American."  There is also a return to birtherism, with Romney recently joking, "Nobody's ever asked to see my birth certificate." The subtext of all this is: Obama, like other blacks, is not one of "us." He is other.

Do Democrats use racial code? No. The Democratic party is a racially diverse coalition. There would be no value to playing this game. In fact, the party has risked alienating white working class voters by fighting for people of color, a tightrope perhaps best symbolized by President Johnson signing the 1964 Voting Rights Act and then famously, and presciently, saying to an aide, "We have lost the South for a generation."

If Johnson could see the modern electoral college map he would recognize his continuing impact in a solid red South, but many say that a white-dominated political party leaning on racial appeals to survive will not work much longer. The Hispanic population in America is rising rapidly and as Brownstein points out, "Whites have declined as a portion of the electorate in every presidential election since 1992, according to exit polls." Those are two frightening trends for the future of the GOP and even prominent Republicans are publicly admitting it. "The demographics race we're losing badly," Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina recently told the Washington Post. "We're not generating enough angry white guys to stay in business for the long term."

But for now, as the GOP paddles furiously trying to stay viable as an all-white party, we must shine a harsh light on their attempts to use old racial stereotypes to win votes.

Touré is the author of four books, including Who's Afraid of Post-Blackness? and the co-host of MSNBC's The Cycle. The views expressed are solely his own.

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+39 # TrueAmericanPatriot 2012-09-09 16:23
An excellent & well-written article Toure; you made the case as clear as a glass window polished with windex! Mitt is a FOOL!! I would not mind having a CIVIL dialogue with an African-America n Republican...if it were realistic. I have heard the Steeles, Cains, McGlowans, Woodsons, Thomases, Elders, over the years, and they always open with the same STUPID LINE; you are "brainwashed"by democratic rhetoric and need to become a "republican." What ever happened to, "Let's see what we have in common," or "Let's work through this together," or maybe even, "Can't we all just get along?" (quote from the late Rodney King). No, the rethugs wind up their little minion "tokens" and send them into the African-America n communities with NO IDEA how to establish a dialogue! Face it repugs...your party is dominated by a bunch of angry old white men (whether you admit it or not) who want to "return to the way things were a hundred years ago," as was quoted by a Rand Paul supported in the 2010 midterm elections. You are trying to resurrect a era of suppression, legalized-racis m, sexism, and other practiced evils of that day. WE THE PEOPLE, WILL NOT STAND IDLY BY AND DO NOTHING. We take action through early-voting and on Election Day. OBAMA-BIDEN 2012!!!!
 
 
+18 # Billy Bob 2012-09-09 21:48
I agree, but I don't agree with mixing the words, "elders" and "old" in with it. Age doesn't figure into it nearly as much as people think. Young rural whites are 95% as conservative as their grandparents.

In other words, elderly whites who have 1st hand experience with minorities are less racist than young whites who don't. The demographic shift that's helping us isn't generational. It's ethnic. In fact, the elderly are turning more liberal right before our eyes. They know very well what the repugs want to do to their Social Security.

THAT'S A GOOD THING! WE NEED THEIR VOTES! DON'T TURN THEM AWAY!

Liberals keep attacking the elderly because it's more politically viable than admitting the fact that we rely on minority votes.

Please everybody, START BEING PROUD of those minority votes, and START BEING PROUD of elderly voters who are already on our side.

WE CAN'T AFFORD TO TURN AWAY OUR NATURAL ALIES.
 
 
+7 # TrueAmericanPatriot 2012-09-10 06:18
Quoting Billy Bob:
I agree, but I don't agree with mixing the words, "elders" and "old" in with it. Age doesn't figure into it nearly as much as people think. Young rural whites are 95% as conservative as their grandparents.

In other words, elderly whites who have 1st hand experience with minorities are less racist than young whites who don't. The demographic shift that's helping us isn't generational. It's ethnic. In fact, the elderly are turning more liberal right before our eyes. They know very well what the repugs want to do to their Social Security.

THAT'S A GOOD THING! WE NEED THEIR VOTES! DON'T TURN THEM AWAY!

Liberals keep attacking the elderly because it's more politically viable than admitting the fact that we rely on minority votes.

Please everybody, START BEING PROUD of those minority votes, and START BEING PROUD of elderly voters who are already on our side.

WE CAN'T AFFORD TO TURN AWAY OUR NATURAL ALIES.

Just a side note to explain my post. When I said "Elder(s)," I was referring to Larry Elder, i.e. Herman Cain (Cains), etc. I am SOLIDLY behind our elderly and have great respect for them...and I encourage them to ALWAYS VOTE.
 
 
+2 # Billy Bob 2012-09-10 06:58
I knew who you were refering to but somehow saw the word wrong when I went over your post a second time. Maybe it was subconscious that I associated the two words.

Anyway, GOOD COMMENTS!
 
 
+22 # Regina 2012-09-09 20:18
The "bunch of angry old white men" doesn't want a dialogue -- they firmly believe that their opinions are gospel. But we have a growing bunch of angry old women, middle-aged women, and young women, of every shade of skin, who have awakened to that other angry old campaign, the War On Women, and they will vote against being dragged back to the 19th century by those angry old misogynists. Hell, they'd better!
 
 
+7 # 666 2012-09-10 03:25
with all due respect, I'm not convinced. I was surprised how many core liberal women (working, middle-aged, educated, pro-choice, self-described libs or dems) who switched from obama to mccain in the last election after he selected putrid palin as a running mate. in some cases it was "women first" and some cases it was fear of "the black man". None of it was rational...
 
 
+9 # Billy Bob 2012-09-10 03:46
That's what I refer to as "situational liberalism". It shouldn't require first-hand awareness of abuse from a victim to stop it. It should be enough that an injustice is done to someone else. If each of us has to be the object of hatred ourselves our civilization won't be able to do anything to stop it. If women have to be treated badly in order to realize minorities are also treated badly, it illustrates why we can't ever seem to get anything done as a united front.
 
 
+12 # Billy Bob 2012-09-09 21:36
"Another classic code word - that hasn't cropped up in this election yet - is "crime." Like welfare, even though more whites commit crimes than blacks, the word is more associated with blacks who have historically been stereotyped as wild, violent, animalistic and immoral."

Apparently, Toure has never heard about repugs calling the President of the United States a "street thug" and a "gangsta", and saying he "pals around with terrorists".

Apparently, Toure hasn't heard posters on this very site complaining about the "black guy intimidating people" at a polling site (forgetting all the white guys showing up with guns at the President's speaches).

Apparently, Toure hasn't heard all the "Chicago brand" of politics comments coming from right-wingers on this very site.

This hasn't STOPPED "yet", and it won't until the repug party is SO far out of power that it has to re-evaluate its entire philosophy.

STILL, this is the kind of bullshit that's being used as we speak to get repugs re-elected to Congress. Don't expect it to change at the local level (especially in the South and Western Midwest) for at least another decade.

CONT.
 
 
+16 # Billy Bob 2012-09-09 21:36
CONT.

It's all kind of a comical irony, given the fact that the President grew up as the nerdy brainy guy with straight "A"s (repugs are unwilling to accept), and that he was raised in rural Kansas (like Dorothy) by his white grandma ("Granny Em"?).

To admit that the black President's personal background is as wholesome as a Wonderbread commercial just doesn't fit their agenda.
 
 
+5 # Jimmy 2012-09-09 22:45
One of the very best sources I have read on this subject is Glenn Feldman, the historian.

I just finished his latest book, PAINTING DIXIE RED, on how the South became Republian. Excellent!
 
 
-14 # Rascalndear 2012-09-09 23:31
Sorry, judging by the calm attitude of the man in the sweater, the way the cop is holding out his sweater and the muzzle of the dog, this was not an attack but a sniff search. Let's not exaggerate or fantasize about what we're looking at. There were enough real, heinous racist attacks in 1963 without claiming one where there wasn't.
 
 
+1 # reiverpacific 2012-09-11 08:13
Quoting Rascalndear:
Sorry, judging by the calm attitude of the man in the sweater, the way the cop is holding out his sweater and the muzzle of the dog, this was not an attack but a sniff search. Let's not exaggerate or fantasize about what we're looking at. There were enough real, heinous racist attacks in 1963 without claiming one where there wasn't.

What the Hell has that comment got to do with the current subject matter; photos from that era, taken in the heat of battle and action, are unreliable at best.
What d'you want; blood and guts strwen all over the place???
 
 
+7 # John Somebody 2012-09-10 01:37
Hasn't already been established that there is no meaningful difference between voting to be shot in the head, or stabbed in the back ?
 
 
+2 # bingers 2012-09-10 03:53
Aww, but only 25% of Republicans are racists as confirmed by studies over the years. The real problem is that the other 75% probably don't recognize the race baiting and aren't turned off by it. Even Ronald Reagan came down on the side of racism when he opened his run in Philadelphia, Mississippi, the home of the unpunished murder of civil rights workers.
 
 
+5 # Billy Bob 2012-09-10 05:58
I don't know who did the studies you're refering to. "25%" and "75%" sound kind of rounded off (like a fancy way of saying 1/4). I'm always suspicious of numbers like that without a reference.

Who defined "racism" for the study? The reality is, racism is as racism does. People will find all kinds of rational justifications for their emotional decisions. Race baiting taps into racism. Without underlying racism, race baiting wouldn't work.

And, what do you mean by "even" ronny raygun? OF COURSE ronnie ray-gun! Raygun's presidency entire political career made frequent use of VERY OBVIOUS race-baiting. It was ray-gun that really made the whole "getting rid of welfare queens" b.s. front and center. Ray-gun knew exactly what he was doing.
 
 
+3 # doneasley 2012-09-10 17:11
Quoting bingers:
Even Ronald Reagan came down on the side of racism when he opened his run in Philadelphia, Mississippi, the home of the unpunished murder of civil rights workers.


Did you ever ask yourself, bingers, why the Man From Hollywood would kick off his campaign in the HEART of the South? Reagan knew full well what he was doing when he went to Philadelphia, MS, to speak before an all-white crowd of 10,000. It was a message, his way of saying, "I'm with you" to racists throughout the South. He didn't have to do it again because they knew where Reagan stood. No mind that he desecrated the memory of the three young men who were brutally murdered and buried in an earthen dam because they dared to violate the unwritten (and sometimes written) Jim Crow laws of the South. It may have been just another campaign stop to White Americans, but Black Americans and the families and friends of those young men knew exactly what Reagan was doing. It was a performance much better than his many B-Grade movies, and precisely the reason most Black Americans hated the GOP God, whose memory Regressives continue to throw in our faces.

Rmoney may have called his "born here" comment a joke, but the crowd didn't laugh... THEY CHEERED! Political racial code is alive and well. I know it when I hear it, see it, read it, and smell it.
 
 
+5 # bingers 2012-09-10 03:59
As to the idea of Michael Steele having a rational idea, remember that this is the guy who, when running a losing campaign for Senate, had flyers put up in all the black communities saying that election day was on Wednesday.
 
 
+7 # James38 2012-09-10 04:32
Resorting to lies and racial stereotyping is typical of authoritarian groups which have no interest in discussing issues or honesty. These groups, extremely similar to religious fanatic groups in many ways, are so convinced of the rightness of their approach that their only interest is in forcing society to comply. They also care primarily for the power they seek, and are ruthless in using any possible means to keep power and get more. They actually do not care about the welfare of society or of individuals who do not agree with them, and in the case of the deluded poor Republicans of this era, the party manipulates ignorance and reinforces misconceptions mercilessly. It is in playing on the racial confusions and programming of poor Republicans that many of the racial buzz-words are used to great effect.

Of course, encouraging the poor, lower middle, and middle class Republicans to reject single-payer health care is condemning them to a drastic lack of care, and shows how totally corrupt and uncaring the Republican leadership actually is. It is also a stunning demonstration of how lack of education reduces people's ability to understand even their own best interests. That so many people can be manipulated into voting against their own survival is a frightening revelation of how powerful social programming actually is.

A fascinating look at the present Authoritarian Republican party can be found in "Conservatives Without Conscience" by John Dean.
 
 
+5 # reiverpacific 2012-09-10 07:11
You just had to look at the people in the background and the general audience at both conventions to see where the "rainbow" demographic resides.
The Rethugs were almost totally lily-white and the Dem's had all colors across the human spectrum -in fact I noted a lot of Indians -as in from that country (not of the American indigenous base unfortunately -but I can't say they weren't there; -they have been screwed by everybody!).
To me, this was a graphic and moving illustration of hope, yes hope, for the "Fragmented States" in spite of all the mean-spirited skullduggery on the right to suppress their votes, books (Arizona), and general participation in the fabric of what should be a proudly multicultural beacon to the world, as it claims to be in all the jingoistic rhetoric, instead of an antediluvian, racist and exclusionary set of regions.
I know what kind of place I'd rather live in.
 
 
+1 # Corvette-Bob 2012-09-10 09:35
It is very sad for me, as an educated, old liberal living in affluent
suburb of Detroit it is very upsetting to talk to all of the angry white men. They feel threatened by the changing world, the browning of America, a world economy, the shipment of jobs overseas, etc. They listen to Fox "News" which spews hate, and bigotry and for unknown reasons to me they accept the representations made by the hatemongers.
I can only hope that we can weather the storm of this far right effort to alter the American way of life. I believe if we are able to get Obama elected in 2012 we will have weathered the storm at least as to the executive branch of the Federal gorvernment. Then in 2016 we can elect Hillary for 8 years and we will be home free.
 
 
0 # James38 2012-09-10 15:03
"Home free" is an overstatement of what would indeed be good news. Remember the famous quote, "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." (Thomas Jefferson)

Along the lines of this discussion it is worth noting another Jefferson quote, "The sheep are happier unto themselves than under the care of a wolf."
 
 
+1 # reiverpacific 2012-09-10 15:37
Quoting Corvette-Bob:
It is very sad for me, as an educated, old liberal living in affluent
suburb of Detroit it is very upsetting to talk to all of the angry white men. They feel threatened by the changing world, the browning of America, a world economy, the shipment of jobs overseas, etc. They listen to Fox "News" which spews hate, and bigotry and for unknown reasons to me they accept the representations made by the hatemongers.
I can only hope that we can weather the storm of this far right effort to alter the American way of life. I believe if we are able to get Obama elected in 2012 we will have weathered the storm at least as to the executive branch of the Federal gorvernment. Then in 2016 we can elect Hillary for 8 years and we will be home free.

It's not just the affluent white men believe me. There are a lot off REALLY pissed-off unemployed loggers and fishermen where I live who are unlikely to ever work again and if I go into certain bars, I'll hear the word "Nigger" aimed right at the President AND his family on down quite regularly -which is why I rarely go to these places any more, as they're probably packin' heat if not on them, certainly in their trucks.
Rush Limp-balls really has many of them in his well-compensate d thrall of hate-fantasy and as you stated, "Fix" News and Clear Channel broadcasting from some other planet where blacks are still slaves and White anger rules.
You ain't alone (sadly).
 
 
+2 # lexy677 2012-09-10 14:45
Republicans could easily solve their problems by bringing Hispanics "on board" and giving them a "corridor of privilege" like they give the Asians and they would be viable as a political party for as long as they'd wish; no matter how badly they mistreat blacks. Blacks have NO real allies; just allies of "convenience". Give a Hispanic a chance to be "white" and his disdain and hatred for the black man is sometimes worse than a Klansman's. For those blacks who welcome the day when Hispanics and Asians would be in the majority; be careful what you wish for because when that actually happens...as a Hispanic would say..."POBRECIT O"
 
 
+5 # tabonsell 2012-09-10 15:35
If we buy the conservative claim that people are poor because they don't work hard, are layabout moochers who take from those who create, we also have to get an explanation from Republicans on a relative matter.

Such as; when Dwight Eisenhower left office, poverty in the US was above 22 percent.

When Lyndon Johnson left office, poverty was 12%.

When Jimmy Carter left office poverty's 11.4%

When the Reagan-Bush regime left office, poverty was 15.1 % but was only 11.3 % when Bill Clinton was finished.

Baby Bush raised the poverty rate past the 15% level again where in remains while little or nothing is done in Congress to address poverty.

So if those in poverty are lazy, worthless bums, what is it about GOP administrations that make tens of millions Americans that way? And what is it about Democratic or progressive administrations that make those millions of lazy layabouts motivated go-getters who pull themselves up by their bootstraps and work like sled dogs to get ahead?

A sidenote: Driving poverty down to 11.3% and creating more than 23 million jobs in the private sector while reducing government employment by 600,000 that allowed Clinton to create four years of surpluses. The difference in poverty rates from Reagan-Bush to Clinton is about 12 million people; add those to the 23 million new jobs and we have about 35 million new taxpayers. You would think government might notice.
 
 
+1 # lexy677 2012-09-10 21:58
The problem is that the Republicans simply tell "Bubba" down in Alabama, Texas or Oklahoma, Tennessee, Indiana Kentucky Arkansas etc that they will stop their tax dollars going to shitless "N*gg*rs and presto!, they are in office. You see "Bubba" is usually abysmally stupid, dishonest and seething with malice.
 
 
+1 # James38 2012-09-11 03:30
I recommend that anyone interested in an honest discussion of political and social issues read "Conservatives Without Conscience" by John Dean.” See the introduction and excerpts at http://www.amazon.com/Conservatives-Without-Conscience-John-Dean/dp/0670037745
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN