So, are they? And if they are not, what would make a person say such a horrible thing? Maybe it’s just an easy way for Democrats to score some political points in an area where they think they can’t lose? There is no doubt that the civil rights legislation enacted during the Johnson Administration did a great deal to endear the formerly disenfranchised to the Demorcratic Party. There is also no doubt that political calculations were very much a part of Johnson’s thinking in regard to these acts. I am willing to believe that he was a compassionate person who wanted to see justice extended to all Americans, but I know he was an astute political operative who felt the need to act before the Republicans did.
And there can be no doubt that the Rockefeller Republicans would have acted and rightly taken credit for guaranteeing civil liberties if Johnson had not gotten there first. They probably would not, however, have taken the next step: the Great Society initiatives. These Republicans and their ideological descendants have never been big fans of broad government social programs. Broad programs need big bureaucracies to administer them. These agencies can quickly transform into self-perpetuating behemoths where employment is taken to be a sinecure. Such bureaucracies also have a high propensity to dehumanize the very people they are meant to serve, as anyone who is currently in line at the License Plate office can tell you.
Likewise, transfer payments (as economists call the transactions that these programs represent) can easily build resentment among those being taxed to provide the payment while simultaneously breeding a sense of dependence among those receiving them. Again, this is humiliating and dehumanizing for everyone involved while not necessarily addressing the issues which the programs were established to combat in the first place. There is a strong argument to be made here, is there not?
It’s so strong, in fact, that it can be and has been co-opted by by political strategists who previously would have used more direct, racially charged rhetoric. Google “Lee Atwater Southern Strategy” to see the thoughts of the political Godfather to Karl Rove. Seeing the writing on the wall once major civil rights legislation went through, a number of Republicans decided to attract the support of those who opposed civil rights. Racists who might not have been a part of the Republican party in the past came into the fold. While it might not be THE base of the Republican Party, a significantly racist group has been A strong base.
Saying this is not true is equivalent to saying that the 9/11 terrorists were not Muslim. Saying all Republicans are racist, however, is equivalent to saying all Muslims are terrorists. Whether or not our government is a useful and appropriate instrument for correcting systemic inequalities in our society can be fairly argued from both sides. The fact that those inequalities often break along racial lines is a consequence of our history, and exploitation of the fault lines will continue to be a feature of our politics. But we should be very careful in discerning who is really engaging in that exploitation.
One Reply to “Are Republicans Racists?”
Comments are closed.