Sadly, racial identity politics, originated as a divide-and-conquer propaganda campaign by the Soviets in the 1920s, and then picked up again in earnest in the 1960s by those like communist history professor Howard Zinn, determined the election. Today, Weatherman founder, terrorist, and former professor of education Bill Ayers continues the Soviet disinformation campaign of attributing racism to capitalism.
To my dismay, not only did the usual suspects, like George Stephanopoulos, promote this old propaganda line, but many “conservative” analysts fell into the trap on the day after.
The George Soros-funded site AlterNet celebrated with an article titled “What Propelled Obama to Victory and Sent the Plutocrats and Racists to a Brutal Defeat”:
The diverse, creative, younger coalition that propelled the first black president — a guy whose middle name is Hussein — to the presidency, beat back what may well have been the last stand of Ronald Reagan’s coalition of plutocrats, white working-class men and religious conservatives.
The GOP’s most reliable supporters remain white, married couples who identify themselves as Christians, a group that continues its sharp decline in numbers.
The same site fulminates at the large size of Christian families, and hyperventilates about overpopulation. But the celebration over a “sharp decline in numbers” reveals an ideological callousness. I think of Bill Ayers’ plans to eliminate about 25 million Americans who would refuse to be reeducated after the revolution.
But celebration over changes in ethnic and racial makeup happens in more respectable venues. Back in September, at the last Decatur, Georgia, Labor Day Book Festival, a political science professor and author of The Polarized Public? Why American Government Is So Dysfunctional predicted to the almost all-white audience that Democrats would prevail this election season. Political polarization was attributed to “extremism” on the part of conservatives, whose numbers were thankfully diminishing due to demographic changes. The fact that audiences at Obama rallies consisted of large numbers of minorities (according to the slides shown) was heralded.
What struck me about the audience, many of whom wore Obama insignia, was the applause and sighs of relief upon hearing that the Democrats were going to win on the basis of demographics. These middle-aged, college-educated book lovers had no qualms about the fact that their winning strategy did not rely on ideas or even ideology. An air of moral self-congratulation, carried over from the “marches” of the 1960s, was displayed in the facial expressions and comments.
Buzzfeed (now just a half a step away from becoming MMFA) tries to tie Romney to racism of the past:
On Saturday, BuzzFeed ran a few maps that showed that, if you removed the votes of women, African Americans, and 18-21 year olds from the 2012 electorate, Mitt Romney would have won the 2012 election. Given the exit polling, this is obviously true. Also true is that, in recent elections, Republicans have gained a disproportionate number of votes from white men and Democrats have gained a disproportionate number of votes from minorities, young people, and women. Obviously, as the number of minorities is increasing, this is an electoral problem for the GOP. (Quite why it is anymorally better or worse to attract white men than to attract minorities and women nobody who complains about this fact ever bothers to explain; it’s just presented as if it is self-evident, which it is not.) But there it is; currently, that’s how the cookie crumbles.
Having established that, however, BuzzFeed then did something rather odd: It took the vote totals from 2012 and applied them to the more limited electorates in 1850, 1870, 1920, and 1970 — in other words, it removed the votes of any 2012 voters who would have been disenfranchised in those years, and recalculated the outcome. Mitt Romney, naturally, wins in each limited electorate simulation, and he loses — as he did — in 2012, when the electorate is “full.” The insinuation here — and judging by the comments below the piece, it worked extremely well — is obvious: “Look!” BuzzFeedappears to be saying, “if Romney had run back when America was racist and misogynistic and generally terrible then he would have won. Republicans lose when you include the voices of the historically disenfranchised.”
The Democrats are playing a dangerous game. They assume that they are insulated against criticism because we have a black president and they have carefully created a firewall consisting of the assertion that all criticism of Obama is based on race.