Was anyone really surprised to hear Mitt Romney appealing to the base ranks of the ailing GOP with remarks about his birth certificate on Friday?
Having seen the debate on the economy, the only true solid ground for the Republican campaign, be systematically eroded by the extreme selection of running-mate Paul Ryan, and the sexual sideshow of Todd Akin - both manifestations of the civil war within the GOP - perhaps it was only a matter of time before the party's presumptive nominee was reduced to conspiracy theories and - let's call it what it is - old-fashioned racism.
Not that bigotry is unique to US politics. In the UK, members of the BNP and the EDL pepper their political discourse with similar innuendo. The difference is, in Britain neither of those parties are anywhere near the mainstream. Romney is running for the highest office in the land. It would be like the leader of the Tories giving a speech in which he said Keith Vaz shouldn't be trusted as "he's not from round here" or that Chuka Ummuna may have been born in London but he "isn't really one of us".
So what's particular about the US that allows this type of talk find its way into the latter stages of an election campaign?
It is less than 50 years, little more than a generation, since the passing of the Civil Rights Act in Washington, and despite steadily changing attitudes, the issue of race still pervades.
An oft-heard criticism of the 'conservative right', best known as the Tea Party since 2009, is that it is inherently racist. There has been plenty of anecdotal evidence that gives credence to this view - just look on YouTube and it's easy to find signs decrying the president as a "half-breed Muslim" or lawmakers being called "niggers" on the eve of the passing of the Healthcare Bill.
Studies on the make-up of the conservative movement, such as the 2010 paper by Professor Gary Jacobsen, argues that members of the Tea Party are more likely to harbour some form of racial resentment than non-Tea Party affiliates.
According to Jacobsen: "Tea Party activists have denied accusations that their movement is racist, and there is nothing intrinsically racist about opposing 'big government' or clean energy legislation or health care reform. But it is clear that the movement is more appealing to people who are unsympathetic to blacks and who prefer a harder line on illegal immigration..."
Though the research is far from conclusive (and was immediately attacked in the blogosphere as part of an academic liberal conspiracy to discredit the Tea Party), the notion that the 'conservative right' tends to be "older, white and male" would be difficult to argue against.
Yet racism seems to be a very specific charge to throw at such a sizable and nebulous group. A broader and more potent characteristic of the 'conservative right' appears to be the fear of change, and not just the immediate individual concerns of unemployment or higher taxes, but also the long-term remodeling of America and what it is to be an American.
In 1998, President Bill Clinton gave an address on immigration to the students of Portland State University. He said: "Today, nearly one in ten people in America was born in another country; one in five schoolchildren is from immigrant families. Today, largely because of immigration, there is no majority race in Hawaii or Houston or New York City. Within five years there will be no majority race in our largest state, California. In a little more than 50 years there will be no majority race in the United States. No other nation in history has gone through demographic change of this magnitude in so short a time. What do the changes mean? They can either strengthen and unite us, or they can weaken and divide us. We must decide."
A decade on, the US Census Bureau published a report that projected by 2042, whites would no longer be the majority of the population, though they will remain the biggest single grouping (around 70%) within the population until well after 2050.
Writing in the Atlantic in 2009, Hua Hsu argued that the rise of multi-culturalism in the US, manifested in myriad ways, from the growth of hip hop culture to Tiger Woods success on the golf course, has led to a "cultural and socioeconomic dislocation" for whites, who have become aggrieved by the sense that "the system that used to guarantee the white working class some stability has gone off-kilter."
The politics of white identity in America, or "the gradual erosion of 'whiteness' as the touchstone of what it means to be American", has left the country's white working majority adrift in a world where "'whiteness' no longer defines the mainstream."
And what greater indication of America's shifting identity than the election of a Hawaiian-born, mixed-race man with a Kenyan father and a foreign-sounding name? Not that Obama's victory triggered this crisis of identity, but in an unsophisticated way, the election of a non-white man to the presidency probably brought the issue into sharper focus for America's blue collared masses, certainly more than the projections on a Census Bureau report.
As such, those affiliated to the 'right' seem to be not only politically conservative but, in the literal sense, fearful of change. It's a fear that has revealed itself in a number of ways from the need to seek out new communities (the Tea Party as an expression of white identity) to investing in conspiracy theories that decry Obama is a secret-Muslim-fifth-columnist.
Like their John Bircher Society forebears, the Birthers, a group of people that claim that Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States, see only conspiracy and plot. Questions over the president's constitutional eligibility originated as a political smear, playing to base fears of 'otherness' seared into the American psyche through decades of propaganda from the Cold War to the so-called War on Terror.
The rumours started during the 2008 Democratic Party primaries, when a handful of anonymous Hillary Clinton supporters tried to reignite her faltering campaign by questioning her opponent's citizenship. Following Obama's inauguration, the rumour was picked up by the Republican blogosphere, appealing not only to those who sought to make political hay, but also the vast legions of online conspiracy theorists seeking the "truth" on everything from the 9/11 attacks to the moon landings.
Though not its defining characteristic, racism remains part of the makeup of the 'conservative right', betraying the anxieties of a social group stricken with a loss of identity and fearful of a future in which the tenets of the past have increasingly little hold.
On Friday evening, in the wake of his remarks, Romney insisted he knew exactly where Obama was born, telling a CBS News reporter: "There's no question about where he was born. He was born in the US".
The real tragedy for the US is that though Romney's comments may lose the candidate some votes come November, the reality is that by reducing his campaign to the level of conspiracy theory and racism, it will probably endear him to a whole lot more.
Follow Paul Vale on Twitter: www.twitter.com/paulvale
Peter G Tatchell: Nick Griffin and BNP Smear Critics
Fiyaz Mughal: Faith Hate: The EDL Targets Faith Communities for New Recruit
1. create uncertainly and anger
2. create a false target for that anger (jews/blacks/etc)
In the USA it seems that the argument is "I cannot afford to give you a job, because I pay that black man benefits. And I pay them out of your taxes. " - This creates both the fear and anger necessary to stop people thinking clearly and a nice deflected target.
The answer to this is "If you can't afford it why are you cutting YOUR TAXES why are you boosting YOUR INCOME"
No wonder America is faltering.
When analyzing the behaviour of the far right, I find that the 2011 University College London study on biology and political orientation to be particularly illuminating. The study found that people who identify as 'more conservative' tended to have a larger amygdalae, the part of the brain responsible for emotional memory whilst those who are 'more liberal' exhibit a larger anterior cingulate cortex, a part of the brain associated with compassion, courage and the processing of conflicting data.
Whilst generalizing about large groups of people is rarely helpful, from this data we can conclude that conservative people are more likely to exhibit a knee jerk fear reaction when confronted with new persons, situations or ideas than liberals. Whether this applies to republican politicians is unclear, what is clear is that such people have no compunction about exploiting this predisposition towards fearfulness in others for political and personal gain.
So the problem I see with Republican “debate” tactics…? The American public let it work.
And it's not just the Tories, Labour are practically as bad.
You're right to state that racism is only a tendency within the far right, rather than a driving force. But the racism expressed is in fact just part of a much wider hatred - of 'do gooders', liberals, feminists and pro-choicers, students, atheists, Islam, social workers, most artists, socialists, the anti-war and anti-gun groups, etc etc...
It's not political in any way for most, but a deep, ingrained hatred of anyone questioning their right to maintain the status quo - to keep living in a past that never really existed in the first place. A very significant number of Republican votes are made not on the basis of what an individual desires, but on what they hate. Such a significant number of course, that Obama has had to court them to a worrying degree to stand even a chance of a second term. But I believe the mandate of another four years will see him act decisively from the outset and re-energise the objectives he declared at inauguration. If he loses, there is a very good case for despair...
no person is allowed to be president of the United States but old men who speaks with fork tongues...