Recent political news has focused extensively on whether modern times are sounding a death-knell for the Republican party ( photo credit: makelessnoise). After bruising losses in the mid-term elections of 2006 and in the presidential election of 2008, near record-low numbers of individuals who identify as Republicans, and an extraordinarily popular Democratic president, many commentators and pundits have questioned whether the Republican party is facing a crisis of being. Even some Republican leaders have acknowledged the peril they face as a party, giving rise to debates over whether they should become more moderate and create a “bigger tent” that includes a broader coalition of supporters, or stick to their principles and align themselves even more strongly with their remaining conservative base.
In my mind, these debates reveal a major problem for the Republican party and highlight the ways in which narrow racial framing is limiting their future opportunities and success. When Republicans debate whether to “stick to their guns” (pun intended) or establish a “bigger tent,” they are thinking short term and avoiding some very real racialized realities that have an impact for their future and ultimately their continued existence. This is perhaps unsurprising for a party whose only engagement with racial issues over the last half century has been creating coded language to justify their opposition to civil rights advancements (“states’ rights,” “urban crime,” “welfare queens,”), or appealing to racialized fears (Willie Horton, fabricating links between immigrants and swine flu, blaming “unqualified minorities” for the housing crisis) as a way of maintaining and consolidating reliable votes. So it’s not especially shocking that Republicans would be oblivious of what—and who–they are ignoring when they think only in terms of going more moderate or staying conservative.
The racial issue that I refer to is this. All demographic data indicates that within a mere 30 to 40 years, this country will no longer have a clear white majority. What we are headed towards, whether Republican elites like it or not, is a nation that is mostly multiracial and where whites are irrevocably becoming a numerical minority. I don’t think many Republicans have really taken that fact in, perhaps because it is hard to imagine in a nation that has been run by a white majority for centuries. But it’s happening, and evidence of the implications of this were even present in the last election. While some commentators like to pretend that Obama’s election is indicative of the fact that we’re past “all the racial stuff”, the reality is that most whites did not vote for Obama. It took a multiracial coalition of African Americans, Latino/as, Asian Americans, and a small but important minority of whites to get Obama into the White House. Ultimately, however, he won without the support of most whites, because there are finally enough Americans of color to have a significant, determining impact on electoral outcomes. Had Obama not had the foresight to appeal to a broad variety of racial groups, we would be dealing with President McCain and Vice President “I Can See Russia From My House” right now. Republicans would do well to think about how this dynamic plays into their “more moderate or more conservative” dilemma.
What I think it means is that if they want to “stick to their roots,” that in itself needs to involve a fundamental paradigm shift. Of late, the Republican roots haven’t just been small government and tax cuts, those roots have also included appealing to white racism and demonizing groups of color. Even though he broke with his party to champion immigration reform, McCain paid the price for his party’s thinly veiled anti-Latino/a sentiment when they went decisively for Obama. If Republicans want to stay relevant in an America that looks less and less like their base, they need to consider strategies that will endear them to the voters they’ve been excluding from that base. Suggesting that these voters carry swine flu or are responsible for the housing crisis is not the way to do this.
This does mean Republicans will have to make some changes that will probably be painful for them. They can’t just do what has been comfortable in the past, like appealing to those charming folks who show up at their rallies with sock puppets that suggest Obama looks like a monkey. If Republicans want to stay a viable political party, it is time to drop the racist ideology, language, and imagery that has too often been a part of their “core values.” This alienates voters of color that they will need if they want to win at a national level. If Republicans really believe in small government, they should think about how they can make that commitment appealing to growing, important sectors of the population whose primary concerns may be to immigrate safely and easily, find work, go to good schools, and get affordable health care. If they really want low taxes, they should consider how that can win them votes from the many black women who work in low-paying jobs and struggle to find affordable child care. Instead of working themselves into a frenzy over the president’s preference for Dijon mustard (I’m talking to you, Sean Hannity!), Republicans would be better served putting serious thought into how those core principles they tout can be put to use to attract segments of the electorate that they have derided, but now need to reach, if they want to remain relevant. This may well lose them the base they have cultivated, but it might buy them a newer, more expansive base that can actually get them elected. In an America that is growing increasingly multiracial, there is no other way to win at a national level. Unless Republicans acknowledge this (other) elephant in the room, they will continue having the wrong discussion and missing the big picture.
I agree with what you are saying, but sometimes I feel that you are almost interchanging the words, “Republicans” with “White People”. I’m neither but I know that my White peers who happen to be at the voting age are very liberal. There are a lot of younger generations of White people who are becoming more liberal. This will also have an effect with the Republican party in the next years. As a whole, the younger generations of America are leaning more towards the democratic party.
@K Michelle – I didn’t get that feeling of interchanging words. It was clear, to me at least, that publican meant publican and white meant white. Not all white people are Republican, and, somehow despite, or maybe because of, their racism, not all Republicans are white.
@Adia – When you say that white people will be a numerical minority, do you mean simply less than 50% but the largest plurality OR both less than 50% and not the largest plurality.
Just a random thought that occurred to me – how will African American fare in this future multi-racial, white minority nation? Will there be equal opportunity or will the nation maintain its anti-black racism? Also, what about reparations. Will we finally get them or will they say, for instance, “over 90% of us had nothing to do with slavery or neo-slavery. So no reparations?”
Great post. Cross posting to my blog now.
Great thoughts Adia. And I love the site:) Ultimately, I think what you are getting at is that the Republican party has become far too conservative for a supposedly enlightened, multicultural society like ourselves. By conservative, I mean defining what is normal to a sickening degree – what an American family should look like, what a man should look like, what a woman should look like (and guess what, it’s all white in more ways than one). Once you start talking about multiple voices, you are in liberal territory. And this godawful Republican party could seriously use a sense of that.
My current thinking is that things in our country swung way too far to the right for the last 16 years or so – with Republicans acting like it’s the middle ages, and Democrats acting like moderate republicans. Maybe we’ll see a trend in the opposite direction, with Republicans dropping the christian conservative b.s. and Democrats moving in a more social democratic direction (although Obama doesn’t seem interested in going that far left).
But who knows? Eight years ago, I thought I understood the direction our country was headed and then we elected George Bush not once, but twice. Only time will tell.
How did this reference to the reality of all voters in the last election make you feel?
Ultimately, however, [Obama] won without the support of most whites…
It’s hard to use White and Republican interchangeably with the “small but important minority of whites” who helped form the emphasis put on the “multiracial coalition” of voters who put “Obama into the White House.” (Note: Referencing younger generations functions as an attempt to ignore all other generations of voters and the reality of the voting population as it exist today… not tomorrow but today or in the last presidential election, you know, the actual topic.)
If anything, the Republican party’s whiteness and its clear strategy to be the Grand Old WHITE Party is referenced here — i.e. the Republican party’s on-going belief that it can win elections merely by attracting a sizable majority of White voters.
Wanted to drop this short clip by that compliments the main post in terms of Obama being able to appeal to many–some or many may have seen it. But here’s President Obama with humor that may bring smiles for anybody interested: