Politicians Will Exploit Bias Fears
On March 14, 1970, President Richard Nixon attended the Gridiron Club in Washington, D.C. The evening featured performances that taunted Republican attempts to lure White Southerners away from the Democratic Party. The acme of the evening came when Nixon and Vice President Spiro Agnew belted out a piano duet with a chorus of Dixie. The predominantly White male crowd reveled in amusement. During this minstrel show, Nixon asked Agnew, “What about this ‘Southern Strategy’ we hear so often?” Agnew responded in mock “Black dialect”: “Yes, suh, Mr. President. Ah agree with you completely on yoah Southern Strategy.” They received a standing ovation.
This episode not only reminds us that stereotypes and “good-old-boyism” have long histories in America, it demonstrates that the deliberate use of “racially coded” tactics is sewn into our political fabric. Every president has embraced the Southern strategy. Some, such as Abraham Lincoln and Lyndon Johnson, despite personal prejudices, rose above the rest and acted their conscience on matters of race. Most have not. When Ronald Reagan began his first campaign in Philadelphia, Miss., at a fairground used by the Ku Klux Klan, he said nothing of the murder of civil rights martyrs Andrew Goodman, Michael Schwerner and James Chaney nearby in 1964, but he proclaimed his support of “states’ rights.” Reagan never used blatant racist language. He didn’t have to. His conjuring of “states’ rights” was a subtle and effective affirmation of White privilege.
Presidential discourses on race, particularly on the right, have been characterized by unpermissive “color-blindness,” resistance to racial redress policies, and subtle manipulation of White racial fears. As November approaches, Americans must be mindful of the past and the extent to which our candidates employ or repudiate the Southern Strategy. With the proliferation of global terrorism, we must also be aware of another flourishing strategy that exploits some of our deepest anxieties: the “Fear Factor.” The expanded and real threat to our national security holds the potential to scare us into voting for the candidate who more effectively exploits our fears and desires to be “safe.” Like the Southern Strategy, the Fear Factor promises “security” and “stability” and exploits our dread of losing both. The costs of living in fear? The Southern Strategy perpetuates racial inequality and tensions. The Fear Factor jeopardizes our civil liberties and personal freedom. Politicians benefit from fear, but most of us grow further apart, less safe and less autonomous because of it. While John Kerry and George Bush debate about who can make us safer, we must consider that the “winner” may emerge based upon our fears rather than our confidence. This is scary.
Dr. Matthew C. Whitaker, a Phoenician native, is Assistant Professor of History at Arizona State University in Tempe. He is also an affiliate faculty in African and African American Studies and the School of Justice and Social Inquiry at ASU. He is also Co-Owner and CEO of The Whitaker Group, L.L.C., a consulting firm specializing in diversity and educational curriculum and instruction training.
Copyright© The Arizona Republic. All rights reserved.