W. E. Du Bois, in his classic The Souls of Black Folk (1903), stated that “the problem of the twentieth century is the problem of the color-line, - the relation of the darker to the lighter races of men.” In the United States, that relationship and the resulting divisions between the groups has, despite all the civil rights laws and court decisions, not progressed to a circumstance of comfort, amity, and equality between the races.
People of color are materially better off now than in the past, but the basic issues of prejudice and discrimination and their resulting status at the bottom rung of American society remain essentially unchanged. This festering sore is always present and has a negative impact on the lives of individuals and our country in millions of instances every day. That racial riots are not the norm does not mean that all is well.
But the problem of the color-line is not the only division that is rending the social fabric of the United States. Historically there were major divisions between white Protestants and Roman Catholics, between Christians and Jews. But those divisions have largely lapsed into dormancy. The commonality of whiteness seems to have enabled age-old prejudices to become a relic, the appendix of society, but like the appendix capable of exploding causing much disruption given the right circumstances.
Over the past decade, however, a new division has emerged, most clearly identified by the emergence of the Tea Party Republicans. This is not a mere political movement, a more radical conservatism. The Tea Party represents a major new social division in our country. Although Tim Burns connects this division with the one that took place during the Vietnam War between the “my country right or wrong” group and those protesting the war.
Why do I say that? Because it marks a new demarcation of us v them. Politicians, no matter how great their differences, have never viewed themselves as social antagonists, as us v them. That is why they have always been able to form strong friendships and even loyalties outside of the halls of Congress. (The one exception to this would be the Southern Democrats, who because of the race question did view the other side as us v them.)
The election of Donald Trump, the darling of the Tea Party, has spawned its equally rabid counterpart on the left, the Resistance, making matters even more difficult. Both of these sides, who will brook no compromise with the other, are at least at this point in time a threat to our democracy.
How do we deal with these divisions, heal them, enabling it to, as Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “rise up and live out the meaning of its creed, ‘that all men are created equal.’” And in so doing, strengthen our country. Is there a common thread that runs through these various divisions that would enable us, through wise government policy and education, to at last move us beyond these divisions? I think there is.
One common thread running through many of these divisions is the lack of equal treatment, both in reality and in the eyes of the beholder. People of color, especially blacks, have never been treated equally by government. Whether one looks at segregated federal housing policy or unequal educational opportunity … never mind the blatant discrimination of southern state governments … people of color have suffered from direct and indirect government discrimination.
On the other hand, many whites, especially middle and working class, viewed the federal government as bending over backwards to help people of color, spending billions of dollars. while not doing much of anything to help them. They are not against big government in the form of social security and Medicare. They are against big government programs that help the poor (predominantly people of color). This is the basic position of the Tea Party.
This ties into the other major thread running through these division … the fear of economic competition, the loss of jobs, the loss of status. If one looks at the South, certainly the enmity of whites towards blacks had everything to do with fear of the potential power of the black masses, their upending the social status of whites, and their retaliation against their white suppressors.
Within the working class in the North and the unions, in the first half of the 20th century, employers often took advantage of or fomented anger and violence against blacks by pitting the two races against each other for jobs. That resentment is seen today in the form of white opposition to affirmation action, both in the workplace and in upper education. Similarly, immigration opponents routinely rouse their base by arguing that hispanics and especially illegal aliens are taking away jobs from American workers who need them.
That this anger and violence is manufactured can be seen in the rare opposite case of Consolidation Coal Co. and its company town of Buxton, IA in the first warter of the 20th century. Consolidation Coal made it their business to promote good relations among white and black workers and both were treated fairly. The result was an unheard of utopia of integration and race relations.
How does this thread of fear relate to the Tea Party phenomenon? It’s not so much that they fear economic dislocation by blacks or latinos, but that they fear their economic position has deteriorated, which is an indisputable fact, and that it will never recover because the jobs are gone due to government support of free trade deals and yet the government has done nothing to help them. They fear the loss of their status. They think that, as Reagan said, government is the problem, not the solution, and so they want less government (except as noted above when it benefits them).
For the nativists within the Tea Party movement, their economic fear is clothed in the fear for the country’s identity. Whether by flower children or immigrants, they feel the country is being attacked by people who don’t belong here, who don’t honor the country, and thus threaten it’s existence as a place hospitable them. This criticism and dislike extends to liberals because they are not sufficiently pro-American and support those attacking the government.
Other factors often mentioned regarding our divisions, most prominently those people are different from us, all feed off these basic themes of a lack of equal treatment and the fear of economic or status loss. If people were treated equally and if they didn’t have the fear of dislocation, the fact of differing cultures would have much less relevance and power.
So it comes down to two things. First, people want to be treated equally. Second, people want their economic status to be protected. There is no question in my mind that if one were starting with a relatively clean slate that it would be possible to treat everyone equally and protect their status. Despite the fact that politicians have pitted one set of interests against another, they are not inherently in conflict.
However, we are not starting with a clean slate. We are starting at a point of great inequality, economically and otherwise, as well as great emotion. And so where do you start the process of bringing our society to a state of equilibrium?
A possible starting point can be found in my post, “Healing Our Nation, Healing Ourselves,” 11/13/15. The points of that post cannot be neatly summarized in a few words. Suffice it to say that it will require each of us to rethink our relationship to ourselves and to the world around us. Not a minor undertaking! But not impossible either. I urge you to read it.
Only then will be open to accepting the steps and sacrifices necessary to bring our country to a point of equilibrium where we truly live out the words of the Declaration of Independence. Where all people are treated equally, where all people have equal opportunity to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This is so important to both our own individual happiness as well as to the happiness and well-being of our country that we are mad if we do not at least make an effort to achieve a more humane, civilized society.
No comments:
Post a Comment