The media villagers gave us endless reporting on what motivated Trump voters in 2016. It was “economic anxiety” they insisted about being left out of the Obama economic recovery.
These media villagers glossed over the fact that this anxiety was “white grievance” about being “replaced” by minorities in the new economy. Losing their “white privilege” status in America’s 400 year-old white male patriarchy. It was always about race.
Note: Never send a campaign reporter to do the work of a political scientist for empirical analysis. Just sayin’.
In 2018, the New York Times began pushing back on its own deeply flawed reporting. Trump Voters Driven by Fear of Losing Status, Not Economic Anxiety, Study Finds:
Ever since Donald J. Trump began his improbable political rise, many pundits have credited his appeal among white, Christian and male voters to “economic anxiety.” Hobbled by unemployment and locked out of the recovery, those voters turned out in force to send Mr. Trump, and a message, to Washington.
Or so that narrative goes.
A study published on Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences questions that explanation, the latest to suggest that Trump voters weren’t driven by anger over the past, but rather fear of what may come. White, Christian and male voters, the study suggests, turned to Mr. Trump because they felt their status was at risk.
“It’s much more of a symbolic threat that people feel,’’ said Diana C. Mutz, the author of the study and a political science and communications professor at the University of Pennsylvania, where she directs the Institute for the Study of Citizens and Politics. “It’s not a threat to their own economic well-being; it’s a threat to their group’s dominance in our country over all.”
The study is not the first to cast doubt on the prevailing economic anxiety theory. Last year, a Public Religion Research Institute survey of more than 3,000 people also found that Mr. Trump’s appeal could better be explained by a fear of cultural displacement.
In her study, Dr. Mutz sought to answer two questions: Is there evidence to support the economic anxiety argument, and did the fear of losing social dominance drive some voters to Mr. Trump?
Leaving Behind the ‘Left Behind’ Theory
Even before conducting her analysis, Dr. Mutz noted two reasons for skepticism of the economic anxiety, or “left behind,” theory. First, the economy was improving before the 2016 presidential campaign. Second, while research has suggested that voters are swayed by the economy, there is little evidence that their own financial situation similarly influences their choices at the ballot box.
The analysis offered even more reason for doubt.
Losing a job or income between 2012 and 2016 did not make a person any more likely to support Mr. Trump, Dr. Mutz found. Neither did the mere perception that one’s financial situation had worsened. A person’s opinion on how trade affected personal finances had little bearing on political preferences. Neither did unemployment or the density of manufacturing jobs in one’s area.
“It wasn’t people in those areas that were switching, those folks were already voting Republican,” Dr. Mutz said.
For further evidence, Dr. Mutz also analyzed a separate survey, conducted in 2016 by NORC at the University of Chicago, a research institution. It showed that anxieties about retirement, education and medical bills also had little impact on whether a person supported Mr. Trump.
Status Under Threat: ‘Things Have Changed’
While economic anxiety did not explain Mr. Trump’s appeal, Dr. Mutz found reason instead to credit those whose thinking changed in ways that reflected a growing sense of racial or global threat.
“The shift toward an antitrade stance was a particularly effective strategy for capitalizing on a public experiencing status threat due to race as well as globalization,” Dr. Mutz wrote in the study.
Her survey also assessed “social dominance orientation,” a common psychological measure of a person’s belief in hierarchy as necessary and inherent to a society. People who exhibited a growing belief in such group dominance were also more likely to move toward Mr. Trump, Dr. Mutz found, reflecting their hope that the status quo be protected.
“It used to be a pretty good deal to be a white, Christian male in America, but things have changed and I think they do feel threatened,” Dr. Mutz said.
The other surveys supported the cultural anxiety explanation, too.
For example, Trump support was linked to a belief that high-status groups, such as whites, Christians or men, faced more discrimination than low-status groups, like minorities, Muslims or women, according to Dr. Mutz’s analysis of the NORC study.
Today the New York Times reports on a new study that confirms the findings of the earlier studies – it is all about race. Fears of White People Losing Out Permeate Capitol Rioters’ Towns, Study Finds:
When the political scientist Robert Pape began studying the issues that motivated the 380 or so people arrested in connection with the attack against the Capitol on Jan. 6, he expected to find that the rioters were driven to violence by the lingering effects of the 2008 Great Recession [the “economic anxiety” narrative].
But instead he found something very different: Most of the people who took part in the assault came from places, his polling and demographic data showed, that were awash in fears that the rights of minorities and immigrants were crowding out the rights of white people in American politics and culture.
If Mr. Pape’s initial conclusions — published on Tuesday in The Washington Post — hold true, they would suggest that the Capitol attack has historical echoes reaching back to before the Civil War, he said in an interview over the weekend. In the shorter term, he added, the study would appear to connect Jan. 6 not only to the once-fringe right-wing theory called the Great Replacement, which holds that minorities and immigrants are seeking to take over the country, but also to events like the far-right rally in Charlottesville, Va., in 2017 where crowds of white men marched with torches chanting, “Jews will not replace us!”
“If you look back in history, there has always been a series of far-right extremist movements responding to new waves of immigration to the United States or to movements for civil rights by minority groups,” Mr. Pape said. “You see a common pattern in the Capitol insurrectionists. They are mainly middle-class to upper-middle-class whites who are worried that, as social changes occur around them, they will see a decline in their status in the future.”
One fact stood out in Mr. Pape’s study, conducted with the help of researchers at the Chicago Project on Security and Threats, a think tank he runs at the University of Chicago. Counties with the most significant declines in the non-Hispanic white population are the most likely to produce insurrectionists. This finding held true, Mr. Pape determined, even when controlling for population size, distance to Washington, unemployment rate and urban or rural location.
[In] his study, Mr. Pape determined that only about 10 percent of those charged were members of established far-right organizations like the Oath Keepers militia or the nationalist extremist group the Proud Boys. But unlike other analysts who have made similar findings, Mr. Pape has argued that the remaining 90 percent of the “ordinary” rioters are part of a still congealing mass movement on the right that has shown itself willing to put “violence at its core.” [So much for the “peaceful protestors” as Fox News falsely claims.]
Other mass movements have emerged, he said, in response to large-scale cultural change. In the 1840s and ’50s, for example, the Know Nothing Party, a group of nativist Protestants, was formed in response to huge waves of largely Irish Catholic immigration to the country. After World War I, he added, the Ku Klux Klan experienced a revival prompted in part by the arrival of Italians and the first stirrings of the so-called Great Migration of Black Americans from the rural South to the industrialized North.
* * *
Mr. Pape said he worried that a similar mob could be summoned again by a leader like Mr. Trump. After all, he suggested, as the country continues moving toward becoming a majority-minority nation and right-wing media outlets continue to stoke fear about the Great Replacement, the racial and cultural anxieties that lay beneath the riot at the Capitol are not going away.
“If all of this is really rooted in the politics of social change, then we have to realize that it’s not going to be solved — or solved alone — by law enforcement agencies,” Mr. Pape said. “This is political violence, not just ordinary criminal violence, and it is going to require both additional information and a strategic approach.”
In an op-ed at the Washington Post, Robert Pape explains further, What an analysis of 377 Americans arrested or charged in the Capitol insurrection tells us:
The Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol by a violent mob at the behest of former president Donald Trump was an act of political violence intended to alter the outcome of a legitimate democratic election. That much was always evident.
What we know 90 days later is that the insurrection was the result of a large, diffuse and new kind of protest movement congealing in the United States.
The Chicago Project on Security and Threats (CPOST), working with court records, has analyzed the demographics and home county characteristics of the 377 Americans, from 250 counties in 44 states, arrested or charged in the Capitol attack.
Those involved are, by and large, older and more professional than right-wing protesters we have surveyed in the past. They typically have no ties to existing right-wing groups. But like earlier protesters, they are 95 percent White and 85 percent male, and many live near and among Biden supporters in blue and purple counties.
The charges have, so far, been generally in proportion to state and county populations as a whole. Only Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri and Montana appear to have sent more protesters to D.C. suspected of crimes than their populations would suggest.
Nor were these insurrectionists typically from deep-red counties. Some 52 percent are from blue counties that Biden comfortably won. But by far the most interesting characteristic common to the insurrectionists’ backgrounds has to do with changes in their local demographics: Counties with the most significant declines in the non-Hispanic White population are the most likely to produce insurrectionists who now face charges.
For example, Texas is the home of 36 of the 377 charged or arrested nationwide. The majority of the state’s alleged insurrectionists — 20 of 36 — live in six quickly diversifying blue counties such as Dallas and Harris (Houston). In fact, all 36 of Texas’s rioters come from just 17 counties, each of which lost White population over the past five years. Three of those arrested or charged hail from Collin County north of Dallas, which has lost White population at the very brisk rate of 4.3 percent since 2015.
The same thing can be seen in New York state, home to 27 people charged or arrested after the riot, nearly all of whom come from 14 blue counties that Biden won in and around New York City. One of these, Putnam County (south of Poughkeepsie), is home to three of those arrested, and a county that saw its White population decline by 3.5 percent since 2015.
When compared with almost 2,900 other counties in the United States, our analysis of the 250 counties where those charged or arrested live reveals that the counties that had the greatest decline in White population had an 18 percent chance of sending an insurrectionist to D.C., while the counties that saw the least decline in the White population had only a 3 percent chance. This finding holds even when controlling for population size, distance to D.C., unemployment rate and urban/rural location. It also would occur by chance less than once in 1,000 times.
Put another way, the people alleged by authorities to have taken the law into their hands on Jan. 6 typically hail from places where non-White populations are growing fastest.
CPOST also conducted two independent surveys in February and March, including a National Opinion Research Council survey, to help understand the roots of this rage. One driver overwhelmingly stood out: fear of the “Great Replacement.” Great Replacement theory has achieved iconic status with white nationalists and holds that minorities are progressively replacing White populations due to mass immigration policies and low birthrates. Extensive social media exposure is the second-biggest driver of this view, our surveys found. Replacement theory might help explain why such a high percentage of the rioters hail from counties with fast-rising, non-White populations.
While tracking and investigating right-wing extremist groups remains a vital task for law enforcement, the best intelligence is predictive. Understanding where most alleged insurrectionists come from is a good starting point in identifying areas facing elevated risks of further political violence. At the very least, local mayors and police chiefs need better intelligence and sounder risk analysis.
To ignore this movement and its potential would be akin to Trump’s response to covid-19: We cannot presume it will blow over. The ingredients exist for future waves of political violence, from lone-wolf attacks to all-out assaults on democracy, surrounding the 2022 midterm elections.
Ahem, the assault on our democracy is being waged right now by seditious Republicans in state legislatures who have introduced 361 bills for Jim Crow 2.0 voter suppression laws in 47 states. Voting Laws Roundup: March 2021. The seditious insurrection is ongoing. It did not end with the failed coup d’etat on January 6.
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Commenting on the study by Robert Pape, above, Hayes Brown at MSNBC writes “Pro-Trump whites afraid of being replaced attacked the Capitol. That’s a race riot.”, https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/pro-trump-whites-afraid-being-replaced-attacked-capitol-s-race-n1263216?icid=msd_topgrid
(Excerpt)
It’s been three months exactly since we watched — on live television — as supporters of former President Donald Trump climbed past barricades, shattered windows and besieged the U.S. Capitol.
Since then, we’ve come to learn a lot about the mob that ripped through the building that day. And, vitally, a new study shows that this wasn’t just a group of people primed to believe the election had been stolen. These weren’t just people wracked with economic anxiety, as previously assumed. It wasn’t even mostly made up of members of the far-right’s front-line groups. What we witnessed was a race riot.
What makes Pape’s findings so troubling is twofold: First, that the size and goals of the rioters on Jan. 6 shows that the movement that Trump seized and molded around him is still metastasizing. And second, that this contingency of aggrieved whites is growing more comfortable with violence — and less willing to see the ugliness of the message they’ve embraced when looking in the mirror.
There has been no period of self-reflection from Trump supporters or the Republican Party leadership writ large since the riots. No mea culpas, no pledges to become a more diverse and welcoming coalition. The culture wars the GOP continues to stoke — harnessing anger toward minorities and vulnerable populations for political gain — are only becoming more foundational to their ideology.
[M]uch as the Lost Cause narrative managed to keep the focus of the Civil War on state’s rights and away from the brutality of chattel slavery, this mythology is obscuring the reality of the January riot. We’re watching it develop in real time. I’m afraid that what we saw in Washington won’t be the last white race riot we see in the next few years based on the lies — and fears — that Trump amplified.
Chauncey Devega writes at Salon, “Welcome to Republicanistan: The GOP’s Jim Crow pseudo-democracy”, https://www.salon.com/2021/04/07/welcome-to-republicanistan-the-gops-jim-crow-pseudo-democracy/
“The Jim Crow Republican Party’s attempt to keep Black people in Georgia from voting is a preview of a national plan to turn the United States into a type of authoritarian state. On paper, “Republicanistan” will be a democracy — but one where one party has rigged the elections so it almost always wins, and the “opposition” must meet almost impossible standards to even be on the ballot. Even then, as seen in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election, with Donald Trump’s coup attempt and the attack on the U.S. Capitol, the Jim Crow Republicans will look for ways to change the rules or nullify the outcome.
In public statements, leading Republicans have basically admitted that their efforts to nullify multiracial democracy are not driven by concerns about “voter fraud” or “voter security” but rather by the desire for power and control.
The mainstream media largely insists on covering the Republican war on democracy as a partisan battle rather than as an attack on democracy itself by one of the country’s two institutional political parties.
There are claims by some stenographers of current events — those who inhabit the “church of the savvy” and take the “view from nowhere” — that the Jim Crow Republican Party’s attempts to stop Black and brown people from voting may be unseemly, but to claim that they are “racist” or “white supremacist” in nature is hysterical and exaggerated.
Such claims are just working in defense of the Jim Crow Republicans. Their anti-democracy attacks are precision-targeted against Black and brown communities. Moreover, these attacks are legitimated by racist insinuations that Black voters are “irresponsible” or that their votes are “low quality” because of alleged fraud or vote theft in “urban areas.” These lies echo earlier falsehoods that the white right used during the Jim Crow reign of terror to keep Black Americans from voting.”
He concludes: “Ultimately, America is in a war against itself for the soul of its democracy and future. Republicanistan is much closer to becoming reality than many Americans would like to believe. We cannot allow the allure of organized forgetting or President Biden’s early successes to distract us from vigilance in defense of American democracy.”