OPINION
CHARLES M.
BLOW
Extremism Is on the Rise … Again
Nov. 2,
2022
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/02/opinion/republican-extremism-trump.html
Credit...Nina
Berman/Redux
Charles M.
Blow
By Charles
M. Blow
Opinion
Columnist
After all
this country has been through — from Donald Trump and his election denial, to
the insurrection, to what prosecutors call the “politically motivated” attack
on Nancy Pelosi’s husband — it still appears poised to elect candidates next
Tuesday who deny the results of the 2020 election. There are 291 election
deniers on the ballot. And Trump — the greatest threat to democracy — may make
a comeback in 2024.
It’s hard
to believe even though it’s happening right in front of our eyes.
In a major
speech Wednesday night, President Biden described election denial as “the path
to chaos in America.” “It’s unprecedented,” he said. “It’s unlawful. And it’s
un-American.” But in truth, the extremism, racism and white nationalism are
neither un-American nor unfamiliar.
I am
personally fascinated by precedents and historical corollaries, the ways that
events find a way of repeating themselves, not because of some strange glitch
in the cosmos but because human beings are fundamentally the same, unchanged,
stuck in rotation of our failings and frailties.
The
presidential election of 1912 offers a few lessons for our current political
moment.
William
Howard Taft had been elected president in 1908, succeeding the gregarious
Theodore Roosevelt, the undisputed leader of the progressive movement of the
age, who endorsed Taft’s presidential bid. But Taft was no Teddy. Taft was, as
University of Notre Dame professor Peri E. Arnold has written, “a warmhearted
and kind man who wanted to be loved as a person and to be respected for his
judicial temperament.”
I hear
echoes there of the differences between Presidents Barack Obama and Biden.
Progressives
at first seemed satisfied with Taft’s election, as they expected him to simply
carry Roosevelt’s legacy forward. But they soon grew disaffected, as did
Roosevelt.
Republicans
seem to be surging heading into November, with Democrats struggling to break
through, as voters turn their focus from abortion to crime and inflation. Even
if the polls are as off, as pollsters fear, all signs seem to be pointing
toward a strong showing for the G.O.P.
For months
now, Times Opinion has been covering how we got here. Chloe Maxmin and Canyon
Woodward argued that Democrats abandoned rural America. Alec MacGillis traced
how the party ignored the economic decline of the Midwest. And Michelle Cottle
described the innovative Republican ground game in South Texas.
Opinion has
also been identifying the candidates who could define the future of their
party. Sam Adler-Bell captured the bleak nationalism of Blake Masters, the
Arizona Republican challenging Senator Mark Kelly. Christopher Caldwell
described the transformation of J.D. Vance, the venture capitalist from Ohio
who went from Trump critic to proud member of the MAGA faithful. Michelle
Goldberg traveled to Washington state to profile Joe Kent, a burgeoning star on
the right.
And
throughout this election cycle, Opinion has held discussions with groups of
experts – hosted by Frank Bruni, Ross Douthat and others – that have followed
the season’s twists and turns, from reviewing the primary landscape to a
Democratic backlash against the Dobbs decision which gave way to a Republican
surge in the fall. And we paused to consider the mysteries of polls and the politically
homeless along the way.
It wasn’t
that Taft was ineffective; he just didn’t do all of what those progressives
wanted, much like Biden hasn’t checked the box on all progressive priorities.
Riding a wave of progressive anger, Roosevelt challenged Taft in 1912, and when
Roosevelt didn’t secure the nomination, he ran as a third-party candidate,
taking many of the progressives with him.
That split
all but guaranteed that their opponent, Woodrow Wilson, would win, becoming the
first president from the South since the Civil War.
Wilson had
not been a favorite to win the nomination of his own party — he only secured it
on the 46th ballot after quite a bit of deal-making. But once he reached the
general election, he sailed to victory over the quarreling liberals. He would
go on to campaign on an “America First” platform, which for him was primarily
about maintaining America’s neutrality in World War I. But as Sarah Churchwell,
author of “Behold, America,” told Vox in 2018, it soon became associated not just
with isolationism, but also with the Ku Klux Klan, xenophobia and fascism.
In Wilson’s
case, extremists took his language and twisted its meaning into something more
sinister. When Trump glommed onto that language over a century later, he
started with the sinister and tried to pass it off as benign.
Of course,
Wilson was no Trump. Trump is one of the worst presidents — if not the worst —
that this country has ever had. Wilson at least, as the University of
Virginia’s Miller Center points out, supported “limits on corporate campaign
contributions, tariff reductions, new and stronger antitrust laws, banking and
currency reform, a federal income tax, direct election of senators, a single
term presidency.” He was a progressive Southern Democrat. The newly formed
N.A.A.C.P. actually endorsed him.
But there
are eerie similarities between him and Trump. Wilson was a racist. He brought
the segregationist sensibility of the South, where he had grown up and where
Jim Crow was ascendant, into the White House. He allowed segregation to
flourish in the federal government on his watch.
And while
Wilson didn’t support shutting down all immigration, as long as the immigrants
were from Europe, he did embrace ardently xenophobic beliefs. In 1912, he
released a statement, saying:
“In the
matter of Chinese and Japanese coolie immigration I stand for the national
policy of exclusion (or restricted immigration). The whole question is one of
assimilation of diverse races. We cannot make a homogeneous population out of
people who do not blend with the Caucasian race.”
It was
Wilson who screened “The Birth of a Nation” at the White House, a film that
pushed the “Lost Cause” narrative and fueled the rebirth of the Klan.
Trump
hosted a screening of “2,000 Mules” — a fact-checker-debunked documentary that
purported to show widespread voter fraud carried out by “mules” who stuffed
ballot boxes with harvested ballots during the last presidential election — at
Mar-a-Lago, which Trump has called the Southern White House. That film has
helped boost his followers’ belief in his lie about the 2020 election.
Allow me a
quick aside to dissect the dehumanizing language of the “mule.” Mules were
synonymous with captivity and servitude, and as such, a comparison between them
and the enslaved — and later, oppressed — Black people was routine. In fact, in
“Their Eyes Were Watching God,” Zora Neale Hurston famously wrote that the
Black woman is the mule of the world.
Then came
the invention of the “drug mule,” a phrase that first appeared in this
newspaper in 1993. Later, the media would often use it to describe Hispanic
women.
Now we have
ballot mules, an extensive cabal of liberal actors bent on stealing elections.
Once you
animalize people, you have, by definition, dehumanized them, and that person is
no longer worthy of being treated humanely.
I say all
this to demonstrate that we have been here before. We have seen extremism rise
before in this country, multiple times, and it often follows a familiar
pattern: One party loses steam, focus and cohesion; liberals become exhausted,
disillusioned or fractured, allowing racists and nativist conservatives to
rise. Those leaders then tap into a darkness in the public, one that periodically
goes dormant until it erupts once more.
I fear that
too many liberals are once again caught up in the cycle, embracing apathy. My
message to all of them going into Election Day: Wake up!
Charles M.
Blow joined The Times in 1994 and became an Opinion columnist in 2008. He is
also a television commentator and writes often about politics, social justice
and vulnerable communities. @CharlesMBlow • Facebook


Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário