We explain it all in this post:

Why is it so crazy out there?

The latest development is that at an anti-judge conference (!) one of the attendees, lawyer-author Edwin Vieira, said his "bottom line" for dealing with the Supreme Court comes from Joseph Stalin. "He had a slogan, and it worked very well for him, whenever he ran into difficulty: 'no man, no problem.'"

Also, at that conference:

"I am in favor of impeachment," Michael Schwartz, chief of staff to Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, said in a panel discussion on abortion, suggesting "mass impeachment" might be needed.

That's outrageous, you say. And it is. But what's making this conservative clock tick? We followed up and looked at characters involved with the conference (and elsewhere) and found that in addition to attacking the judiciary, these people want to:

• End Social Security
• Return to the gold standard
• Eliminate public schools

To name a few goals.

What they all have in common is extreme distrust of the government. They don't trust the government to maintain a fiat currency. They don't trust the government to continue to run a 75-year old social insurance program. They don't trust the government to educate their children. They don't' trust the government to apply the law.

Why?

The government is, broadly speaking, representative of the society around us. If you don't trust or feel comfortable with the people in your neighborhood (or city or state or nation), you certainly won't feel comfortable with the government.

Before we go any further, we acknowledge that the current crop of wild right-wing characters are in a distinct minority. They do not represent all conservatives. But they do indicate feelings that lurk beneath the surface for many people.

That said, it is our firm belief that the reason for the current anti-government, pro-family and pro-religion trends is a fear that the nation is transforming itself into something unfamiliar. Something alien.

Consider the following facts: (emp add)

In recent years, Hispanics and minority racial groups (defined here as racial and ethnic groups that make up less than 50 percent of the population and include non-Hispanic blacks, Asians and American Indians) have each grown faster than the population as a whole. In 1970 these groups together represented only 16 percent of the population. By 1998 this share had increased to 27 percent. Assuming current trends continue, the Bureau of the Census projects that these groups will account for almost half of the U.S. population by 2050. Although such projections are necessarily imprecise, they do indicate that the racial and ethnic diversity of the United States will expand substantially in the next century.

That's real change. 33% over 80 years. Also, the sense of the nation being "under assault" by swarthy foreigners was given a huge boost with the Al-Qaeda attacks in 2001. A huge boost. And even though Indians are over in Asia, they're only a Dell-support-center phone call away. Yikes! They're comin' at us!

What we get is a panic reaction. A retreat to safe havens like the home and the church. And rage at public institutions. And while we're at it, just to be safe, why not put all Arabs into internment camps? (Malkin) Or perhaps, fantasize about leaving them all behind to taste the torments of hellfire? (LaHaye) Speaking of the latter, if that isn't exclusionary, what is?

This explains the reason why many people are drawn to Bush's persona. The protective father and all that. Only the father is not so much protecting us from foreign threats, but from a vague, inchoate threat coming from the inside.

We could even engage in some speculation on the subject. The move of southern racists from the Democratic party to the Republican party signaled to those concerned about a transforming United States, that Republicans are the best bet for preserving, somehow, the white culture.

POLITICAL DETOUR: Forget the framing. Forget being Beinart-tough on foreign policy. Forget just about everything. As much as we deplore racism, it seems to be a constant in human affairs. In the last century racism was a substantial political force. Why should it disappear in the 21st century? Anyone offering strategic advice to Democrats must address the demographic and cultural "threats" perceived by many white Americans.

RELATED: Until people feel more like they're all part of the same group, it will be hard to generate support for any redistributionist policies. Or "social" anything. Perhaps that explains the bizarre reintroduction of the conservitive epithet "socialist" which is often applied to completely-in-the-mainstream Democrats and Republicans.

On the bright side, intermarriage and the passing of generations can do much to reduce the fears. And we have accepted, and continue to do so, increasing diversity. One hundred fifty years ago being German-American put you outside the mainstream. One hundred years ago Irish and Italians were outside the mainstream. We don't do it anymore, but in the past, people were very sensitive to the small differences between Caucasians. One could look at the bone structure and make a good guess as to what part of Europe somebody was from. Back then, it was a learned behavior, and not all that hard to do. (Study faces for an art class and you will quickly see the metrics that determine a person's visage, and therefore, the ethnicity.) But today, "all whites look alike," to abuse the cliche.

So whatever process ground down the inter-Caucasian tensions should, over time, do the same for tensions arising from increasing numbers of Mexicans, Chinese, Africans, and others. It will take time, however.

Short term politics? Hard to say. Democrats are behind the 8-ball on this. They are perceived as being more "ethnic friendly" which doesn't get the votes in Wyoming. It will take major economic distress in order for the Democrats to return to power. Until this country has adjusted to its new demographics, which might take until 2030, we are likely to see the continued thrashing by distressed whites. And because of that, a continuation of right-wing extremist talk, and action.


POSTSCRIPT: Are we too focused on race and ethnicity? We try not to be, but our thought process was this: Read about the mistrust of fiat currency. Then mistrust over Social Security. The way the arguements were made, it seemed more like mistrust with one's fellow citizen, and less with a specific policy. And in trying to think what would lead people to such a position, we couldn't think of anything besides a demographic change, which, as it turns out, is taking place and is substantial.

UPDATE: changes made to improve clarity and spelling

posted by Quiddity at 4/09/2005 05:20:00 PM