Chapter 7: America’s 21st century alt-right / Make America White Again

(Credit: Getty Images)

America’s 21st Century Alt-Right

A long time ago there was Apartheid, an ideology based on racial privilege, fear of the other, walls and barbed wire, censorship, ignorance and oppression (Scholars and Rogues).

The year 2016 saw the election of Donald John Trump as President of the US. A White billionaire of German and Scottish ancestry, Trump won the presidency with 304 Electoral College votes, while losing the popular vote by 2.86 million votes (Schmidt & Andrews, 2016). President Trump became the oldest and wealthiest male ever to hold the highest political office in the nation. He also became the first to do so without having prior government or military service to his name.

“Make America Great Again”[1]

We shall be as a city upon a hill, the eyes of all people are upon us (John Winthrop).

An examination of the demographics related to the victory of President Trump reveals an interesting pattern of data in relation to the underlying reason for his election. According to the results of the national exit polls reported the day after the 2016 general elections, the distribution of the electorate consisted of 69% White voters versus 31% non-White voters (Henley, 2016; Tyson & Maniam, 2016). From the former group, 58% of White voters supported President Trump, with this statistic comprising 63% of White males and 53% of White females. From the overall total number of males and females (White and non-White) that made up the electorate, a greater number of males than females voted for the President (53% v. 41%). This gender gap was the widest to occur in presidential election exit polls since 1972.

Considered by education level, 67% of non-college-educated Whites voted for the President Trump, with 72% of that group being made up of males (Henley, 2016; Tyson & Maniam, 2016). Fifty two percent of the total number of college graduates (white collar) were reported to have voted for his opponent, Secretary Hillary Clinton. Conversely, 52% of the total number of voters without a college degree (blue collar) had voted for the President. This education gap was the widest in presidential election exit polls since 1980.  Continue reading “Chapter 7: America’s 21st century alt-right / Make America White Again”

Chapter 5: The effects, types, forms, frequency and results of racism


The Effects of Racism

Between me and the other world there is ever an unasked question: How does it feel to be a problem? (W. E. B. Du Bois).

 Racism has been defined as:

“Racial prejudice that has been incorporated into the activities and procedures of major institutions, corporations, social systems (such as those related to housing, education, and health), and other arenas of major social activity (such as politics, the media, finance, and banking)” (OEMA, 2007).

Racism serves “both to discriminate against ethnic minorities and to maintain advantages and benefits for White Americans” (ibid.). It contains the essential tension of not-so-egalitarian applied presences of the historically different races, with races derived from Northern Europe being considered civilized, whereas all other races are considered inferior (Jones, 1997).

Race and ethnicity. Race is defined as a “human group . . . [aggregated] by virtue of innate or immutable characteristics” (van den Berghe, 1967). Ethnicity is defined as a social group aggregated through cultural criteria and customs. Race as a construct tends to contain within it long-standing connotations of nativism,[1] despite having been debunked in an overwhelming manner in favor of the variable of race as a sociopolitical construct (HGMIS-ORNL, 2003; OMB, 1995, 1997; Shih, Bonam, Sanchez, & Peck, 2007; Smedley & Smedley, 2005; Sternberg, Grigorenko, & Kidd, 2005).

Carter (2007) defined racism as “a complex set of rational and logical beliefs and attitudes that serve to justify the superiority of the dominant racial group, while deemphasizing its systemic characteristics and sociohistorical context.” Jones (1997) defined racism as building “on the negative-attitude view of prejudice” and incorporating:

  1. The purported biological bases of group characteristics;
  2. The assumed superiority of one’s own race (ethnocentrism); and
  3. The rationalization of “institutional and cultural practices that formalize the hierarchical domination of one racial group over another” ().

According to Jones, racism has five basic elements as follows:

  1. Beliefs about racial superiority and inferiority;
  2. Ethnocentrism, with the concurrent rejection of customs, ideas, peoples, and practices divergent from the ethnocentric norm;
  3. Conferral of privilege through a racially-based and dominant-cultural national system;
  4. Personal and collective thoughts, feelings, and behaviors emanating from various cultural-institutional social structures that support racism; and
  5. The systematic attempt to prove the rationality of applied policies and practices based on racial differences.

Continue reading “Chapter 5: The effects, types, forms, frequency and results of racism”

Chapter 3: Building the new empire


Building the New Empire

Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: In God is our trust.
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave (Francis Scott Key).

Overt racism (1787-1964). Virtue principles were codified in the US Constitution (Library of Congress, 2016) in addition to those found in the Declaration of Independence, to extend and confirm the right to equality, freedom, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all human persons who were to live in the new nation. But in Article 1, Section 2 of the same Constitution, a racialized double standard was instituted from the outset by defining a slave as three-fifths of a whole free person, for the manifest purpose of official representation in Congress and the Electoral College. Slaves had been imported into the US from Africa and the trade had not ceased. Article 1 thus defined African Americans and human persons of African descent as less-than-human, denying them the right to official representation in the new democracy (de Tocqueville, 1835-1840/2000). The latent intent of Article 1 was to legitimize slavery as a way of maintaining a cheap agricultural and mining labor population for those of White colonial stock.

The Judiciary Act of 1789 (1 Stat. 78) established the diversity jurisdiction of the nation to define foreign citizens and subjects as aliens. The Naturalization Act of 1790 (1 Stat. 103) restricted US citizenship to “free White persons” (Ancheta, 1998) – in practice, White males. In theory, therefore, America was a functioning democracy. In practice, however, it was a racialized plutocracy (Thandeka, 1999).

Translocation of the Indians. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 (4 Stat. 411) and multiple removal treaties facilitated the translocation and re-education of Native Americans through the 1950s, ostensibly to protect and ‘civilize’ them into American culture. In reality, the forced translocation of the natives facilitated more governmental land appropriation through the practices of covert genocide and legalized land fractionation for cotton-growing, these actions extending the border-frontier of the nation by millions of acres. Andrew Jackson, the 7th President of the US, had declared these removals necessary for “pecuniary advantages” (Richardson, 1908). He also considered the natives to be childlike, decadent, and rude savages.  Continue reading “Chapter 3: Building the new empire”

Chapter 3: Racism in the United States / The American dilemma


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness (Preamble).

Racism has existed in the US since the birth of the nation in 1776, despite having been founded on the egalitarian value principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence (National Archives, 2016), the Preamble to which can be found above. Racism, defined as a “system of cultural, institutional, and personal values, beliefs, and actions in which individuals or groups are . . . [disadvantaged] based on ethnic or racial characteristics” (Tinsley-Jones, 2005), has long been considered the hallmark of US history, because the construct of race[1] both was and still is the fundamental determinant of sociopolitical ordering in the nation (Essandoh, 1996; Omi & Winant, 1994). Racialized sociopolitical ordering affected and continues to affect without abatement the legal, natural, political, psychological, and social rights of human persons in America (Miller & Garran, 2007; Omi & Winant, 1994). It also affects their labor market positioning and personal identity.

Right from the outset as a nation, the US involved itself in the active organization, interpretation, and management of race, and it did this for two reasons. First, to compare, contrast, and control the ‘different’ or ‘unknown’ other in relation to the Anglo-Saxon norm as the ideal of a human person. Second, to attempt to establish a ‘pure’ or ‘real American’ race by reducing or eliminating the ‘undesirable other’ as much as possible and this in a legal manner.  Continue reading “Chapter 3: Racism in the United States / The American dilemma”

Chapter 2: Korematsu revisited


Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one cannot stay silent (Davoine / Gaudilliére).[1]

In 1944, the Supreme Court of the US (SCOTUS) ruled by a 6-3 decision in the case of Fred Korematsu v. United States (323 U.S. 214) that the Executive Order 9066 (The White House, 1942) signed two years before by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the 32nd President of the nation, was constitutional. The Order had cleared the way for American citizens with dual nationality from countries of concern to be banned from areas deemed critical to national security and to be interned in government-run concentration camps across the US. These countries of concern were Germany, Italy, and Japan; the designated critical areas stretched from Washington to the south of Arizona.

Tens of thousands of dual-nationality American citizens and LPRs were interned as a result of the implementation of Executive Order 9066. Some people were held for brief time periods; others were held for several years after the end of World War II (WWII). Fred Korematsu, an American of Japanese ancestry, had been convicted for refusing to obey the military order to leave his home and report to the ‘relocation camp’ upon implementation of the order. This conviction was upheld at the time.  Continue reading “Chapter 2: Korematsu revisited”

Chapter 1: In the name of God / The imperial presidency

(Credit: Getty Images)

In the Name of God

Look how they love one another (Tertullian).

Christians of all denominations across the US acted no different than their non-Christian counterparts throughout the entire process that was both unfolding and continues to unfold in relation to Protecting the Nation. They have done this despite their calling to manifest a very different kind of behavior by virtue of their professed faith and belief in God.

On the one hand, conservative Christians, in particular those on the extreme right, Catholics included, who had considered President Trump to be a postmodern-day King Cyrus II (the Great;[1] e.g., G. L., personal communication at A House of Prayer) or King Constantine I[2] (e.g.,, 2016; Voris, 2016) upon his election – namely, that he was ‘sent by God’ to save both the nation and the world from its ever-increasing descent into postmodern-era paganism and violence, including the barbaric terroristic violence of the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL) – stomped and hurled insults at their more moderate and liberal brethren on social media and elsewhere, with a fervor and zeal that would have put the Old Testament high priest, Phinehas, to shame. More often than not, these insults tended to end with the yelled exhortations to “PRAY!” and “STAY STRONG, Christians!” – combined with several requests to the administrators of the relevant social media platforms to censor or block those who disagreed with them in a manner quite different from that of a snowflake.[3]

On the other hand, liberal Christians, in particular those on the extreme left, hurled verbal abuse online, and at times even physical abuse in offline venues, at their more moderate and conservative counterparts with no less fervor, zeal, and versatility. Strings of profanities and vulgarities in the name of God abounded, even though some in the conservative camp engaged in the same behaviors. Civil resistance protests grew in urban areas across the nation and in more than a few cases, riots were incited on purpose to attempt to create a state of anarchy, with multiple instances of physical violence being the result.  Continue reading “Chapter 1: In the name of God / The imperial presidency”