Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

cthulu2016

(10,960 posts)
25. Using language the way people use language is communicative
Fri Jun 15, 2012, 07:05 PM
Jun 2012

Nobody is simplistic enough to read "cats are smaller than dogs" as a statement that all cats are smaller than all dogs unless they are in a nit-picking mood. Since the OP states that there are many millions of white Democratic voters it is obviously not saying that all white voters vote Republican.

But all white voters who pick a party based on race are Republicans.

The designed appeal of the Republican party is to white people, and to the exclusion of other people.

In the phrase "the white party" the word white modifies the word party. It is descriptive of the Republican party as an institution.

I am not advising white people to vote for republicans. I am identifying that they do in numbers that are at odds with class and interest.

And the reason many white people vote against class interest is because they opt for perceived racial interest. Being a Republican is perceived by many, many, many white people "the white thing to do."

This fact is often not appreciated because the media does not describe the Republican party base in terms of perceived racial interest, in the way the Democratic party base is routinely described described in terms of racial self-interest.

And the reason that identification is not made in the media is because it would make the Republican party sound like a racist institution.

By obscuring the relative racial exclusivity of the Republicans we craft a false view where race is not determinative.

For instance, anyone who is more worried about the deficit today than they were in 2006 is likely to be a racist, but we treat deficit concern that arises mysteriously when the president is black as being legitimate concern about the deficit, worthy of respect as a dry policy issue.

Any all-but overtly racist institution is granted legitimacy by pretending that it is not a party built on racial identification, which it is.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

That's exactly the point. swayne Jun 2012 #1
The white MALE party. polichick Jun 2012 #2
Well, now, I think we can expand it... Scootaloo Jun 2012 #4
Add the word Xenophobe. JoePhilly Jun 2012 #8
Yes and no cthulu2016 Jun 2012 #6
yes exactly--that's also why they pretend that Dems are "girls" librechik Jun 2012 #7
I, and some others, think the party differences are CLASS, not race. There are plenty of "Whites" patrice Jun 2012 #3
I used to think the same, and there's some truth to the matter Scootaloo Jun 2012 #5
You can think that but it isn't true cthulu2016 Jun 2012 #9
So you are in favor of dividing the parties by race? patrice Jun 2012 #11
. cthulu2016 Jun 2012 #15
What is the logic of "The Republican Party is the White Party"? Not "a", "the White Party" i.e. . . patrice Jun 2012 #20
Using language the way people use language is communicative cthulu2016 Jun 2012 #25
k. "the" is still the definite article, limiting to ONE specific person/place/thing - and - "a" patrice Jun 2012 #33
Ayup, okay, so what happens if you take the white male vote out of the picture? Zalatix Jun 2012 #17
Sorry, I don't understand. White males don't suffer from economic injustice? If I care about patrice Jun 2012 #19
And the Democratic Party isn't? What about poor Whites? Are they better off as Republicans? nt patrice Jun 2012 #10
The Democratic party should become the elderly party as well aint_no_life_nowhere Jun 2012 #12
No, it's the party of hate and fear. ananda Jun 2012 #13
Some whites. Zalatix Jun 2012 #18
Which is my point. OP subject is a BROAD brush; what about poor Whites? patrice Jun 2012 #21
It is not broad brush cthulu2016 Jun 2012 #26
So don't play THEIR game. nt patrice Jun 2012 #34
Another DUer pointed out something I found very illuminating: malthaussen Jun 2012 #27
I understand, except that I think we're talking about pie here, not misery. That's the vision thing, patrice Jun 2012 #36
Ummmm Zalatix Jun 2012 #31
We don't need the majority of the White vote, but that doesn't mean that we don't need a significant patrice Jun 2012 #35
Actually, they are a "big-tent" party these days SoCalDem Jun 2012 #14
The white 1%ers and the willfully ignorant. lpbk2713 Jun 2012 #16
And race is a handy way to do that, especially with anyone who is already pissed off about economic patrice Jun 2012 #22
So very true. lpbk2713 Jun 2012 #23
And, in my real life experience, poor white males are more often paranoid rather than not. nt patrice Jun 2012 #24
This PWM sure is malthaussen Jun 2012 #28
Talking about family here, but lol anyway . . . patrice Jun 2012 #29
The Plutocracy is NOT ignorant - they create this divide by design. Zalatix Jun 2012 #32
It is also the KOOK party. michaelcobb Jun 2012 #30
White's Only Party is a better fit Son of Gob Jun 2012 #37
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Republican Party is t...»Reply #25