Racism, Economics and How Media Enabled Trump's Victory

-A +A
0

CBS's Leslie Moonves said Trump was good for business

[Speaking Truth To Power]

So a xenophobic, racist sexist who bragged about grabbing women "“by their pussy”" has just been elected president —behind 53 percent of the White female vote.

Apparently, racism is a White American team sport that trumps sexism. Now that this bigoted buffoon has been elected president, those who created this monster and caused this debacle are pointing fingers at everyone except themselves. The mainstream media and the Democratic Party are the primary culprits here.

Media enabled this monster with their constant coverage of Trump, which signified legitimacy in the minds of many Americans.

They covered everything he did. By contrast, media hardly covered Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders— even though his campaign events were often more packed with people than that of anyone else running. But Senator Sanders’' message of economic equality is not one the corporate media is interested in hearing.

The Democratic Party’'s behavior was less than democratic when it undermined the Sanders campaign— which had sparked youthful enthusiasm, among other things; instead, the coronation of a seriously flawed candidate occurred.

Party leaders were acting as if Secretary Clinton was the presidential candidate way before any primary vote was taken. The conduct of the Democratic Party leadership is unforgivable.

Democratic voters must now purge some of these people in future primaries. It must now be demanded that Senator Sanders and Senator Elizabeth Warren become the voices of the party and quickly promote new young latented leaders.

Now, since Tuesday, there is a school of thought, among some White academia, which argues that those who voted for Trump did so largely because of economic insecurity, and that racism played only a minor role.

What these folks seem to forget is that American economics, from nearly the beginning, has been joined to the hip with racism and White supremacy. History tells us this.

For one thing, the enslavement of Africans for economic profit was justified by racist ideology that held them as lesser human beings if not beasts.

We also know that several of America’'s race riots happened at times of economic distress. For example, the racial upheaval of the 1919’s “Red Summer,” where upwards of 300 Black people were lynched and killed in several cities, was sparked when existing racial tensions were mixed with the period'’s financial instability. At that time, many Whites felt Blacks were the cause of them not having jobs, because of those Blacks who were then migrating from the South.

For generations, whenever Whites felt financial distress they frequently blamed Blacks, not the crooked capitalist economic system, for their problems.

The driving force behind the 1921 mass murder of Blacks and the bombing and burning of Tulsa, Oklahoma, known as “Black Wall Street,” was the jealousy of those Whites who resented the economic success of Tulsa’s Black community. After all, these White people had been taught they were superior to these Blacks— who were financially flourishing while they were struggling.

The need of White people to scapegoat Black people —and nowadays, the Mexicans, Muslims and such— whenever economic hardship is upon the nation is not new.

Economic elites like this; because by blaming these "“others:” for America'’s financial problems, instead of the elites themselves, that racist divisiveness maintains the economic status quo. Also, historically, many labor unions— like the AFL— fought against unifying with African-Americans.

Several historians have made the point that in the years after the infamous 1676 Bacon’s Rebellion —where poor White indentured servants and Black slaves, in Virginia, engaged in armed insurrection against the Virginia government— that America'’s elites decided racial division had to be rigorously legislated and enforced.

For America’'s economic elites, any future coalition between poor Whites and Blacks had to be discouraged if America’'s unequal economic system was to be maintained.

As a consequence poor Whites were indoctrinated with the poison of their supposed superiority, because of White skin. Ever since then, poor and working-class Whites have been the impediment to real economic change in America.

Racism and White supremacy, at its core, was always about protecting economic inequality.

Therefore, the notion that Tuesday's ’vote had to do with just economics and not racism shows a lack of understanding about the essential interplay between American economics and racism.

Tuesday's vote was a perverse manifestation of the economic anxiety and White supremacist thoughts of a vast segment of White America.

For centuries, racism has been the central tactic used to created division between working-class Whites and Blacks.

Today, this division also includes these “"others”" that Trump attacked every chance he got. This is why he smeared Mexicans, calling them murderers, rapists and drug dealers— while promising to “build the wall” to keep them out.

The same holds true for his slanderous attacks against Muslims, especially, when he vowed to ban all Muslims.

African-Americans should also take note of the so-called “progressive” Whites, many of whom will not suffer the brunt of a Donald Trump presidency— like Black people will —so, they have the luxury of being idealistically self-righteous in defending their “protest vote” stance about not being able to vote for the “lesser of two evils.”

Let'’s be clear here: these folks will be safe and sound in their communities when racist police, emboldened by the presence of a Trump White House --once dismissed as fantasy-- decide that it will be open season on Black people in the streets.

Let’'s talk further about the majority of White women who just voted for this sexist.

What are we to make of the fact that 53 percent of White women decided a sexist who thinks nothing of denigrating and assaulting women was a more acceptable choice than electing the nation'’s first female president, who is also White?

The excuse that Secretary Hillary Clinton was untrustworthy—any more so than this foul-mouthed serial liar— just won'’t cut it. Neither will any talk about e-mails.

Many of these White women have daughters and granddaughters. Have they really considered the message they have just sent with their votes?

When their daughters and granddaughters face sexual assault and rape will they reflect on their vote? How can White women now chastise a young man for sexist behavior when a majority of them just voted in a president who bragged about grabbing women “by the pussy?”

Another reason we will now have this racist opportunist in the White House is the conduct of the craven corporate media—, not just Fox News, but even NBC who made Trump a reality television star.

These networks gave this jackass wall-to-wall coverage and legitimized him to millions of ignorant Americans who became star struck by the mythology behind the man. Because many saw him daily on T.V. they assumed that he must be doing great things.

Let’'s remember what CBS CEO Leslie Moonves said earlier this year about their constant coverage of Donald Trump "It may not be good for America, but its damn good for CBS. … [T]he money’s rolling in … [T]his is going to be a very good year for us. It’s a terrible thing to say, but bring it on, Donald. Go ahead. Keep going."

The great irony here of course is conservatives and Republicans are constantly complaining about some “liberal media” slant against them.

But their new “champion” is a man whose ascension was made possible by those media entities, like CBS and NBC, who Republicans label as the “liberal media.”

Republicans are probably secretly thanking these same networks for their invaluable help in electing Trump.

Also Check Out...

CONGRESSWOMAN NORTON WILL
A WILLY WONKA STORY, LOCAL
ATTORNEY GENERAL JAMES CONDEMNS
STATE LAWMAKERS ACROSS AMERICA
Disabled Persons Rights Supported
Local Brooklyn Reggae Artist And