SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
anti immigrant
The Election Does Not Redeem Donald Trump’s Moral Indecency
We can and must keep standing against his cruelty.
Nov 20, 2024
Tens of millions of Americans voted against Donald Trump and the cruelty he celebrates. None of us have to see the election as a vindication of his contempt for democracy, basic decency, and anyone who disagrees with him. In our constitutional democracy, there is never a final election, there is always another day, and it is indisputably legitimate to speak up and criticize those in elected office, including the president.
Today, we doubt these basic truths because we know Trump seeks to undo them. He has made clear that he wants to rule as an American Putin. That is certainly his goal, and we cannot pretend otherwise. But we need not accept this or conclude it is inevitable. There is no guarantee he succeeds, and we must use all legal and peaceful means available to us in order to stand in his way and to insist on the enduring primacy of our democratic values and our constitutional system.
The fact that most voters preferred Trump does not mean what is immoral is now moral, what is obscene is now respectable.
Trump sneers at the cherished principles that truly make the United States great—the rule of law, racial equality, equality of men and women, constitutional rights like freedom of speech and due process, free and fair elections, and the notion of limits on power that make government officials public servants advancing the national interest rather than kleptocrats seeking to line their own pockets. Those who reject what Trump stands for must defend these principles and insist on the centrality of distinctions between right and wrong, even as Trump seeks to eviscerate the very notion of morality.
Consider the basic moral concepts we learned as children. Bullies are bad. Lying is wrong. You don’t insult someone else, and especially not because of how they look or where they come from. Trump embodies each and every one of these immoral traits. He is a schoolyard bully who delights in crude insults, which I will not repeat but which we have all heard so many times that we may have become desensitized to these outrages. Yet we know what he has said, and we know who he is. We know that he degrades and demeans women, immigrants, people of color, people with disabilities—indeed, anyone who is different from him and anyone who dares to disagree with him. No elementary school teacher would tolerate such behavior from a student, and we can never accept such moral failure from a person placed in a position of public trust.
Those who Trump insults, mocks, and derides are human beings, although he smears them as “vermin,” “dogs,” and “animals,” words that are obviously intended to dehumanize. Indeed, he has quite literally said that some immigrants are “not people.” He will not extend to others the basic courtesies and respect that decent people instinctively extend to co-workers, members of the community, and indeed all human beings. Trump’s goal is to mark us as second-class citizens—at best. He does not have this power unless we cede it to him or unless others, especially other government officials, defer to him. There is very little Trump can accomplish on his own and, although he feels no sense of shame, some of those he will ask to carry out his plans may. We must remind them that there is a difference between right and wrong, and that morality matters. We must remember that, even if some of us do not seem to be the initial targets of Trump’s wrath, we must stand with those who are most vulnerable, recognizing that when cruelty singles out one group, we do not know where it will end.
We have lived with all of this for nearly a decade, and we are tired. We are sick of Trump’s bullying, his lack of decency, his preening egotism and constant demand for adulation. We hoped that all of this could be placed in our past. Instead, it continues to be our reality. Some will ask us to reconcile with this, to accept it. We need not do either. This is what it means to be free. We certainly should not adopt Trump’s own tactics. We must refuse to embrace the politics of personal insults, bullying, and hatred. Yet we must continue to insist it is wrong when Trump does these things, and that, even though it has now become normal, making cruelty normal is a rejection of our most fundamental principles that we can never accept. Trump won an election—an election where nearly half of voters rejected his tired, blustering act. The fact that most voters preferred Trump does not mean what is immoral is now moral, what is obscene is now respectable. The celebration of disrespect and indecency will never be right. No election can change that.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Today’s Toxic Political Rhetoric Draws from a Well of Racism in Our Media System
The United States needs new public media policies to redress a history of racism and xenophobia.
Nov 03, 2024
In communities across the nation, millions of immigrants are living in harmony with native-born residents, with neighbors, coworkers, and friends collectively caring for each other. Yet we rarely see those stories uplifted on the nightly news or on the front pages of local newspapers; those stories never go viral on social-media platforms. That’s because these kinds of stories don’t help the politically powerful in our country, and they don’t boost the profits of corporate media empires.
Instead we see, on repeat, the lie that noncitizen immigrants are voting in droves. People with millions of followers—like Elon Musk—are routinely spreading this lie on social media.
We see hateful rhetoric about immigrants of color. During a Univision town hall last month, Donald Trump re-upped the notorious lie about Springfield, Ohio’s Haitian community.
Our nation has yet to reckon with the deadly role our media system has played in the creation and distribution of narratives that have harmed countless people, including Ohio’s Haitian community.
We see coordinated campaigns to dissuade Black and Latino voters from participating in our democracy, with baseless claims that the U.S. election might not happen, or that police will be monitoring polling stations to round up voters who lack the “proper” documentation.
The intent of this rhetoric is to scare voters of color from going to the polls, to pander to anti-immigrant sentiments, to stir up fear and hysteria, to drive voter turnout of white people who are scared about the changing demographics of this country, and to legitimize authoritarian power grabs based on lack of trust in our electoral process.
And our nation’s dominant media and tech companies are complicit in all of this.
Far-right figures, including Ohio’s junior senator, continue to spread the falsehood that Springfield’s Haitian immigrants are eating pets. Both traditional and social media have amplified this conspiracy theory—and an entire community of innocent people continues to live in fear.
Many of us understand that these are outlandish lies—yet they are resonating with people who have fallen prey to anti-Haitian, anti-Black, and xenophobic talking points that are disseminated on media outlets like Fox News or on social-media platforms. This is part of a pattern in media coverage that stretches back hundreds of years.
The nation’s earliest newspapers supported enslavement by profiting off ads promoting the sale of enslaved people and the recapture of those who fled for freedom. In the ensuing years, powerful media institutions supported lynching and racial segregation.
More recently, several newspapers apologized for their histories of supporting segregation and white supremacy. But these outlets have yet to redress the harm they’ve caused or their roles in supporting racial hierarchies. Meanwhile, local-TV newscasts dehumanize communities of color through their crime coverage, reporting that has long proven lucrativefor media conglomerates.
It’s not surprising that most people in the United States know very little about immigrants of color since the dominant narrative in corporate media portrays immigrants as criminals who are dangerous invaders.
The sober truth is that racism is profitable for social and traditional media companies alike. If-it-bleeds-it-leads coverage and “copaganda” serve as strategies to attract larger audiences. And powerful media figures are happy to look the other way if it means this incendiary rhetoric will help their companies’ bottom lines. Former CBS chairman and CEO Les Moonves admitted this when discussing the 2016 Trump campaign at an investor conference:
“Who would have thought that this circus would come to town?” said Moonves. “But, you know, it may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS. The money’s rolling in.” Never mind the harmful impacts that Trump’s white-nationalist screeds were having on Black and Brown people across the country.
Many media executives share this sentiment, which helps explain why so little coverage illustrates the humanity of people who are forced to leave their homes and loved ones to escape violence and political instability stemming from histories of colonialism, and environmental destruction resulting from climate change. It explains why there are so few stories on people who are seeking employment and a better life for their families.
Even less coverage focuses on how U.S. foreign policy has economically, politically, and socially destabilized countries in the Americas like Haiti—and prompted thousands to flee their homelands. Despite our country’s long history of interventionist policies in Haiti—which has included an occupation and the support of deadly dictatorships—the public knows very little about the country, and the people we are told to fear.
“Haiti has been and continues to be the main laboratory for U.S. imperial machinations in the region and throughout the world,” University of British Columbia Professor Jemima Pierre wrote last year.
University of Toledo Professor Ayendy Bonifacio’s article “Tracing the Anti-Haitianism Behind the Springfield Scapegoating” explains that when Haitians overthrew their colonial enslavers to form the world’s first Black republic in 1804, it struck “fear into the hearts of slaveholders and their political allies, who wielded considerable influence over the nation’s major newspapers.”
Bonifacio notes that “during and after the Haitian Revolution, the U.S. press frequently reported on the supposed barbarism and primitiveness of Haiti and its people. Indeed, stories have circulated about Haitians eating animals and practicing cannibalism since the country’s founding.”
This anti-Haitian—and anti-Black—rhetoric has extended to other communities of color. In recent years, the Asian American Pacific Islander community has suffered from an increasein xenophobic news coverage that has criminalized both immigrants and U.S.-born residents. Reporting that fomented anti-Asian hate played a significant role in the adoption of racist policies such as the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the incarceration of Japanese Americans during World War II. The Los Angeles Timesand The Seattle Times issued apologiesover the past decade for supporting the imprisonment of Japanese Americans.
Meanwhile, hateful government policies and the media coverage that propped them up resulted in the deportation of more than 1 million Mexicans and Mexican Americans in the early 1930s—and then again in a 1954 campaign with the racist name “Operation Wetback.” The latter received supportive coverage from papers like the Los Angeles Times, which acknowledged in 2020 that the publication had served as an “uncritical mouthpiece for Washington.”
Our nation has yet to reckon with the deadly role our media system has played in the creation and distribution of narratives that have harmed countless people, including Ohio’s Haitian community.
We need government policies that support the development of a new media system that redresses this history of racism and xenophobia—a system where journalism supports the realization of a multiracial democracy rather than one that undermines it.
Keep ReadingShow Less
How Communities Like Springfield, Ohio Can Push Back Against Fear and Racism
The case of Shelbyville, Tennessee is proof that when communities come together—across racial and class lines—they can challenge hate and demand real change.
Sep 27, 2024
As racial tensions escalate in Springfield, Ohio, Haitian families are facing violent threats and harassment, reflecting a wider pattern of fear and division that’s being felt across the country. This isn’t just about racism and xenophobia; it’s also about political leaders exploiting white fear to distract from systemic failures.
But there is hope. Shelbyville, Tennessee—a town with similar challenges—demonstrates how communities can transform this tide of hate into a movement for justice.
While smaller and less white than Springfield, Shelbyville shares a common profile: Both towns have faced long-standing economic hardship, spurred by the loss of manufacturing jobs. Both have also seen more recent immigrant arrivals. With this combination of economic struggle and demographic shifts, both towns have been targeted for racial scapegoating and organized white hate.
Unlike many anti-racist efforts among white people that focus on personal behavior or privilege awareness for a liberal, middle-class audience, the BCLP focused on real-world issues affecting white working-class people.
Much like how the Proud Boys and KKK descended on Springfield, white nationalists set their sights on Shelbyville five years ago. They chose the town because Somali refugee resettlement challenged their vision of a “white ethnostate.”
But instead of giving in to fear, many in Shelbyville pushed back. They organized counter events, like a pozole potluck just blocks away from the white nationalists’ rally—a peaceful, community-centered response that drew far more participants than the hate rally itself.
Similarly, many in Springfield have flocked to Haitian businesses in support, rejecting white, racist hate.
In Shelbyville, a handful of residents knew more needed to be done to confront the hate long-term, and they could not leave the fight solely to their immigrant neighbors. They needed to address the root causes of division and show white community members that their true enemies weren’t refugees or immigrants.
They started small, going door to door to alert neighbors about the hate group’s presence, identifying allies, and asking residents about their real concerns. What they found was telling—most people were far more worried about economic issues than about immigration. Residents complained about a few exploitative landlords monopolizing rental housing in the mostly low-income town.
Springfield faces similar challenges: a severe lack of affordable housing (a crisis across the nation) and politicians blaming Haitian Americans for those problems instead of tackling the real culprits—such as failed policies and exploitative landlords. Indeed, residents of Springfield have long faced a lack of adequate services across the board. One Springfield resident, interviewed by journalist Aymann Ismail, explained how he receives just $23 per month in food stamps, nowhere near enough to survive. When pressed further, many residents agreed that government neglect, not Haitian families, was responsible for their struggles.
Back in Shelbyville, the rejection of organized hate grew into something bigger—the Bedford County Listening Project (BCLP). The group adopted a “shared interest” approach, highlighting how white residents, struggling just as much as their immigrant neighbors, could benefit from joining forces to fight systemic injustices. The BCLP shows white residents that racism isn’t just morally wrong—it is a tool used by the powerful to divide them and maintain the status quo.
Unlike many anti-racist efforts among white people that focus on personal behavior or privilege awareness for a liberal, middle-class audience, the BCLP focused on real-world issues affecting white working-class people. They organized for tenant’s rights, fought to improve housing policies, and even helped elect one of their own to the city council—unseating a decades-long incumbent. They also tackled racism head-on, playing a key role in defeating an anti-refugee ordinance in 2019 and standing up to the KKK’s efforts to intimidate the town during the 2020 election.
This isn’t some story about a group of progressive activists. As their staff organizer explained, “None of them were activists prior to this. And nobody was Democrat.” Some even voted for former U.S. President Donald Trump in 2016, though most had not voted at all. What united them wasn’t ideology, but a shared desire to improve their lives and community.
One BCLP member summed it up: “That [anti-]refugee thing was doing nothing. It was just another dumb tactic” to distract from what really matters—jobs, schools, and housing.
The Shelbyville case is proof that when communities come together—across racial and class lines—they can challenge hate and demand real change. The real question is which groups will reach these communities first, those like the Bedford County Listening Project or hate groups like the Proud Boys?
The BCLP isn’t an isolated example. It’s part of a growing movement, supported by national groups like Showing Up for Racial Justice and other grassroots organizations that are working to unite predominately white communities with people of color in the fight for justice. These groups know that we’re all in this fight together, and they need our support.
As our nation encounters mounting levels of extremism and political violence, intentionally fueled by mainstream political actors, communities like Shelbyville and Springfield show us two ways forward. One succumbs to fear and division, while the other fights for solidarity and justice.
The choice is ours.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular