If Democratic Party candidate Barack Obama becomes the next President of the United States, it won't be because traditional conservatives suddenly vote for a Democrat; it will be because those who usually vote Democrat do so again and the "minority" demographic, which usually abstains from electoral politics, shows up to vote for Obama, too.
This would be an interesting development for a number of reasons. First, those same conservatives, on the outside looking in with this hypothetical, are the demographic that typically reports its ancestry to be "American" and sees itself as the heart and soul of the country. For the most part, these people reside in "red states" (meaning: states that, for years, have voted Republican) and, for as long as anyone can remember, their vote has mattered. Arguably, they are a continuation of the "Solid South" but more importantly their rejection of 1960s counterculture ushered in the era of the "conservative superstar" Ronald Reagan, followed by his straight-talking vice president and, after a quick break, the son (whose common language and Texas persona probably scored bonus points). The quick break was Bill Clinton, the first Democrat to win two terms of presidency since that happened during a war. But he was a "red state" son of the "Solid South" playing for the other team, so traditional conservatives probably saw him as an anomaly. In their view, their opponent is but a menagerie of freeloaders, homosexual metropolitans and Che-loving radicals on the coasts who, along with "minorities" - Blacks, Latinos, etc - can take power with a swing vote amidst bad economic weather or war. But all of that may be changing.
Given current trends, the traditional American conservative demographic is predicted to lose its core, white population as the U.S. majority in just 40 years 30 years. Assuming that to be true, the idea that conservatives could remain the dominant force in American society is completely unrealistic. No minority population can dictate its interests to the majority unless the majority obliges. And, because that rising majority includes the coalition of the once-jeered and overlooked, no demographic could possibly be more hated. So, it seems unlikely that conservatives will retain familiar levels of power, influence and cultural dominance; it does not matter how strong their sense of entitlement is as descendants of the nation's founders, or whether they think they are better suited to call the shots. The majority is sovereign unless it opts to relinquish that advantage.
With this in mind, one can begin to see a critical turning point ahead, changing the entire profile of American politics and, ultimately, America. Most people do not understand this, and conservatives typically deny that such a change could actually happen. But they fail to understand the demographic changes that Mr. Reagan, his vice-president and Mr. Clinton - and Congress - allowed. To what degree the conservatives are aware of these changes, they still don't "get it"; they think anyone can come to embrace conservative ideas, for example. Similar to liberals, they tend to believe race means "nothing" and is but a "social construct", and that we live in a post-racial society. But all of this wishful thinking ignores how ironclad and ethnically-consistent modern political alignment is.
This would be an interesting development for a number of reasons. First, those same conservatives, on the outside looking in with this hypothetical, are the demographic that typically reports its ancestry to be "American" and sees itself as the heart and soul of the country. For the most part, these people reside in "red states" (meaning: states that, for years, have voted Republican) and, for as long as anyone can remember, their vote has mattered. Arguably, they are a continuation of the "Solid South" but more importantly their rejection of 1960s counterculture ushered in the era of the "conservative superstar" Ronald Reagan, followed by his straight-talking vice president and, after a quick break, the son (whose common language and Texas persona probably scored bonus points). The quick break was Bill Clinton, the first Democrat to win two terms of presidency since that happened during a war. But he was a "red state" son of the "Solid South" playing for the other team, so traditional conservatives probably saw him as an anomaly. In their view, their opponent is but a menagerie of freeloaders, homosexual metropolitans and Che-loving radicals on the coasts who, along with "minorities" - Blacks, Latinos, etc - can take power with a swing vote amidst bad economic weather or war. But all of that may be changing.
Given current trends, the traditional American conservative demographic is predicted to lose its core, white population as the U.S. majority in just 40 years 30 years. Assuming that to be true, the idea that conservatives could remain the dominant force in American society is completely unrealistic. No minority population can dictate its interests to the majority unless the majority obliges. And, because that rising majority includes the coalition of the once-jeered and overlooked, no demographic could possibly be more hated. So, it seems unlikely that conservatives will retain familiar levels of power, influence and cultural dominance; it does not matter how strong their sense of entitlement is as descendants of the nation's founders, or whether they think they are better suited to call the shots. The majority is sovereign unless it opts to relinquish that advantage.
With this in mind, one can begin to see a critical turning point ahead, changing the entire profile of American politics and, ultimately, America. Most people do not understand this, and conservatives typically deny that such a change could actually happen. But they fail to understand the demographic changes that Mr. Reagan, his vice-president and Mr. Clinton - and Congress - allowed. To what degree the conservatives are aware of these changes, they still don't "get it"; they think anyone can come to embrace conservative ideas, for example. Similar to liberals, they tend to believe race means "nothing" and is but a "social construct", and that we live in a post-racial society. But all of this wishful thinking ignores how ironclad and ethnically-consistent modern political alignment is.
So, it would certainly be interesting to see what happens if a "Barack Hussein Obama" were to win the Democratic nomination. I think he actually will, given the unprecedented growth of the "minority" demographic in the U.S. and probability that Obama can mobilize it to vote by presenting himself as a representation of their power - a card the Democrats appear very willing to play. At the same time, Obama is eloquent enough shilling the usual Democrat positions that he will likely not only capture the regular Democrat vote, but get these same voters excited about the "magical darkie" who validates their anti-racist convictions. Assuming these things happen and, after a win in the primaries, Obama is just one step from the presidency, the strategy would likely be weaponized at the next stage, now to woo all "minority" voters in general and, again, those inclined to see him in sort of quasi-religious context, like a post-racial Jesus. This would expose a number of important truths to conservative voters; should Obama actually ''win'' the U.S. Presidential Election in 2008 though, it would be all the more of a reality check, because it would show the tactics prevailed on a total societal level, thus emboldening those keen to use these strategies again. In turn, those who refuse to see race as a factor in anything would probably begin to see it means everything.
Granted, most conservatives are not racist; even fewer hate people they meet in public because of their skin color or purposely mistreat such individuals. But being against somebody because they appear black and watching that same person's campaign become an expression of "change" where "minorities" on the other team take over the country to make decisions for you, are two different things. Most conservatives are not ready for this, or even willing to believe it could happen, so it would be interesting to see it happen just to see how they would respond. It will also be interesting to see how liberal Whites respond, because they seem to think that Blacks, Hispanics and other minorities are all aboard for this ride that is taking us towards anti-racism and tolerance - a multiracial-multicultural wonderland. This stop, which may or may not exist, is where the White liberals assume everyone will get off. But who said that non-white interest groups are not fighting long-standing notions of "white supremacy and "white power" just to see their own peoples take power? Indeed, nobody told the Blacks or Hispanics to forget about their ethnicities and stop focusing on their own cultural groups and communities. In fact, lib-left Whites are the very people encouraging Blacks and Latinos to rally behind their identities, and they have yet to stop encouraging such behavior.
Perhaps some historical context is necessary here as to why any of this is happening. During the Civil Rights Movement, Blacks learned to see their race as the cornerstone of identity and a platform for representation, voice and a vehicle for power. The same is true of the Latinos, and both groups became immersed in their ethnicities. It was part of realizing who they were and standing up for their people, for a fair share and to oppose discrimination. From an optimistic point of view, the "Obama election" would be viewed as the last lap of progress towards equality. But how will Latinos, Blacks and the rest of the Non-White "Other" feel about race after this trophy is attained? Will they become tyrants drunk on racial triumph? Will an anti-white alliance within this "Other" take hold? These are not easy questions to answer; it is also why the possibility of an "Obama presidency" is a very interesting development, because we would find out just how post-racial and exclusionary this era will be. Whites best pay attention; they will soon be the kid playing in somebody else's sandbox - they'd better get to know whose domain they are under and what the new rules will be.
Granted, most conservatives are not racist; even fewer hate people they meet in public because of their skin color or purposely mistreat such individuals. But being against somebody because they appear black and watching that same person's campaign become an expression of "change" where "minorities" on the other team take over the country to make decisions for you, are two different things. Most conservatives are not ready for this, or even willing to believe it could happen, so it would be interesting to see it happen just to see how they would respond. It will also be interesting to see how liberal Whites respond, because they seem to think that Blacks, Hispanics and other minorities are all aboard for this ride that is taking us towards anti-racism and tolerance - a multiracial-multicultural wonderland. This stop, which may or may not exist, is where the White liberals assume everyone will get off. But who said that non-white interest groups are not fighting long-standing notions of "white supremacy and "white power" just to see their own peoples take power? Indeed, nobody told the Blacks or Hispanics to forget about their ethnicities and stop focusing on their own cultural groups and communities. In fact, lib-left Whites are the very people encouraging Blacks and Latinos to rally behind their identities, and they have yet to stop encouraging such behavior.
Perhaps some historical context is necessary here as to why any of this is happening. During the Civil Rights Movement, Blacks learned to see their race as the cornerstone of identity and a platform for representation, voice and a vehicle for power. The same is true of the Latinos, and both groups became immersed in their ethnicities. It was part of realizing who they were and standing up for their people, for a fair share and to oppose discrimination. From an optimistic point of view, the "Obama election" would be viewed as the last lap of progress towards equality. But how will Latinos, Blacks and the rest of the Non-White "Other" feel about race after this trophy is attained? Will they become tyrants drunk on racial triumph? Will an anti-white alliance within this "Other" take hold? These are not easy questions to answer; it is also why the possibility of an "Obama presidency" is a very interesting development, because we would find out just how post-racial and exclusionary this era will be. Whites best pay attention; they will soon be the kid playing in somebody else's sandbox - they'd better get to know whose domain they are under and what the new rules will be.
