The Republican Party and the Democratic Party take different approaches to talking about race and racism. While politicians in the Republican Party have used coded language or “dog whistles” to stoke racial division, politicians in the Democratic Party either avoid talking about race in favor of talking about class issues or talk about race as a matter of white over nonwhite conflict. Each of these approaches have had difficulty resonating with a broad multiracial coalition of voters needed for electoral success. Berkeley Law Professor Ian Haney López has an alternative approach to messaging around race that could resonate with most Americans: Race-class fusion politics. In this episode, Talk Policy to Me Reporter Noah Cole speaks with Ian Haney López (Author of 2019’s “Merge Left: Fusing Race and Class, Winning Elections, and Saving America”) about the race-class fusion approach to building a multiracial coalition for elections. Noah and Professor Lopez discuss the historical precedent for the approach, the focus groups that demonstrate the effectiveness of the approach, and criticisms of the approach.
References
Can Democracy (and the Democratic Party) Survive Racism as a Strategy?– – Ian Haney Lopez Medium Article
Merge Left– Ian Haney López
Dog Whistle Politics – Ian Haney López
https://projectjuntos.us/ – Fusion politics messaging focus group findings
https://www.poorpeoplescampaign.org/ – Poor people’s campaign
https://peoplesaction.org/ People’s action
https://race-class-academy.com/ Race-Class Academy resources for learning about race-class fusion politics
Audio credits
AOC Demolishes Lauren Boebert’s Welfare Hypocrisy– The Young Turks (Youtube)
Ron DeSantis slams critical race theory as ‘poison’– Fox News (YouTube)
The First Presidential Debate: Hillary Clinton And Donald Trump (Full Debate) | NBC News NBC News (Youtube)
Poor People’s Campaign asks America to face the injustices keeping millions in poverty PBS Newshour (Youtube)
George Goehl: If Dems Don’t Embrace Populism They Will Be Destroyed People’s Action (Youtube)
Transcript
Rep. Lauren Boebert: [00:00:00] We’re here to tell government we don’t want your benefits. We don’t want your welfare, don’t come
Rep. Lauren Boebert: [00:00:07] knocking on my door with your faulty TLT. You leave us the hell alone.
Gov. Ron Desantis: [00:00:12] Spending tax dollars to teach kids that America is a rotten place is absolutely unacceptable.
Donald Trump: [00:00:19] We need law and order in our country. We have a situation where we have our inner cities, African-Americans, Hispanics who are living in hell because it’s so dangerous.
Noah: [00:00:41] What you just heard were a few examples of dog whistle politics coming from prominent members of today’s Republican Party.
Amy: [00:00:47] A dog whistle is coded message communicated through words or phrases commonly understood by a particular group of people, but not by others. So when a politician uses a dog whistle in their messaging, they’re usually promoting a racist belief without using explicitly racist language.
Noah: [00:01:02] Dog whistles aren’t only used by members of the Republican Party. They can be tied to Bill Clinton’s rhetoric in the 1990s to end welfare quote as a way of life. And they’re still used by some members of the Democratic Party today. But since the rise of Trumpism, dog whistles in the GOP have taken a new form that threatens to undermine U.S. democracy. Think about language that criticizes critical race theory, promotes anti-immigrant sentiment, and props up other xenophobic policies.
Amy: [00:01:29] Our guests on the podcast today is Ian Haney Lopez, a Berkeley Law School professor, scholar of critical race theory and author who wrote the 2013 book Dog Whistle Politics, Strategic Racism, Fake Populism and the Dividing of America.
Noah: [00:01:42] But today’s episode isn’t necessarily focused on defining dog whistles. Its focus on a potential path forward that the Democratic Party can take to combat dog whistles. It’s a part of an approach that Lopez calls race class fusion politics. In his 2019 book, Mirch Left, Lopez outlines how Democrats can adopt race and class messaging to win elections and defeat the anti-democratic right. His most recent December 2021 medium essay. Can democracy and the Democratic Party survive racism as a strategy? An argument for race, class views and politics? Further discusses this approach.
Amy: [00:02:16] So what is race classification politics? Will Democrats adopt this approach to talking about race and racism on the campaign trail in 2022? How do fusion politics work in practice, and what are the critiques of this approach?
Noah: [00:02:28] Today we’re talking race class fusion politics, a path forward for building a multiracial coalition for U.S. democracy.
Ian Haney Lopez: [00:02:44] OK, so quick time, he’s got a new audio recording going.
Noah: [00:02:48] All right, so why don’t we begin?
Ian Haney Lopez: [00:02:51] So here’s where we are. We are a multiracial country. In fact, the Democratic Party is a multiracial party. In fact, when you look at the demographics of the country, when you look at the demographics of the party, how do we lean into this multiracial identity? How do we turn it into a strength rather than the divide that is keeping democracy on a forward path? The key is to change our paradigm about racism.
Noah: [00:03:32] To define race, class fusion politics, you have to start with an understanding of how issues of race have traditionally been discussed by politicians in the U.S.. Professor Lopez posits that the Democratic Party is made up of two main factions that discuss race very differently. The first faction of the party discusses racism as an issue of white over nonwhite conflict. He calls this the race, like the second faction avoids discussing race altogether in favor of highlighting class based conflict. He calls this faction the colorblind one race class. Fusion politics are meant to offer an alternative messaging and policy approach to discussing racism. This is in part to unite these two factions with the goal of building a broader coalition, which explains why Professor Lopez began our conversation by talking about a shift in the paradigm in how we talk about race and racism.
Ian Haney Lopez: [00:04:24] What is the shift, then we call this race class, fusion politics, race, hyphen class. And the idea is to articulate. A critique. And also a vision in which we recognize that our fates are linked across race lines, that yes, we’re different on the basis of race. We have different cultures and traditions and experiences, but all of us are trying our best to take care of our families and also to contribute to our communities and build our society. And that the danger doesn’t come from people of different colors or different religions or sexualities, different immigration status. The danger comes from powerful elites who cynically and intentionally. Stoke, social strife so that while we’re busy fighting each other. They can more easily rig the rules of government and the economy to work for them. But the danger in our lives come from powerful people engaging in divide and conquer politics and that the only way forward. Is to see the strategy of divide and conquer and to respond with an ethos of unite and build unite, especially across the lines of division being actively promoted by the Right Unite, especially across lines of race, but also of gender and sexual orientation. Religion, immigration status.
Noah: [00:06:02] Although Race Class Fusion is a relatively new term coined by Professor Lopez, there is precedent for campaigns and movements of the past in the U.S. that have taken a race class fusion approach to politics. Here’s Professor Lopez with more on the historical examples of race class fusion politics.
Ian Haney Lopez: [00:06:18] Calling it race class fusion politics is a way to connect it with some of the most radical traditions in the United States. The tradition of fusion politics immediately in the wake of the Civil War, when newly emancipated African-Americans worked with the white working class in the South, who had been not enslaved but impoverished by slavery, worked with them, collaborated with them, not because they were best friends, but because they needed to build power with each other to stand up against the plantation class. It harkens back to the insights of Martin Luther King in the Poor People’s Campaign, the idea that you could not pursue racial equality without pursuing significant reform of capitalism. And simultaneously, you could not reform capitalism. You could not make capitalism work for the majority if you didn’t simultaneously address racism, racial fear and division. This is race class fusion politics. A good example of where race class fusion politics could have helped Democrats comes in the recent Virginia race in which the Republican candidate revived his candidacy and. Ultimately, we’re here again,
Noah: [00:07:42] what Professor Lopez is explaining is a 2021 Virginia governor’s race during the campaign. The Republican candidate tied the concept of critical race theory to Democratic government overreach in public schools, which was a claim that aimed to stoke racial fear when the Democratic candidate was forced to respond to these claims. He relied on a pivot toward discussing economic issues. Professor Lopez says this was a mistake and an example of the limits of the colorblind love strategy. The Republican candidate will go on to win the election. Here’s Professor Lopez talking about how the Democratic candidate could have been more successful had he adopted a race class fusion approach to talking about critical race theory and public education during the election.
Ian Haney Lopez: [00:08:28] What he should have said is the Republicans are once again trying to get you to fear your neighbor of a different color when the truth is look at who the Republican candidate is. He’s a hedge fund millionaire who’s spending his millions to take control of government. Who do you think he’s going to rule on behalf of? You. This guy is a multimillionaire. Friends with billionaires who wants your vote and to get it. He’s so cynical, so anti-social, so anti-democratic that he’ll promote lie so that we turn on each other. Reject the lies. Build power with people across division. That’s the only way you’re going to be able to take care of your family and contribute to your community. And I don’t care whether you’re white or black. A recent immigrant, African-American, Asian-American, I don’t care what community you’re affiliated with. The truth is division. Anti-Black racism is the biggest single threat in American politics to your family. White, black or brown? If you don’t reject that division, you’re going to hand power to the billionaire class. And that’s who the Republican candidate represents. That’s a race class fusion message.
Noah: [00:09:50] It was helpful for Professor Lopez to both explain the historical tradition of fusion politics in the U.S. and to provide an example of how it could have been used in a more recent campaign. But our discussion of race class fusion politics to this point still seemed a bit abstract. If pollsters, news pundits and political strategists have been trying to find an approach to discussing race in a way that resonates with the masses. Who’s to say that fusion politics is the best approach? And if it is the best approach? What makes it so effective? Luckily, race class fusion politics messaging has been tested among focus groups, and the results are promising.
Ian Haney Lopez: [00:10:30] Let me add that in the summer of 2020, I tested racial justice messages. I tested a sort of a traditional race forward. There’s been an explosion of hate, bigotry and xenophobia type message. I also tested a message for criminal justice reform that said, we’re all in this together. Some politicians describe communities as basically criminal, then invest mainly in prisons and police. It seems like a strategy for them to stoke fear and to divide us when we reject these lies. Vote out those politicians, then we can have more jobs and more schools, a better life for all of our communities. That message did better than denouncing the white race as a message. That message was the most popular message among African-Americans. The most popular message among Latinos, and also in this is really stunning. That message for criminal justice reform was more convincing to white voters than a message of dog whistle racial fear. And this is stunning because. White voters have been bombarded for 60 years with a message of racial fear, especially around crime and African-Americans. And yet the first time they hear a message that says. That’s all a lie. And if you believe the lie about dangerous African-Americans and you keep voting for more police and more prisons, your own community is going to lose. Reject the lies, build power with people of color to take care of your family. The first time white voters hear that message. They find it more convincing than a dog whistle racial fear message. All right, so this race class fusion approach it’s power comes because the analysis helps us see clearly what has happened to us. And its power comes because when we translate that into a political message, it’s convincing to people of color, to African-Americans, to Latinos, to Asian-Americans and to white voters. And why is it convincing? Because it has the power of truth when we name it, when we say we’re being pushed to hate each other by greedy elites who laugh all the way to the bank? People say, yeah, that’s right. Yeah, I can see that I hadn’t thought about it that way, but it does help me understand the two big things happening in my life. Economic hardship and risk and struggle. And race relations, race, hatred, race, violence that is worse than I’ve ever seen in my life. It connects those to the racism is so bad right now because billionaires are promoting it. And when we reject the lies, when we reach across lines of racial division. Then and only then. Can we have enough political power to protect ourselves, to protect ourselves against state violence directed at communities of color, to protect ourselves against a government in an economy run for the corporations run by and for the corporations?
Noah: [00:13:44] Professor Lopez, my understanding of a race class fusion approach and how it’s used is that we should be calling out politicians for using racism as a tactic, but not necessarily saying that they themselves as politicians are racists. So it involves pointing to the tactic being racist. But we’re supposed to counter that message by saying that the person in power is trying to divide us through that tactic. And so you come up with an alternative message around unity in order to bring more people into the coalition. This message and this approach is obviously really compelling, which is evident from both the focus group findings and the historical precedent. But one thing I’m really struggling with is I feel that folks in my generation have been actively encouraged to call out racism directly if we were having this conversation almost two years ago during the summer of 2020. I’m not sure how well received race class fusion messaging would have been because of the renewed interest at the time in explicitly calling out racism as a result of the pandemic. George Floyd’s murder and the subsequent uprisings. You’re suggesting a paradigm shift in how we talk about racism that I really think a lot of students at Berkeley, myself included, would struggle with because of how much we’ve been encouraged to bring explicit language around race and racial equity to the center of public policy. So what do you say to folks who might be sympathetic to this new paradigm of race class fusion politics, but are also struggling with it because it seems to run in conflict with the race forward framework that I would say is more popular among the average student at Berkeley.
Ian Haney Lopez: [00:15:21] I think many people who are deeply concerned with racial justice for communities of color hear race class and worry that it is an attempt to build solidarity with whites. By suppressing attention to racial justice and I want to break those apart, is race class an attempt to build solidarity with whites? Absolutely. Absolutely. And why? Because whites continue to hold the vast bulk of power in our society and we cannot save ourselves. We cannot save democracy if whites and people in color are in battle with each other. But is this an effort to build solidarity with whites precisely by pushing the concerns of communities of color to the back burner by suppressing attention to race and racism? Just the opposite. Race class fusion politics is an effort to build solidarity with white folks and indeed with all sorts of people of color who don’t want to see themselves primarily through a lens of racism, of white supremacy, of systemic racism, to build solidarity with all of those folks by saying. I don’t care how you position yourself in society. The single biggest threat in your life is racism against black and brown and Asian people. It really is politically the biggest threat in all of our lives. If you are driven first and foremost by racial justice for communities of color, then you have to understand the sources of violence against us. And understanding the sources of violence against us. Take heart because it implies a new way to resist, a new way to build power, including with whites, to vote out those dog whistle racially demagogic politicians and to put into office political leaders who understand that their ability to win elections depends on a multiracial coalition committed to racial equity for communities of color. As a policy matter, that means regulating capitalism, so that in fact, it works for the majority creating safe places to work, empowering workers back in unions. It means protecting the environment, averting climate collapse, ensuring that to the best we can, we protect a climate and ecology in which all of us and the planet can thrive. It means repairing the harms of unjust social hierarchies that have been done over centuries and that have been actively worsened over the most recent decades. And those hierarchies include racism. They include sexism, homophobia, transphobia, religious bigotry. Social solidarity is the prerequisite for a democracy to survive. But social solidarity has to be actively fostered, and that requires repair of social injustices of deep rooted social injustices. It requires racial equity.
Noah: [00:18:56] Before the end of the interview, I had to ask Professor Lopez one more question about his optimism when it comes to this analysis. Professor Lopez, what gives you hope doing this research?
Ian Haney Lopez: [00:19:09] In some ways, a race class fusion politics is hopeful. Because it articulates a vision in which. We care for each other. We have a sense of linked fate. We build a future society in which. We’re curious about differences, we learn about differences. Our children are welcome, are secure, are celebrated, no matter who they are, what they bring with them. A society in which there’s a realistic possibility of earning enough to be safe, to have sheltered, have health care, to have an education that allows oneself to articulate one’s vision of a good life and then to pursue it. It’s a very positive vision. And the hope is not just in the vision. The hope is in. The very success of a race class fusion message. This is the single most compelling vision for most Americans right now. That’s really hopeful. I think what that means for the majority of us is we want that the majority of us want a society of social equality of racial equality and one in which capitalism is regulated and fostered in a manner that makes it possible for the vast majority to thrive. That’s what we want. Now we have to push the Democratic Party to embrace that ideal to.
Noah: [00:20:49] A race class fusion approach is being used in movements and campaigns of today. One example of race class for use in politics in practice is in Reverend William Barber’s New Poor People’s Movement, an anti-poverty campaign inspired by Dr. King’s 1960s Poor People’s Movement.
Rev. William Barber: [00:21:06] We are saying that there are five interlocking injustices that America has to face because it contained they continue to call policy violence that is systemic racism, particularly seen through the lens of voter suppression, where people use voter suppression to get elected. And then once they get elected, they pass policies that hurt the poor, mostly white women, children and the working poor.
Noah: [00:21:30] Another example is a messaging of George Goehle’s People’s Action, an advocacy organization focused on organizing rural areas in the northwest.
George Goehle: [00:21:39] People know somebody is taking them to the cleaners, whether that’s pharmaceutical companies, the big banks, health insurance companies and honestly, like most Democrats, failed to name the villain in this story. And everybody talks about narrative these days. While narratives need villains and heroes and there are villains in the story, these are true culprits of what’s wrong in the country. And if you’re not going to name them, the other side is going to name them for you. And they will name immigrants, people of color, Muslims, big government. And actually, I think most liberal voters we talked to like, I don’t trust somebody that’s not going to say to me, Yes, somebody is responsible for this and I’m going to go fight them for you.
Noah: [00:22:15] Although it may take some time for the Democratic Party to embrace race class fusion politics messaging, it is a positive sign that movement leaders across the U.S. have used race class fusion politics to organize and build a broader, multiracial coalition. So, Amy, what did you think?
Amy: [00:22:35] You know, academically and theoretically, this makes sense. I understand the history of it. I understand the nature of how it’s playing out in today’s political arena. It’s really timely and really necessary to start speaking in this type of language and pushing for the Democratic Party to change its messaging. We’ve seen such a quick descent into identity politics since the age of Trump. It’s scary, but I’m also wondering where we go from here. The type of politicians I associate with this ideology are people like Bernie Sanders and AOC, who are lauded by many as progressive and really pushing the Democrats to a new level. And they’re also seen by many as really divisive. So I’m wondering how we bring this type of theory into practice in the mainstream?
Noah: [00:23:20] Yeah, I had this same exact question after speaking with Professor Lopez Amy, and one thing I was really happy to discover is that he has an entire race class academy, which is this 12 part video series we’ve actually linked in. The show notes that really cover the basics on how to use race class fusion politics in practice. Each video is just around two minutes long. The content is free, and it’s just really accessible for organizations, campaigns and everyday voters interested in learning more about how to use race, class, fusion politics and practice.
Amy: [00:23:51] I think that’s a really incredible start to give people an accessible way to enter into this new narrative to challenge the way that they’ve understood the messages that are coming at them in an incredible, rapid and really divisive manner. You know, a lot of what we talk about on the podcast is about how we’re training the next generations of policy makers of candidates and hopefully of politicians at the highest level. And I think that this is really important to think about a new generation of the Democratic Party. And I think that this is really important to think about how we can instill this type of mentality into the messaging of these emerging politicians from the ground up.
Noah: [00:24:30] Exactly. I really couldn’t put that any better, and I’m excited about the potential for this and hope that the message continues to spread.
Amy: [00:24:45] Talk policy to me is a co-production of UC Berkeley’s Goldman School of Public Policy and the Berkeley Institute for Young Americans.
Noah: [00:24:51] are executive producers are Borrelli Reid and Sarah Swanberg.
Amy: [00:24:55] Nicole produced and edited this episode with editing assistance from Elaine and Neil Sax.
Noah: [00:25:00] The music you heard today is by Blue Dot Sessions and Pat Metheny Miller. The outside audio you heard was from the Young Turks, Fox News, NBC News, PBS NewsHour and People’s Action.
Amy: [00:25:11] I’m Amy Benzinga. I’m Noah Cole. Catch next time.
