OPINION: Saying ‘blacks’ can succeed without ‘special favors’ is actually racist, according to an Auburn professor
President Donald Trump’s promise to Make America Great Again and his “appeal to nostalgia,” is rooted in, you guessed it, racism and sexism.
So says Auburn University Professor Spencer Goidel, writing in The Conversation.
Goidel (pictured) says past candidates, like President Ronald Reagan, have appealed to nostalgia. He also notes Trump is appealing to his first term in office, with statements like “rebuild the greatest economy in history,” on his campaign website.
But Goidel sees something more sinister in what Trump is doing, as academics regularly do. He is using nostalgia as a “dog whistle.”
“Trump’s appeal isn’t just about a better economic past or a more stable society,” the scholar writes. “It serves as an evocation of a time in America when women and minorities had less power.”
The professor believes “feelings of collective nostalgia in a country with an unjust past are inextricably tied to racism and hostile sexism,” according to a May 2024 paper he co-authored.
But one example of “racism” is believing black Americans do not need extra help to succeed.
You might note that saying black Americans can succeed without special help is not racist – in fact, it acknowledges that black Americans have free will and agency. Viewing black people as equally capable to other racial groups cannot be racist, as simple logic tells us.
But that is not how liberal college professors view the world.
“Analyses show that those people with more nostalgia are 23% more likely than those with less nostalgia to agree with the following racist statement: ‘Irish, Italian, Jewish and many other minorities overcame prejudice and worked their way up. Blacks should do the same without any special favors,’” Goidel wrote for The Conversation, citing his study.
MORE: Asian women like white men due to racism, professors say
This essay in Conversation is sadly one of a number of ideas put forth by academics in recent years that suggest standard Republican talking points, like hiring more cops, is a “dog whistle,” or a covert way to push racism.
I suppose the response from leftist professors would be – exactly, Republicans are racist in everything they do.
For example, Arizona State University historian Calvin Schermerhorn suggested, also in The Conversation, that putting more cops on the streets was “dog whistling,” by Vivek Ramaswamy (who is Indian) during a Republican primary debate.
Schermerhorn also criticized South Carolina Senator Tim Scott, who is black, because he “didn’t deviate from the conservative script that government aid hurts families and vowed to ‘break the backs of the teachers’ unions.’”
Note Schermerhorn didn’t provide data on the benefits of welfare or discuss the potential pros and cons of teachers unions being in charge of public schools. The reader is to simply accept the professor’s assertion that Scott was using coded language.
But again, logic here helps. If everyone hears the “dog whistle” and can break the “code,” is it really coded?
Nevertheless, we can expect more fine-tuned ears in academia hearing racism and sexism where it doesn’t exist.
In fact, it has already begun with scholars managing expectations for Vice President Kamala Harris and blaming her “electability” concerns on “racism” and “sexism.”
The professors said black women are held to a different standard than other candidates. But wait, Spencer Goidel said holding black people to the same standard is also racist.
It makes you wonder if the higher ed habit of calling everything racist lacks any basis in truth, logic, and consistency.
MORE: 72 things higher ed declared racist in 2023
IMAGE: Auburn University
Please join the conversation about our stories on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Reddit, MeWe, Rumble, Gab, Minds and Gettr.