The thing is – no, that’s not tar-and-feathers racism – but in the end, it is a complaint that the game is no longer stacked in our favor. The economy isn’t a zero-sum game, but of course white people were better off when we had a more privileged position. And moving back in that direction is technically an option; that’s the (previously) unspoken impulse behind a lot of conservative politics. I mean, the clue is in the name.
(You can make this argument substituting “Americans” or “Westerners” for “white people”, but personally I think that’s dodging the uncomfortable heart of the matter)
White people were better off when black people weren’t allowed to do our jobs. America was better off when its competitors were bombed-out ruins and feudal despairscapes. It might come as a surprise to talk radio listeners, but no one ever covered up those facts; we just didn’t mention them because we thought we’d agreed not to go down that route. In hindsight, that tiptoeing probably went too far, because some Brexiters and Trumpkins now believe they’ve discovered a brilliant, untried new idea with their exceptionalism.
So, even if Trumpism were just about economic grievances, that wouldn’t mean it wasn’t about [something that could accurately be called] racism. But in any case, the point the Vox article makes (which btw I totally invented linking to) is that the people with title to those grievances aren’t the ones driving Trump rallies.
It makes sense. If you’re a steelworker, you want your Chinese counterpart to get paid the same as you, in terms of both competition and not being a dick; Trump’s not offering you much, even if you’re out of work. But if you’re a white business owner who doesn’t like his low-paid Latino employees to see his house, then you know exactly what racial biases do for your lifestyle. That’s the sort of person I can really understand liking Trump.
