Okay, so I'm kind of swimming in research and ideas at this point, so forgive the following incoherent expression of ideas:
I am interested in the role of racialization in political campaigns. I am interested in this subject as a way of exploring how racial discourse occurs in popular media in coded ways, as well as in exploring the question of who has incentive to perpetuate racism. The political sphere potentially offers the most formal expression of one group gaining from the perpetuation of racism, and it has its origins in the racialization of slavery in order to align poor whites with wealthy whites rather than for wealthy whites to have to face general uprising from poor whites banding together with slaves.
This is a huge topic, and so I am going to hone in on the period of the 60s to 80s, and hopefully I'll be able to bring it into the present a little bit, though that is not where my research will focus. I am going to focus on the evolution of the Southern Strategy, and in particular I am going to focus on the role of class-race associations in its evolution.
I specifically want to explore the development of class-race associations and how that supported or undermined or transformed the Southern Strategy. The intuitive picture that is emerging (though I need to research this much more) is that coded racism was persisted within the Southern strategy by the factioning of two types of poor people: 1) the hard-working blue collar white that "
"puts into the system" (Atwater) and 2) Reagan's "welfare" queen i.e. the non-contributing poor person.
It is a very muddy issue to try and tease out the sequential order of motives and associations, so through this research paper I really want to hone in on how the political sphere transformed through the 60's and 80's a setting where race was THE issue, explicitly, to a setting where race was not allowed to be the issue, but was coded. Who were the players? What are the incentives? Who is acting consciously? Who is acting subconsciously?
I am definitely not going to be able to answer this thoroughly, that would take a book, so I am going to work hard to hone in on something that I can argue and carefully explore.
Primary Sources:
Lee Atwater interview
Statements from Nixon's campaign manager
Reagan's speeches
Probably many others, though I am worried that in trying to piece together a puzzle, that I will dilute the type of close reading that was emphasized on the midterm paper.
Secondary Sources:
The New Jim Crow (michelle alexander)
The Problem of Race in the 21st Century (Thomas Holt)
Witness to Power: The Nixon Years (John Erlichman)
I am interested in the role of racialization in political campaigns. I am interested in this subject as a way of exploring how racial discourse occurs in popular media in coded ways, as well as in exploring the question of who has incentive to perpetuate racism. The political sphere potentially offers the most formal expression of one group gaining from the perpetuation of racism, and it has its origins in the racialization of slavery in order to align poor whites with wealthy whites rather than for wealthy whites to have to face general uprising from poor whites banding together with slaves.
This is a huge topic, and so I am going to hone in on the period of the 60s to 80s, and hopefully I'll be able to bring it into the present a little bit, though that is not where my research will focus. I am going to focus on the evolution of the Southern Strategy, and in particular I am going to focus on the role of class-race associations in its evolution.
I specifically want to explore the development of class-race associations and how that supported or undermined or transformed the Southern Strategy. The intuitive picture that is emerging (though I need to research this much more) is that coded racism was persisted within the Southern strategy by the factioning of two types of poor people: 1) the hard-working blue collar white that "
"puts into the system" (Atwater) and 2) Reagan's "welfare" queen i.e. the non-contributing poor person.
It is a very muddy issue to try and tease out the sequential order of motives and associations, so through this research paper I really want to hone in on how the political sphere transformed through the 60's and 80's a setting where race was THE issue, explicitly, to a setting where race was not allowed to be the issue, but was coded. Who were the players? What are the incentives? Who is acting consciously? Who is acting subconsciously?
I am definitely not going to be able to answer this thoroughly, that would take a book, so I am going to work hard to hone in on something that I can argue and carefully explore.
Primary Sources:
Lee Atwater interview
Statements from Nixon's campaign manager
Reagan's speeches
Probably many others, though I am worried that in trying to piece together a puzzle, that I will dilute the type of close reading that was emphasized on the midterm paper.
Secondary Sources:
The New Jim Crow (michelle alexander)
The Problem of Race in the 21st Century (Thomas Holt)
Witness to Power: The Nixon Years (John Erlichman)
Dear Charlie,
ReplyDeleteThis is a fascinating topic. I particularly like your plan to focus your essay on the period between Nixon and Reagan and to look at the evolution of conversations about race during this time.
We've discussed this in detail, but if you have any additional questions, please feel free to email me.
I look forward to reading your final paper.
Very best,
Prof H
P.S. You have collected an excellent set of sources (primary and secondary).
ReplyDelete