This week, in reaction to the unfolding protests across the US in the wake of the killing of George Floyd during his arrest in Minneapolis, Minnesota, President Trump likened the unrest to ‘domestic terror’, and vowed to ‘dominate the streets’. Christopher Putney writes that Trump’s rhetoric is the latest expression of a racial order that has been ever-present in American political development, and always defined Blacks and other people of color as a threat to a white ethnonational identit

Putney, Christopher

English

LSE Research Online

Long	Read:	Trump’s	threats	of	violence	againstprotestors	reflect	a	racist	order	defined	bynationalism	in	US	history.This	week,	in	reaction	to	the	unfolding	protests	across	the	US	in	the	wake	of	the	killing	of	GeorgeFloyd	during	his	arrest	in	Minneapolis,	Minnesota,	President	Trump	likened	the	unrest	to	‘domesticterror’,	and	vowed	to	‘dominate	the	streets’.	Christopher	Putney	writes	that	Trump’s	rhetoric	is	thelatest	expression	of	a	racial	order	that	has	been	ever-present	in	American	political	development,and	always	defined	Blacks	and	other	people	of	color	as	a	threat	to	a	white	ethnonational	identity.The	aggressive	reaction	by	the	president	to	protests	and	the	civil	unrest	gripping	Washington,	D.C.,	sincethe	killing	of	George	Floyd	is	not	an	aberration	from	Donald	Trump’s	typical	approach	to	governance,as	some	recent	high	profile	criticisms	of	the	president	have	implied.	Instead,	the	ongoing	spectacle	in	thenation’s	capital	this	week––replete	with	growing	numbers	of	National	Guard	troops	in	full	riot	gear,	shutteredstorefronts,	and	District-wide	curfews––is	a	product	of	the	US’s	racial	order	as	formulaic	as	the	president’snationalist	rhetoric.The	problem	with	framing	Trump’s	responses	to	the	surge	of	protests	burgeoning	across	American	citiesas	something	exceptional	for	the	administration––instead	of	as	an	outcome	of	its	defining	features––is	that	doing	soobscures	precisely	how	predictable	those	responses	are	given	the	historic	role	of	white	supremacy	in	Americanpolitical	development.	Indeed,	the	president’s	calls	this	week,	in	both	off-the-record	and	public	remarks,	for	the“domination”	of	protesters	characterized	as	the	“organizers”	of	“terror,”	are	only	the	most	recent	manifestations	ofan	otherwise	traditional	set	of	claims	defined	by	racial	ideology,	and	which	have	long	been	at	the	center	ofAmerican	politics.Racial	Order	in	US	HistoryTo	be	sure,	earlier	iterations	of	what	leading	scholars	like	Rogers	Smith	and	DesmondKing	have	labeled	the	“white-supremacist”	or	“antitransformative”	racial	orders	have	been	active––evenpredominant––in	American	politics	since	the	country’s	18th	century	founding.	But	if,	as	Columbia	historian	BarbaraJ.	Fields	has	argued,	ideology	should	be	understood	empirically	as	a	“distillate	of	experience,”	America’s	endemicracial	structures	have	always	supplied	justifications	for	racial	domination	linked	to	state	violence––as	well	as	theimpulse	for	its	eradication.Image	credit:	Christopher	PutneyUSApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: Long Read: Trump’s threats of violence against protestors reflect a racist order defined by nationalism in UShistory.Page 1 of 4		Date originally posted: 2020-06-05Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2020/06/05/long-read-trumps-nationalism-and-threats-of-violence-against-protestors-are-the-latest-reiteration-of-a-racist-order-that-has-defined-us-history/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/Some	of	these	claims	have	been	implicit	in	state	and	federal	policy	and	the	rhetoric	of	political	elites	acrossAmerican	history,	and	many	have	been	comprehensive	and	overt.	Yet	all	are	linked,	at	a	basic	level,	to	thecentral	question	that	has	animated	racial	conflict	in	the	United	States	since	its	inception:	who	may	be	counted	asmembers	of	the	political	community,	and	what	rights	or	privileges	are	they	entitled	to	by	virtue	of	that	membership?For	white	supremacists	of	every	era	(and	in	both	political	parties)	the	answer	has	been	some	version	of	Stephen	A.Douglas’s	infamous	formulation––that	the	American	polity	was	“made	by	the	white	man,	for	the	benefit	of	the	whiteman,	to	be	administered	by	white	men.”At	the	earliest,	and	probably	most	wide-ranging	historical	juncture,	white	rule	spelled	an	emergent	“proto-nationalist”identity	forged	amid	the	revolutionary	zeal	of	the	1770s––an	embryonic	nationalism	that	would	cement	the	roles	ofwomen	as	the	subjects	of	patriarchal	rule,	and	the	subhuman	statuses	of	enslaved	(and	free)	blacks	and	NativeAmericans.	Such	conditions––despite	early	anti-slavery	(and	broader	egalitarian)	efforts––were	then	codified,and	ultimately	made	absolute	in	the	supposedly	egalitarian	America	of	Thomas	Paine.	Citizenship	reforms	in	thewake	of	the	Constitution’s	1788	ratification	a	decade	later,	during	Reconstruction’s	collapse	in	the	1870s,	andespecially	in	the	early	Progressive	years	(roughly	1890-1920),	merely	recapitulated	this	pattern:	Anempowered,	predominantly	white	and	Protestant,	national	identity	would	be	challenged	by	forces	of	egalitarianreform,	and	then	decisively	reinforced	in	law	and	custom––often	under	the	auspices	of	constitutionalarguments,	claims	about	the	rule	of	law,	and	elite	invocations	of	American	“culture”	or	“heritage.”The	different	phases	of	these	evolving	racial	orders––“egalitarian-transformative,”	“white	supremacist,”	and	morerecently,	“antitransformative”	or	conservative––have	always	been	an	undercurrent	in	American	politics.	While	theymay	be	less	visible	amid	the	day	to	day	of	policy	debates	and	shifting	electoral	coalitions––and	to	thecorresponding	partisan,	social,	and	economic	arrangements	that	have	occurred	in	different	eras––they	remain	elemental	in	configuring	the	very	structure	of	those	arrangements.	The	authority	of	a	given	racial	order,Smith	and	King	show,	may	“shift”	in	different	ways	at	different	times––forinstance,	with	the	1863	legal	emancipation	of	slaves,	or	the	passage	of	the	1964	Civil	Rights	Act––but	their	tectonic	presence	“beneath”	American	politics	remains	with	us	today.Looking	at	American	history	through	a	racial	orders	framework	emphasizes	that	the	constructed	categories	of	raceas	such––often	deployed	to	limit	the	rights	of	would-be	(Black	and	other	people	of	color)	citizens––have	beenomnipresent	in	American	political	development	in	ways	overlooked	by	scholars,	citizens,	and	political	leaders	of	allstripes.	Racial	orders,	in	all	their	evolving	phases,	have	thus	constrained	the	broader	opportunities	for	nationalgovernance	that	every	president	negotiates	as	they	work	to	exploit	the	political	contingencies	of	theirplace	in	history.Nationalism,	Militarism,	and	Trump’s	RhetoricPoliticians	and	groups	working	to	stop	meaningful	reform	and	transformation––the	political	heirs	of	the	bipartisan,enduring,	and	adaptive	white	supremacist	tradition––include	factions	of	the	modern	Republican	Party,the	sitting	president,	various	conservative	interest	groups	and	elite	commentators,	as	well	a	jumble	of	otherinstitutional	and	“non-institutional”	actors.	But	notwithstanding	new	“race-neutral”	rhetorical	tendencies,	thesegroups––like	their	predecessors––all	still	make	claims,	wittingly	or	not,	which	are	linked	to	enduring	racialstructures.As	I	argued	here	recently,	this	more	coded	ideological	continuity	(e.g.,	conservative	arguments	for	“color-blindness”in	policy-making)	is	most	visible	in	Trump’s	on-going	critiques	of	“globalism,”	immigration,	and	minority	groups	thatbegan	with	his	2016	campaign.USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: Long Read: Trump’s threats of violence against protestors reflect a racist order defined by nationalism in UShistory.Page 2 of 4		Date originally posted: 2020-06-05Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2020/06/05/long-read-trumps-nationalism-and-threats-of-violence-against-protestors-are-the-latest-reiteration-of-a-racist-order-that-has-defined-us-history/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/Phrases	like	“a	national	security	crisis	on	our	southern	border,”	“an	invasion	of	drugs	and	criminals	coming	into	ourcountry,”	and	“unknown	Middle	Easterners,”	remain	ideological	shorthand	for	the	story	long	recycled	by	illiberalnationalists:	that	ethnic	and	religious	minorities	in	the	US––or	those	said	to	be invading––are endangering	“traditional”	American	identity	as	well	as	“law	and	order.” 	“The	Wall”––new	southernborder	fencing––in	that	story,	just	like	the “Wuhan	virus” in	recent	months,	serves	as	a	symbol	of	the	problem	ofotherized	(non-white)	groups,	and	implies	a	federal	solution. Executive	Order	13769,	the	first	iteration	of	the	so-called	“Muslim	ban,”	like	the	policy	of	separating	migrant	children	from	asylum-seeking	families,	are	only	the	mostovert	examples.	Trump’s	2017	Inaugural	Address,	as	well	as	later	speeches	given	at	the	United	Nations,	merelyintegrate	anti-globalism	with	the	themes	of	racial	order	and	immigration	that	are	at	the	heart	of	“America	First,”	andare	understood	as	the	president	has	repeatedly	presented	it	since	taking	office––as	a	“governing	vision.”The	signal	themes	of	this	nationalism	were	reiterated	this	week	by	the	presidenton	Twitter,	and	especially,	in	a	Rose	Garden	speech	in	which	the	president	threatened	to	“deploy	the	United	Statesmilitary”––“thousands	and	thousands	of	heavily	armed	soldiers”––against	overwhelmingly	peaceful	protests.Despite	the	presence	of	military	vehicles	and	police	on	virtually	every	downtown	street,	during	the	last	72	hours	thescene	viewed	from	up-close	has	consisted	of	non-violent––if	tense––gatherings	near	the	WhiteHouse.	The	demonstrators	I	met	there	held	signs	emblazoned	with	slogans	like	“We	will	not	be	silenced”,	and	“Alllives	cannot	matter	if	BLACK	lives	don’t”.	In	one	march	from	La	Fayette	Square	down	Pennsylvania	Avenue	thatnumbered	in	the	thousands,	the	demonstration	ended	at	the	southwest	steps	of	the	US	Capitol,	whereprotesters	chanted	“take-a-knee,”	and	“who-do-you-protect?”	to	police	officers	clad	in	shields	and	protective	bodyarmor.Protest	in	Washington	D.C.	Credit:	Christopher	PutneyYet	the	president’s	most	vocal	appeals	this	week	have	moved	beyond	the	demonization	of	immigrants	and	racialminorities,	to	open	justifications	of	state-sanctioned	violence.	During	Monday’s	remarks	at	the	White	House––withthe	sounds	of	flashbangs	and	tumult	in	the	background	as	police	and	National	Guardsmen	forciblycleared	protesters	from	La	Fayette	Square––Trump	likened	the	protests	to	domestic	“terror.”	He	averred,	in	a	seriesof	war	metaphors,	that	his	“mission”	to	“dominate	the	streets”	would	prevent	the	further	“spilling	of	blood”	inAmerican	cities.	And,	as	demonstrators	were	forced	westward	down	H	Street	amid	exploding	smoke	canisters	and“pepper	balls,”	Trump	affirmed	himself	as	“your	President	of	law	and	order	and	an	ally	of	all	peaceful	protesters.”USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: Long Read: Trump’s threats of violence against protestors reflect a racist order defined by nationalism in UShistory.Page 3 of 4		Date originally posted: 2020-06-05Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2020/06/05/long-read-trumps-nationalism-and-threats-of-violence-against-protestors-are-the-latest-reiteration-of-a-racist-order-that-has-defined-us-history/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/What	this	rhetoric	and	the	on-going	urban	militarization	efforts	in	theDistrict	share	are	hallmarks	of	a	common	racialized	heritage	–	the	inheritance	of	an	illiberal	nationalism	whichhas	sustained,	in	successive	versions	since	the	colonial	period,	America’s	enduring	racial	orders.	For	modernantitransformative	figures	like	Trump,	like	earlier	open	white	supremacists,	the	ever-present	political	subtext	is	thatnon-white	“outsiders”	or	their	allies––be	they	legal	citizens	or	otherwise––are,	at	minimum,	a	threat	to	“nationalsecurity,”	“law	and	order,”	and	an	ethnonational	identity	defined	by	white	supremacy––and	at	maximum	subhuman,and	thus	not	entitled	to	the	protections	of	the	law	that	citizenship	bestows.Of	course,	the	terms	of	the	president’s	Rose	Garden	speech	and	his	decision	to	invoke	extraordinary	sources	ofauthority	for	militarizing	law	enforcement	in	the	District,	have	received	wide-spread	criticism––ranging	fromactivists,	academics,	and	local	leaders,	to	former	and	current	Cabinet	Secretaries.	In	a	recent	interview,	AbbyDobson,	an	Artist-in-Residence	at	the	African	American	Policy	Forum	and	the	President	of	the	NationalOrganization	for	Women	(NOW-NYC),	reinforced	these	rhetorical	themes,	commenting	that	the	“president’s	actionsin	the	wake	of	George	Floyd’s	killing	should	give	us	all	pause,”	since	the	“use	of	military	force	to	quell	principledprotest…should	not	be	the	first	response	to	a	nation	of	souls	hurting	and	reeling	from	the	aftershocks	of	anotherBlack	person	unjustly	killed	by	the	hands	of	police…without	regard	for	the	sacredness	of	Black	lives.”Echoing	Dobson,	LSE’s	Peter	Trubowitz	has	recently	observed	that	“more	and	more	Americans”	may	“speak	outagainst	the	clear	violation	of	First	Amendment	rights	and	the	provocative	display	of	presidential	overreach”	playingout	in	the	District.	True	enough.	But	the	origins	of	Trump’s	nationalist	grammar	usedto	justify	those	“violations”	and	their	effects	should	be	a	mystery	to	no	one.That	grammar	merely	reiterates	that	racial	order	and	ideology	in	American	politics––especially	when	wedded	topresidential	power––are	patterns	ripe	for	reproduction,	not	aberrations	without	precedent.Please	read	our	comments	policy	before	commenting.  Note: 	This	article	gives	the	views	of	the	author,	and	not	the	position	of	USAPP–	American	Politics	and	Policy,	norof	the	London	School	of	Economics.Shortened	URL	for	this	post: https://bit.ly/3czo5qFAbout	the	authorChristopher	Putney – The	Graduate	Center,	CUNYChristopher	Putney	is	a	graduate	student	in	American	political	development	and	political	theory	at	theCUNY	Graduate	Center,	and	a	lecturer	at	Hunter	College’s	Department	of	Political	Science.USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: Long Read: Trump’s threats of violence against protestors reflect a racist order defined by nationalism in UShistory.Page 4 of 4		Date originally posted: 2020-06-05Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2020/06/05/long-read-trumps-nationalism-and-threats-of-violence-against-protestors-are-the-latest-reiteration-of-a-racist-order-that-has-defined-us-history/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/

Long read: Trump’s threats of violence against protestors reflect a racist order defined by nationalism in US history

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/105520/1/usappblog_2020_06_05_long_read_trumps_nationalism_and_threats_of.pdf

Long read: Trump’s threats of violence against protestors reflect a racist order defined by nationalism in US history

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online