The Orbis

Issue date: 3/23/09 Section: Opinion

This image is facetious. Source: oldamericancentury.org

In the wake of the 2008 elections, some supporters of the Republican Party believe that the key to reviving the party’s electoral fortunes is to further pander to xenophobic and nationalistic voters, even if this is presented in the guise of patriotism and promoting evangelical Christianity. Despite the popular perception that most Americans claim to believe in freedom and non-discrimination, this may not necessarily be an entirely ineffective tactic. Many Americans would reject the assertion that xenophobia could help a major political party, but the recent rash of anti-gay and English-only ballot measures would seem to suggest otherwise. Less than 50 years ago, Southern Democrats utilized xenophobic fears in dominating Southern politics.

It would be easy to point to the history of the Nazi Party in Germany or the National Fascist Party in Italy less than a hundred years ago as examples of extremely xenophobic parties democratically rising to (eventually absolute) power. The fact that the Nazis argued that they had a way to rescue Germany from the Great Depression, and the fact that both the Nazis and Italian fascists represented themselves as the viable alternative to communism and socialism is not something that should be lost a present-day observer. Today’s world is embarking on its worst economic crisis (perhaps, even economic depression) since the Great Depression and numerous segments of the American populace are fearful of social democratism (moderate socialism) as a solution to the numerous problems American society faces. Identifying a marginalized “outsider” as a scapegoat for these problems can be a comforting, if destructive, lie.

Nevertheless, one does not need to go back into the past to point to electorally successful xenophobic parties. In Western Europe, the far-right National Alliance in Italy and the Swiss People’s Party are both current members of their respective national governments. Other far-right parties, such as Belgium’s Vlaams Belang, Norway’s Progress Party, and the Freedom Party of Austria, represent some of the largest political parties in their countries as measured by their share of the national vote. While some of Europe’s far-right parties are essentially nothing more than neo-Nazi organizations, others place less of an emphasis on reviving national socialism and focus more on attributing nearly any and every trouble facing their nation as the fault of non-European immigrants (and for Western European far-right parties, often non-Western European immigrants), Muslims, and those of Jewish descent. Their accusations have resonated with lower class (and relatively uneducated) Caucasian voters who have been facing increasing unemployment as globalization progresses.

Of course, this does not represent an instant success formula for the Republican Party. Most far-right European parties (and, indeed, all of the electorally successful ones) compete in elections where the representation is divided up on some incarnation of proportional representation and are primarily financed by the state. In the United States, parties are largely funded through non-government contributions and elections are first-past-the-post (winner-takes-all with plurality of the votes). While a fairly large voter base could be solidified through appeals to xenophobia, this segment of the population does not have much in the way of spare funds to contribute to political parties.

Nevertheless, one of the greatest flexibilities of Europe’s far-right has come in the realm of economic policy that run the gamut from laissez-faire capitalism to unapologetic socialism (restricted to non-immigrants). The Republican Party could still continue with its pro-upper class and pro-corporate stance and pick up campaign contributions that way. Their new nationalistic and xenophobic policies would appeal to the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter fans. While this may spur some moderates to defect from the Republican Party, as long as these policies are not explicitly racist, moderates may be able to reconcile their beliefs. All it would take is one major terrorist attack on American soil by a non-American (which is probably bound to happen sooner or later, regardless of what the Department of Homeland Security tries to do), and the credence of nationalist and xenophobic rhetoric increases exponentially in the minds of much of the electorate.

A sample of points to be added to a
xenophobic platform:

- Advocate for a hardliner stance on Muslims and institute additional security measures for Muslims at public infrastructure. Explain this xenophobia by constantly invoking 9/11 and by claiming that Islamic culture promotes violence against non-Muslims.

- Remove all illegal immigrants and begin revoking visas and expelling legal immigrants. Blame immigrants for crime and economic woes as well as being a drain on social program resources. Attribute perceived flaws of immigrants to cultural differences and their “unwillingness” to assimilate into American culture.

- Outlaw abortion on the basis that (non-white) immigrants will outnumber “true” (white) Americans. Use the same reasoning to persecute gays as social deviants and traitors.

- Denounce critics as unpatriotic and un-American who are secretly sympathetic to communists and want to destroy American culture.

This is just conjecture, and it is also worth noting that it would not be terribly difficult to incorporate most of these points into the existing platform. However, they fall in line with positions taken by some nationalist groups on the extreme far-right.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools