This Election Marks The End Of America’s Racial Détente

David Marcus, The Federalist, November 14, 2016

Jamelle Bouie had an article in Slate following the election titled “White Won.”


He rightly concludes that the most direct national appeal to white voters in decades had not only been made, but won.

As a white person, I cannot fully understand what Trump’s victory means for people of color.


In trying to better understand the fears of minorities through Bouie’s essay, one section stood out to me as a particularly astute description of the current racial moment in America. Bouie writes:

John McCain indulged racial fears, and Mitt Romney played on racial resentment, but they refused to go further. To borrow from George Wallace, they refused to cry ‘nigger.’ This is important. By rejecting the politics of explicit racism and white backlash, they moved the political battleground to nominally colorblind concerns. Race was still a part of these clashes—it’s unavoidable—but neither liberals nor conservatives would litigate the idea of a pluralistic, multiracial democracy. Looking back, I thought this meant we had a consensus. It appears, instead, that we had a detente. And Trump shattered it.

This admission that what he believed to be a consensus was really a détente is extremely important. While a consensus means questions have been laid to rest, a détente means disagreement still lingers, but a deal is struck to keep those disagreements from flowering into open hostility. From the 1970s through the beginning of the current century, America existed under such an agreement. Bouie is correct that this has been shattered, but he is wrong to suggest Trump is the only, or even the primary, reason for this.

The rules of the deal were pretty straightforward. For whites, they stated that outright racist statements and explicit appeals to white racial identity were essentially banned. Along with this, whites accepted a double standard about the appropriateness of cultural and political tribalism.


The other side of the deal was that so long as white people were sufficiently punished for acts of outright racism, minority leaders and communities would be cautious with accusations of racism. The key here was that once leveled and proved, the accusation of racism was a blow most whites could not come back from.


But not only did many white voters break the rule of disqualifying a person based on a racist statement, they broke the second rule too. They began to ask why Trump couldn’t say a Mexican judge might be unfair, when we hear all the time about the danger of all white juries and white police officers. The white acceptance of legitimate racial double standards had dissipated, and without it the détente could not stand.


Privilege theory and the concept of systemic racism dealt the death blow to the détente. In embracing these theories, minorities and progressives broke their essential rule, which was to not run around calling everyone a racist. As these theories took hold, every white person became a racist who must confess that racism and actively make amends.


That shift, from carefully directed accusations of racism for direct actions to more general charges of unconscious racism, took away the carrot for whites. Worse, it led to a defensiveness and feeling of victimization that make today’s whites in many ways much more tribal than they were 30 years ago. White people are constantly told to examine their whiteness, not to think of themselves as racially neutral. That they did, but the result was not introspection that led to reconciliation, it was a decision that white people have just as much right to think of themselves as a special interest group as anyone else.


The détente was far from perfect. It often allowed quieter racism to lurk unchallenged. In some ways, it was a Band-Aid on a bullet wound. But Band-Aids have a role to play in treating bullet wounds—the body heals itself better when the wound is clean and free from infection. This is true of discourse’s ability to heal our body politic, as well. Under the détente, there was still racism, but Steve Bannon, whose publication Breitbart has traded in vile explicit racism, could never have been considered for White House chief of staff.

Whether the old détente was better or worse than current conditions is probably a purely academic question. It is not coming back. It was created in a cauldron of a very specific historical moment. Its creators had known and experienced racism in ways we simply have not, and they were more willing to compromise to keep the monster at bay while, hopefully, new generations naturally became more racially accepting.


If a generation of Americans who lived through the racism, riots, anguish, and terror of the civil rights movement were able to trust each other’s decency and create cultural codes and norms to punish abject racism, we should be able to do it, too. But the truly scary thing is that, at this moment, it doesn’t appear we want to.

Topics: , , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.