Search results

Although conservatives have for years complained of identity politics on the left, recent years have seen an increase in right-wing identity politics. This has been most pronounced in the rise of the so-called Alt-Right, a recent iteration of the American white nationalist movement. What accounts for this movement's rapid rise and fall? If identity politics really are inevitable, why did this effort to bring explicit white racial identity politics out in the open fall apart in such a short amount of time? Hawley strives to deal with the very nature of identity politics in the United States: how conservatives view and understand it, how they embrace their own versions of identity, and how liberal and conservative intellectuals and politicians navigate this equally dangerous and potentially explosive landscape.

This book explains the ideas, tactics, history, and prominent figures of the so-called Alt-Right, a white nationalist movement that first gained national and international prominence during the 2016 presidential election. It describes this movement's place in contemporary American life, and how the Alt-Right relates to Donald Trump's much larger right-wing populist movement. In clear and dispassionate terms, the book explains the degree to which the Alt-Right and other elements of the modern white supremacist movement threaten American democracy.

Intro -- Table of Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction -- 1. The Alt-Right's Goals and Predecessors -- 2. The First Wave of the Alt-Right -- 3. The Alt-Right Returns -- 4. The Alt-Right Attack on the Conservative Movement -- 5. The Alt-Right and the 2016 Election -- 6. The "Alt-Lite" -- Conclusion -- Notes -- Index

1. Is there a "white vote"? -- 2. The "missing" white votes of 2012 -- 3. The enduring influence of ethnicity and history -- 4. Class and the white vote -- 5. The white generation gap, gender gap, and marriage gap -- 6. Religion and the white vote -- 7. White voters and demographic change -- 8. Conclusion.

"The United States is experiencing remarkable demographic changes that are having an important impact on the American electorate. As the minority share of the voting-eligible population continues to grow, the political clout of non-Hispanic whites will further decline. The 2012 election demonstrated that the Democratic Party can secure an Electoral College victory even when it loses badly, in the aggregate, among non-Hispanic whites. This does not mean that white voters are unimportant, however. The political behavior of whites in the decades ahead will largely determine the direction of American politics. This book examines the political behavior of non-Hispanic whites. It considers the trends within the white vote, how white voters differ geographically, and the primary fault lines among white voters. It also examines how white political behavior changes in response to diversity. It considers whether or not the day is approaching when whites consolidate into a largely homogenous voting bloc, or whether whites will remain politically heterogeneous in the decades ahead Whereas other books have examined the political behavior of specific social classes within the non-Hispanic white community (working class whites, for example), this is the first book to examine whites as a whole, and provide a useful summary of recent trends within this group and thoughtful speculation about its future."--

"In recent years, political scientists and journalists have taken a great interest in the question of whether the American electorate is "sorting" into communities based on partisan affiliation. That is, there is concern that American communities are becoming increasingly politically homogenous and this is because Americans are considering politics explicitly when determining where to live. Academics have since debated the degree to which this is a real phenomenon and, if it is, whether it has important normative implications. However, little empirical research has examined which factors turned some closely-contested counties into Republican enclaves and others into Democratic strongholds. Examining individual and aggregate data and employing a large number of statistical methods, George Hawley explores the increasing political homogenization of small geographic units and explains the causal mechanisms driving this phenomenon as well as its consequences for individual political attitudes and behavior among residents residing in these geographic units. He argues that some partisans are self-selecting into communities of likeminded partisans, causing some areas to become overwhelmingly Republican and others to become overwhelmingly Democratic. The book also notes that the migratory patterns of Republicans and Democrats differ in systematic ways for other reasons, due to the different demographic and economic characteristics of these partisan groups"--

"In recent years, political scientists and journalists have taken a great interest in the question of whether the American electorate is "sorting" into communities based on partisan affiliation. That is, there is concern that American communities are becoming increasingly politically homogenous and this is because Americans are considering politics explicitly when determining where to live. Academics have since debated the degree to which this is a real phenomenon and, if it is, whether it has important normative implications. However, little empirical research has examined which factors turned some closely-contested counties into Republican enclaves and others into Democratic strongholds. Examining individual and aggregate data and employing a large number of statistical methods, George Hawley explores the increasing political homogenization of small geographic units and explains the causal mechanisms driving this phenomenon as well as its consequences for individual political attitudes and behavior among residents residing in these geographic units. He argues that some partisans are self-selecting into communities of likeminded partisans, causing some areas to become overwhelmingly Republican and others to become overwhelmingly Democratic. The book also notes that the migratory patterns of Republicans and Democrats differ in systematic ways for other reasons, due to the different demographic and economic characteristics of these partisan groups"--

ObjectiveI test the hypothesis that immigration status itself is a predictor of Democratic Party affiliation and vote choice, even controlling for other attributes. I further test whether having immigrant parents and grandparents has a similar effect.MethodTo examine these questions, I created single‐ and multilevel models of party affiliation and vote choice using the 2016 Cooperative Congressional Election Study.ResultsEven after controlling for a myriad of individual and contextual attributes, immigration status was a statistically significant and substantively important predictor of Democratic affiliation. This was also true of the children and grandchildren of immigrants, but this effect weakened over multiple generations.ConclusionImmigration status itself appears to be an important determinant of voting patterns, which is highly consequential, given the large and growing foreign‐born population in the United States.