Dog Whistle Politics

The development of any country in the world to a great extent depends on the political ideologies embraced by the ruling party or government. With clearly stated and detailed manifestos from the sitting government, the country will encounter tremendous growth accompanied with infrastructural expansion as well as realize the millennial development goals. After every five years, the United States holds general elections where the president and a new regime is bestowed power by the public to lead the country to the next level of development. However, one feature that has marked most of the American general election campaigns is the occasional use of hidden statements that are pleasing to a particular group or society by politicians to win their votes and trust.

The use of dog whistle politics began as early as 1964 witnessing the polarization of the major political parties. During the campaign, most famous American politicians in history have used what Mr. Lopez refers to as a dog whistle policy. Politicians in the US have over the years used dog whistle politics to win the backing of the middle-class. They claim to support certain reforms in the society trying to show they want the best for a given section of the community mostly supporting racist reforms. In America, two major political parties battle in the general elections; the Conservatives and Democrats. During the general election, every aspirant going for various political positions use ideologies that are likely to win them the support of the majority white working class. The use of dog whistle politics in American elections and campaigns have brought divisions among the black minority voters and the majority whites.

Studies have revealed that politicians will do what it takes to win the elections even if it means touching on most sensitive issues in the economy that may be pleasing to the public. Some of these matters politicians in the US have used in a bid to win the white working-class votes include a stop to immigration, supporting racism as well as a war against the Islamic religion. One reason why these claims have received attention among the white middle class is that there is a section of citizens who are extremely racists and are comfortable supporting such policies and ideologies. Additionally, the department of police as done little to stop the use of such immortal words against certain groups of citizens who they are to protect against all kinds of violation.

Consequently, it is evident that using dog whistle politics among political aspirants is a good strategy to winning the elections and persuading the majority of the white middle-class voters. According to Mr. Lopez the application of the dog whistle politics is not a new thing and every aspirant either from the Democrats, Labour or Conservative will use it to gain prominence among the voters. He adds that these political demagogues supported by the wealthier individuals in the society use racial, immigration and anti-Muslimism appeals to manipulate white working-class to win their support in return wrecking them (Wilby, 09).

Moreover, using this calls to gain the support for restrictive policies that will benefit the corporations and their super-rich friends and in the course economically kill the middle class. Mr. Lopez argument is in support of various pieces of literature that white Americans have held negative perception and views against their counterparts for a very long time. Consequently, politicians have ventured in these racial prejudgments which hold a great significance on predicting many opinions on various issues touching on politics. Or even better as Desmond King and Rogers Smith brings it out in their research regarding the American politics: “On occasions that encompass a broad range of basic structure of American life, nearly all the same players are likely to line up on the same side. Or the opposite side outlined by the support for or against race-conscious strategies and ideologies meant to improve racial discriminations based on materials.” (TerBeek, 168).

These formal political policies have ruined the lives of the middle-class population of Americans. Nonetheless, if an individual digs deeper into Mr. Lopez argument, they will realize the statement cannot carry all the weight that he claims. For instance, it is clear that probably a dog whistle politics has provided politicians with a new way to talk on matters regarding race, immigration as well as anti-Muslim aggressive policies; however, it has not “intoxicated” the white working-class. Furthermore, Mr. Lopez argument did not attempt to understand the verdict of the Supreme Court regarding the racial conservatism in the American politics.

However, the decision made by the Supreme Court does not obviate the interest of engaging in Mr. Lopez argument. In his case, Lopez makes one important discovery about the American politics and elections. As a result, the policy of race plays a significant role in the US contemporary politics. For instance, when one political party has racial homogeneity like the current Republican Party with approximately 88 percent whites who voted Mitt Romney, then surely race plays a significant role in the politics of America. Furthermore, Jack Balkin noted recently how the two principal political parties have remained polarized in the recent years unlike the era of Civil War. Then one can conclude that Mr. Lopez may have identified one of the factors that play the American politics- dog whistle over the last few years.

Even though most readers will have noticed Mr. Lopez’s thesis mainly talks about politicians; nonetheless, the Supreme Court as well has a significant role in this story. But Lopez’s assessment of the argument concerning the court is broad. As a result, if this thesis is to come out clear there is need to embrace the actions of the Supreme Court as a political actor as well as a central player in all the undertakings of the country’s politics. In this perspective, we look at what the Supreme Court has done to support the policies of racial conservatives in playing the dog whistle politics. When assessing Mr. Lopez thesis, we consider George Wallace political gamble. Though, 1964 marks the era when the modern political parties became identifiable through the race. Some political scientists have evidently revealed the presidential elections is an opinionated cleavage point of the present modern era racial politics in the US.

In conclusion, dog whistle politics has significantly impacted on the lives of the ordinary citizen while empowering the few rich guys in the economy. A good example is the 2017 general election that was characterizable with stringent racial policies by Donald Trump’s policies of racial and anti-Muslims prejudice move in America (Eaton, 23). Though the Americans were not in full support of Trump’s election as the next president of the United States, he won because he convinced the middle-class that he would deport all blacks. Consequently, the racists voted him in as the next presidential elections.