Thread by @LarryGlickman

This is a terrific review by John Judis, but I’m increasingly uncomfortable with the following formulation: “the rise of the civil-rights movement sparked a powerful backlash among some white voters.” 1/

https://twitter.com/thenation/status/1106203515591028742

This phrasing suggests that the movement _caused_ (“sparked”) the white backlash. This is how backlashes are often framed: agency is assigned to the activists who set it off, rather than where it properly belongs, namely to the participants in the backlash. 2/

This view suggests a hydraulic process in which backlashes are almost a natural response to freedom struggles, rather than movements whose causes need to be studied rather than assumed. /3

By attributing causality to the civil-rights movement we can skip over the peculiarities of each backlash and focus less on the agency of those who participate in so-called backlashes. /4

We should not naturalize backlashes as a normal or expected response to freedom struggles. /5

We can often turn this formula around and examine how the behaviors we associate with backlashes can themselves “spark” demands for equality. /6

This is especially so because so many backlashes are preemptive rather than reactive. /7

Here is a 1963 (pre-Civil Rights Act) article by Jack Germond about the “white backlash.”
newspapers.com/clip/30088957/…