Charles Murray asks why Asians are not Republicans. After all, as a group they tend to be the following:
conspicuously entrepreneurial, industrious, family-oriented, and self-reliant. If you’re looking for a natural Republican constituency, Asians should define “natural.”
Murray thinks that the Republicans have been successfully stereotyped as not just social conservatives, but as hard core nutjobs:
…something has happened to define conservatism in the minds of Asians as deeply unattractive, despite all the reasons that should naturally lead them to vote for a party that is identified with liberty, opportunity to get ahead, and economic growth. I propose that the explanation is simple. Those are not the themes that define the Republican Party in the public mind. Republicans are seen by Asians—as they are by Latinos, blacks, and some large proportion of whites—as the party of Bible-thumping, anti-gay, anti-abortion creationists. Factually, that’s ludicrously inaccurate. In the public mind, except among Republicans, that image is taken for reality.
That image is certainly taken for reality in my area. I have run for office twice now as a Republican, and I am sick and tired of the assumptions people make, and sick of taking flak for stereotypes that will not go away. I’m so sick of it I can barely crank out this post.
The problem is that there are Bible-thumping, anti-gay, anti-abortion creationists in the GOP, and I cannot pretend there are not. They tend to be louder than their more reasonable counterparts, and they do not mind in the least if they make people uncomfortable, because they think that they are most right and most principled people in the GOP. Their stridency makes a lot of people avoid them and worst of all, gives the GOP a bad name. I like to prattle on about coalitions, but one of the problems with any coalition is that whoever is opposing it will seize upon its less attractive elements for propaganda purposes.
And maybe, like, win.
Comments
6 responses to “A “natural Republican constituency” which is unnaturally Democrat”
[…] Update: Eric makes a similar point in A “natural Republican constituency” which is unnaturally Democrat […]
I am sure the Democratic party has an equal share of bible thumpers and nut jobs, but they seem to do a better job of controlling them.
The democratic party also seem to have the media ignoring their problems while showcasing problems in the Republican party.
Around MN we have the Independence Party where sane people who would have been Republicans in the past can run for office. Our Republican Party was actually Independent Republicans (IR) until about a decade ago when they gave up their independence.
How exactly is the Republican party of today, interested in Liberty, economic growth, or opportunity to get ahead?
What part of the creation of the TSA and DHS under Bush promoted Liberty?
How did the institution of a ridiculous set of programs – “No Child Left Behind” – which mandates more testing than teaching help anyone?
How did the creation of the prescription drug entitlement promote economic growth.
And while I understand that taxes are generally hated, you do have to pay your bills – eventually.
Or maybe I missed the Republican resolution getting rid of pork.
At least you can hope communism will collapse of its own weight. Like in Greece, Spain, et al.
We need a third party. Maybe the (presently no-party) tea party – IF they dump the republican right-wing. (I know…dream on…)
Slate chimes in:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2012/11/why_did_asian_americans_vote_for_president_obama.html