Decades of Distortion - Page 3
Highlighting The "Undeserving" Poor
The Republican candidacy of Barry Goldwater for President in 1964 was
a turning point for the Old Right.37 During
that campaign, many of the themes which later would form the multiple
bases for the New Right's attack on welfare were explicit; rightist publications
attacked the welfare state for undermining rugged individualism and private
property, fostering immorality and non-productive activity,38 contributing
to crime (particularly associated with urban riots and the Civil Rights
Movement), and ultimately leading to Communism.39
The Old Right drew a classic parallel between conditions in the US and
the decline of the Roman Empire,40 drawing
especially from the work of neoclassical economists like Friedrich Hayek,
Ludwig von Mises, and Milton Friedman. Hayek's The Road to Serfdom warned
of the consequences of collectivism and that Western civilization was
abandoning "the foundations laid by Christianity and the Greeks
and Romans."41 In
its 1959 founding documents, the John Birch Society warned of how the
Roman Empire died from the cancer of collectivism.42 Believing
that the welfare state destroyed individualism and supported the growth
of collectivism,43 Goldwater stated "government
policies which create dependent citizens inevitably rob a nation and
its people of both moral and physical strength."44
More militant Christian groups further to the right expressed the same
equation more bluntly. Destiny magazine stated in a 1961 article
that "[o]ne has only to read history to mark the awful price exacted
from the nation whose people followed a course that destroyed individual
initiative and ambition [the welfare state]." In 1962 The Cross
and the Flag saw the welfare state as "taxing away the rewards
for responsible behavior."45 The
welfare state would leave to socialism and socialism would lead to communism.
Receipt of welfare was also seen as encouraging behavioral problems.
The John Birch Society Bulletin stated that governmental welfare
programs led to "the subsidization of illegitimacy, laziness, and
political corruption."46 Goldwater
stated "I don't like to see my taxes paid for children born out
of wedlock."47
The racism in the Right's rhetoric of this period was blatant in many
subject areas,48 including
welfare. Thus laziness and immorality were frequently explicitly tied
to an image of AFDC recipients as African American, e.g., the immoral
sexual practices of a "growing horde of lazy Negroes" living
off the public dole,49 "the
unmarried Negro women who make a business of producing children...for
the purpose of securing this easy welfare money."50 Goldwater
stated that welfare "transforms the individual being into a dependent
animal creature,"51 evoking
traditional European American caricatures of African Americans.52 Distribution
of welfare was designed to buy votes at the taxpayer's expense,53 with
the implication that recipients were African American voters.54
Crime was seen as an individual, rather than a social, problem, and was
another opportunity to raise the theme of individual responsibility. "The
Conservative excuses nobody."55 Therefore
the welfare state would not alleviate the "lawlessness" which
our nation was experiencing; only a return of respect for authority could
accomplish that.56 Goldwater
stated "on our streets we see the final, terrible proof of a sickness
which not all the social theories of a thousand social experiments has
ever begun to touch."57 Indeed
by teaching that "the have nots can take from the haves" through
taxation, Goldwater portrayed the welfare state as contributing to crimes
of property and riots.58
After Goldwater's defeat, the Right consciously focused59 on
the "white backlash," particularly in the South,60 as
a means of exploiting the racial tensions of the 1960s for political
gain.61 Thus,
at this critical time when welfare rolls were finally being opened to
African Americans, AFDC, along with street crime, non-discriminatory
housing, deteriorating neighborhoods, declining property values, school
busing, and affirmative action, became banners which could popularize
the Right's agenda.62
An example of the evolution of this strategy can be seen by following
the coverage of welfare in Human Events, a leading Old Right
publication which began in 1944 as a voice of the reactionary wing
of the Republican Party. In the early 1960s, articles in Human Events routinely
attacked many aspects of the War on Poverty, arguing that it took power
away from local governments, brought with it all the associated problems
of big government, contributed to business investment decline, and
created counter-productive behavior on the part of recipients.63
The Johnson Administration's Great Society programs were accused of
leading to "the virtual extinction of local government except
as a minor bureaucratic instrumentality of federal power," and
would "impose coerced conformity" instead of free enterprise,
individuality, and personal freedom.64 Poverty
programs would result in consolidated power in the hands of a few men
who might abuse the system.65 The
programs were portrayed as inefficient,66 primarily
creating high salaries for bureaucrats,67 and
resulting in political corruption.68
Therefore, federal grants to states for relief should be reduced or
eliminated, and those who receive benefits should not be allowed to
vote until they paid back the "loan."69 Government
had only three legitimate duties: national defense, personal freedom
from attack by another, and "certain functions that it is not
in the interest of any single individual or small group of individuals
to undertake."70
A 1965 Human Events article argued that business expansion within
the free market structure is the appropriate method to fight poverty
and unemployment.71 The
reliance on Keynsian economic theory in development of Great Society programs
is misplaced.72 Poverty
can be conquered by individual responsibility and thrift: e.g., if
the $20 billion spent each year on liquor and tobacco, not to mention
gambling, were invested in US industrial development.73
The theme that receipt of benefits creates counter-productive behavior
recurs. Programs for high school dropouts encourage teens to leave
school.74 The
rise in the numbers receiving welfare is attributed to "illegitimate
children fathered by men who wander from woman to woman, unworried
about who will care for their offspring because they know that Aid
to Dependent Children payments will."75 In
criticizing New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller's welfare plan for
women with children with "no male member of the household," the
author comments that "[I]t certainly does seem that most of the
aid recipients are skilled enough to know every trick of the trade
in getting relief and staying on it."76 People
receiving welfare don't want to work.77
However, the tenor of the articles begins to shift in 1966. A connection
between poverty programs and the rise of the Civil Rights/Black Nationalism/anti-Vietnam
War Movements becomes a theme, playing to the fears of many whites.78 While
discussion of waste, corruption, and political patronage still form
the basis for some of the discourse,79 urban
riots and poverty programs are directly linked. Human Events reports: "Evidence
suggests that part of the reason for the riots are militant `anti-poverty'
officials and Negro agitators preaching hatred against the whites."80 Grants
to "questionable" African Americans are increasingly reported.81 This "army
of welfare warriors,"82 has
strong ties with labor unions83 and
organizes partisan voter registration drives, often in African American
neighborhoods.84 While socialism
was blamed for much of the world's poverty by "paralyzing human
initiatives,"85 articles
document the connection between War on Poverty programs and staff and
communism.86 In addition, the populist
notion of giving a voice to people receiving the benefits is criticized.87
Human Events articles begin to portray poor people in more derogatory
terms. A typical example is the story of a Puerto Rican poverty program
trainee who failed to keep regular hours and when fired "flounced
away, but only after having told Syd's workers they were fools to stay
on the job when they could take the first subway to the Bronx and `make
as much money from the Program for half the work you're doin' here.'"88 An
AFDC mother demonstrating for children's clothing allowances complains
that her son is "deprived of even a cotton undershirt to go to
school," while smoking a cigarette.89
At the same time, the "marketing of dissemblance" is
evident, as Human Events articles begin to undermine the validity
of the existence and extent of poverty.90 In
critiquing a judicial decision that struck down residency requirements
for receipt of welfare, unnamed "experts" are cited to underscore
the ludicrousness of the "long-time judicial activist," and "liberal" judges'
majority opinion:
Court decrees that welfare residency requirements are "unconstitutional" are
not only absurd, say judicial experts who believe there is no constitutional
right to welfare whatsoever, but will heavily penalize those states
and localities which provide substantial welfare for the poor.91
Thus the Old Right constructed a message based on the confluence
of poverty, race, labor unions, violence and communism. In this way, the
Old Right was able to promote its agenda of lower taxes and
reduced government by beginning to use welfare and the War on Poverty92 to
capture the increasing racial fears of much of white America at a time
when African Americans were asserting their rights in new ways. This
increasing use of welfare as a means of crystallizing and legitimating
racism was a particularly successful ploy in breaking open the Democratic
white South.93