White backlash,white rage,whitelash andwhite grievance are terms used by some scholars and commentators to describe reactions by certainwhite individuals or groups to social, economic, or political changes related torace. It is often discussed in connection with perceptions of declining relative status, changes in cultural influence, or shifts in political power following efforts to expandcivil rights and economic opportunities for other racial orethnic groups.[1][2][3][4]
George Yancy,Robin DiAngelo and other writers have used the term to characterize strong negative reactions to discussions ofracial inequality or the concept ofwhite privilege. In this framing, such reactions may include hostility, resistance to critique, or, in more extreme cases, racist rhetoric or threats of violence. These interpretations are sometimes contrasted with concepts such aswhite fragility, which focuses more narrowly on defensive responses rather than overt hostility.[5][6][7]
Discussions of white backlash most commonly focus on theUnited States, particularly in relation to the social, economic and political status ofAfrican Americans. However, similar dynamics have also been examined in other national contexts, including theUnited Kingdom andSouth Africa, especially in analyses of racial politics during and afterapartheid, the system of legally enforced racial segregation and discrimination againstblack South Africans by the minorityAfrikanerherrenvolk government.[8][9]
Concerns among some whites aboutimmigration and demographic change have been identified by researchers as factors associated with political and social opposition to these trends. Political scientistAshley E. Jardina spoke about how perceptions of shifting social structures influence attitudes, noting that some white Americans perceive changes in the country’s demographic composition as altering long-standing cultural and political arrangements, including the historical prominence of white Anglo-Saxon Protestant (WASP) norms.[10][11][12]
A 2018 study conducted at theUniversity of California,Riverside found that awareness of the growth ofHispanic and Latino populations can lead somenon-Hispanic white Americans to perceive existing racial hierarchies as being challenged, which may affect political attitudes and behavior.[13] Similarly, research published in theEuropean Journal of Social Psychology reported that informingwhite British participants about rising immigration levels increased their likelihood of supporting political candidates with restrictive immigration policies.[14]
CommentatorKevin Drum has observed that as the proportion of residents in the United States who are not non-Hispanic white increased from 25 percent in 1990 to 40 percent in 2019, this demographic change may have produced a "short-term white backlash in recent years.".[15]
HistorianLawrence Glickman, writing inThe Atlantic in 2020, situates such political responses within a broader historical context. He argues that political reactions labeled as “backlashes” became more prominent in the 1960s but reflect earlier patterns in American political history, including those followingReconstruction. Glickman suggests that these responses often emerge in anticipation of social change and that narratives emphasizing perceived disadvantage have played a role in shaping various political movements over time.[16]
One early example of this concept occurred whenHiram R. Revels became the first African-American to serve in theUnited States Senate in 1870 after he was selected by a vote of 81 to 15 in theMississippi legislature to finish the term of one of the state's two seats in the U.S. Senate, which had been left vacant since theCivil War.[17] This was before the ratification of the17th Amendment to theconstitution of the United States in 1913, which introduced direct elections for the office of senator. The backlash to this event ultimately helped to derailReconstruction, which ended after the contestedpresidential election in 1876. TheCompromise of 1877 led to the withdrawal of federal troops from theAmerican South, effectively leaving the region to the hands ofJim Crow racial segregation policies and the effective disenfranchisement of black Americans in the region.[18]
Similarly, the1898 massacre inWilmington,North Carolina occurred as a backlash by white Democrats to significant political changes in the city at the time, when the city was governed by a legally elected, biracial coalition supported by blacks and white Republicans. This arrangement was strongly opposed by the white Democratic leadership and their supporters, who viewed the existing government as illegitimate and destabilizing to the political and social order they favored. This ultimately contributed to the backlash that ultimately led to the forced removal of elected officials. The events that followed involved violence, the suppression of black political influence, and the imposition of a new municipal leadership aligned with the insurrection’s leaders, contributing to the broader pattern of disfranchisement of black Americans in the South.[19][20][21]
Another backlash happened after the passage of theCivil Rights Act of 1964. Many Democrats in Congress, as well as PresidentLyndon B. Johnson himself, feared that such a backlash could develop in response to the legislation, andMartin Luther King Jr. popularized the "white backlash" phrase and concept to warn of that possibility.[22] The backlash that they had warned about occurred and was based on the argument that whites of immigrant descent did not receive the benefits that were given to African Americans in the Civil Rights Act.[23] After signing the Civil Rights Act, Johnson grew concerned that the white backlash would cost him the1964 presidential election later that year. Specifically, Johnson feared that his opponent,Barry Goldwater, would harness the backlash by highlighting the black riots that were engulfing the country.[24] Despite the fears, Johnson won the election by a landslide, only losing South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Goldwater's home state of Arizona. Eventually, white southerners switched to theRepublican Party.
From then on, Republican politicians have been accused of carrying out dog-whistle politics, and examples of this arguments include the phrase "welfare queen" and theWillie Horton ad during the 1988 election.[25][26]
Following theelection ofBarack Obama as the first blackpresident of the United States in 2008, some commentators later argued that political and cultural reactions to demographic and social change led to a backlash, and influenced subsequent electoral outcomes such as the2010 and2014 midterms.[27][22]
In this context, many pundits saw theelection ofDonald Trump as president in 2016 as an example of "whitelash".[22][28]CNN contributorVan Jones coined the term “whitelash” (a aportmanteau of "white" and "backlash") during the 2016 election night coverage by the network to describe what he viewed as a backlash to these changes, including opposition to Obama’s presidency. He said: "This was a whitelash. This was a whitelash against a changing country. It was a whitelash against a black president in part. And that's the part where the pain comes.".[29][30][31] Jones used the term to describe one of the reasons he thought Trump won the election, and he characterized Trump’s victory as partly reflecting this reaction, a view that has been discussed but not universally accepted.[32]
During Trump's first presidency he used the example ofLuis Bracamontes, a man convicted of killing two police officers inSacramento in 2014 and sentenced to death, to migrant caravans with the slogans "Democrats let him into our country" and "Democrats let him stay".[33][34]
After the2020 election, which was won byJoe Biden, Trump and his allies carried outattempts to overturn his election loss, with many participating in the so-called "Stop the Steal" movement, which culminated in theJanuary 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. These events have been interpreted by some scholars and commentators as reflecting broader historical narratives in American politics. Certain analysts have drawn parallels between these events and theLost Cause myth after theConfederacy lost theAmerican Civil War. HistorianJoseph Ellis has argued that overlooking the role of race in Trump’s political support echoes earlier historical tendencies to downplay racial factors in major national conflicts, including the disputed argument made by Lost Cause advocates, who attributed the American Civil War to a clash over constitutional issues while downplaying the role of slavery. These interpretations, however, remain subjects of debate among historians and political analysts.[35][36][37]
Throughout the latter half of the twentieth century,South Africa’sapartheid system faced growing political, social, and moral pressure, both domestically and internationally. The Afrikaner government's actions during this period frequently reflected concern over potential backlash from segments of thewhite electorate, particularly amongAfrikaners, whose political dominance apartheid was designed to protect.
In 1975, reports indicated that the government was slow to approve the desegregation of residential areas due to fears of resistance from conservative Afrikaner communities.[38] This reluctance underscored the extent to which apartheid policies were maintained to preserve racial privilege rather than to promote equality. Similarly, in 1981,The New York Times reported thatPrime MinisterP. W. Botha’s cabinet, wary of a white backlash, publicly emphasized statistics showing disproportionately higher per capita spending on education for white children than for Black children—figures that highlighted the systemic inequalities at the core of apartheid.[39]
During the 1980s, electoral trends reflected growing divisions within the white population. Support for the rulingNational Party declined among white Afrikaners, while theConservative Party gained traction by advocating for even stricter racial separation. At the same time, asignificant number of white South Africans - including clergy, journalists, academics, business leaders, and members of liberal political parties -actively opposed apartheid, participated in protests, supported reform, or worked withanti-apartheid movements despite social and legal risks.[40][41][42]
As apartheid began to be dismantled, resistance from parts of the white population persisted. In 1990, political commentatorJeane Kirkpatrick observed thatPresidentF. W. de Klerk was aware that opinion polls showed substantial white opposition to his reform policies.[43] Nevertheless, de Klerk proceeded with negotiations that led to a1992 referendum which ultimately led to the end of apartheid.[44] In 1994, South Africa held itsfirst multiracial democratic election, resulting inNelson Mandela being electedpresident of South Africa (the first black president in South African history), theAfrican National Congress winning a majority in theSouth African Parliament, and marking the formal end of institutionalized racial segregation.
In the years following apartheid, concerns about Afrikaner identity and political marginalization continued to surface. By the late 1990s, some Afrikaner groups warned of backlash unless cultural autonomy initiatives, such as the proposed so-calledVolkstaat atOrania, were recognized.[45] Former president P. W. Botha also cautioned against threats to theAfrikaans language, framing them as potential sources of unrest. These debates occurred alongside efforts by the post-apartheid government to redress historical injustices and promote inclusion.[46]
More recently, discussions of historical memory and transformation have continued to provoke controversy. In 2017, scholarJohn Campbell suggested that opposition, particularly among Afrikaners, to the removal of colonial-era statues, the renaming of places, and the increased use ofEnglish at historically white universities was, to some extent, predictable. These debates reflect the ongoing challenge of reconciling cultural identity with the legacy of a system widely condemned for its racial oppression and denial of basic human rights.[47]
Notes
White rage got us here ... Barack Obama's election — and its powerful symbolism of black advancement — was the major trigger for the policybacklash that led to Donald Trump
Carol Anderson's "White Rage" takes what many of us have known, perhaps existentially or intuitively, and puts it in a new framework, adding a synthesis of thoroughly researched archival evidence that documents the deeply entrenched and ubiquitous nature of white rage — white backlash, across time and space — as response to black advancement.
The responses that I received, however, speak to something more extreme than just reactionary or unreceptive responses. Rather than "white fragility", these responses are ones that speak to deep forms of white world-making
Given this history, it would be astonishing if the unintended, rapid diversification of the United States over the past 50 years didn't produce a backlash rooted in white anxiety about racial demographics
What is particularly noteworthy is that the white backlash in this case was in place before the passage of the Civil Rights Act in July 1964. The pattern is this: American reactionary politics is nearly always preemptive, predicting catastrophe and highlighting potential slippery slopes. "White backlash," after all, got its name in 1963, just months after African Americans in Birmingham risked attacks from police dogs and high-pressure fire hoses in order to demand justice, and immediately after Kennedy mooted the idea of substantive legislation—both events taking place well before the Civil Rights Act became law. What one reporter called "white panic" was driven by fears of "favoritism" and "special privileges" for African Americans—that white "workers would be forced out of their jobs to make way for Negroes," as one article put it that year, when Jim Crow still prevailed. "Many of my people think the Negroes want to take over the country," a midwestern Republican politician said in a Wall Street Journal article published on April 10 of the following year, still months before the Act's passage. "They think there are things in the bill that just aren't there, like forced sales of housing to Negroes and stuff like that." White backlashers imagined coercion where it did not exist. They embraced a lexicon and posture of victimization that hearkened back to the era of Reconstruction and anticipated the deceiving, self-pitying MAGA discourse that drives reactionary politics in Donald Trump's America.
In an eleventh-hour compromise between party leaders – considered the "Great Betrayal" by many blacks and southern Republicans ...
Perhaps because of the symbolism, or concern over right‐wing Afrikaner backlash, the Government has been slow to approve desegregation
Sensitive to the danger of a white back- lash, Mr. Botha's Cabinet colleagues have spent much of this raucous political season advertising statistics they normally gloss over.
{{cite web}}:|last= has generic name (help)Further reading