AMHERST — Despite an hourlong discussion by a panel of University of Massachusetts Amherst experts about what fueled President-elect Donald Trump’s victory and where it will lead Americans, several audience members chastised the panelists during a question-and-answer session for leaving out a key issue — race.
Rodrigo Dominguez-Villegas speaks during a Q and A session after a @UMassAmherst panel about the #election. pic.twitter.com/byFXqLwBTT
— Stephanie Murray (@StephMurr_Jour) November 17, 2016
The panel of professors had spoken about Trump’s impact on the economy, journalism, politics, immigration, the judicial system and foreign policy. But the topic that was missing, some of the 200 attendees said, was the issue they have found most pressing: race and xenophobic rhetoric throughout the Trump campaign.
“While as the provost very well said at the very beginning of the panel it is impossible to cover everything, the election was so divisive because of this topic,” Rodrigo Dominguez-Villegas said. “The word race came up three times. The word racism was mentioned once.”
Armanthia Duncan, 33, agreed. The Northampton woman felt sick to her stomach as she watched the crowd display apathy and even laughter at the prospect of Trump’s leadership.
“I want to speak to not the things that were said here tonight, but what wasn’t said here tonight.” Duncan said. “I came here today as a graduate student, as a woman of color someone who is experiencing very real fear.”
As the audience asked questions revealing their fears, concerns and opinions after last week’s election, the conversation shifted to talk of white supremacy and racism.
“I do not think that we as a panel are belittling the fact that there is white supremacy in the United States, and that it has found its way to the White House,” said panelist Tatishe Nteta, an associate professor of political science. “What we are here to do is to provide information and evidence.”
Nteta told the crowd that once the evidence and data were presented, the fight against white supremacy and racism could begin. Other panelists encouraged activism, self-expression and social change through litigation.
The panel, titled “Election 2016: What Happened? What is Likely to Happen,” featured a panel of seven faculty experts and was moderated by UMass Provost Katherine S. Newman.
Ray La Raja, professor of political science, said a number of researchers predicted Trump’s win based on factors like the length of time the Democratic Party had held the presidency. But because Trump was such an unusual candidate, many experts discounted their own research.
To get American politics in a stronger place, La Raja suggested something he said his progressive listeners may not like: give more power to party leaders and let them help pick candidates.
“Such things are the lubricants of effective governance in a society so large and diverse and divided,” La Raja said.
La Raja called for more “smoke-filled rooms” with politicians and lobbyists with experience and reputations riding on election results.
Kathy Roberts Forde, UMass journalism department chairwoman, acknowledged the criticism journalists have come under following Trump’s victory. Those criticisms include giving Trump too much free press, being too gentle on his campaign’s documented falsehoods and reporting heavily on polls. “Fair enough,” Forde said. “But there was also a lot of hard-hitting, smart reporting done in this election that did not fail in these ways.”
Forde said the press may come under stronger attack in the next four years, not by readers but by the government. Forde pointed to Trump’s newly appointed chief strategist Stephen Bannon, chairman of Breitbart News. The press may come under direct attack, but the press is strong enough “to attack right back,” Forde said.
To better understand the current moment, Forde pointed to the past.
“We’ve got to teach this country’s history … in a better way. That’s all there is to it,” Forde said. “I apologize to anyone in this room who felt your feelings and your perspective were not heard.”
Forde cited an 1898 coup d’etat in Wilmington, North Carolina that was racially motivated and led by white supremacists. The attack went unrecognized in that state until the mid-2000s, Forde said.
“Yes this is a long time ago, but it is a history that matters,” Forde said.
Paul M. Collins Jr., of the UMass legal studies department, said he does not believe the Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade or outlaw gay marriage during a Trump presidency.
“The Supreme Court does not generally grant constitutional rights to Americans and then take them away,” Collins said.
But Trump is likely to appoint several Supreme Court justices, Collins said, based on the current vacancy on that court and the ages of the justices. Additionally, Trump will likely appoint some 100 judges to lower-level courts.
UMass economics professor Gerald Friedman gave a presentation sprinkled with jokes and self-deprecating remarks, but he addressed the economy, which has riled up strong feelings in American voters.
Friedman, who contributed economic research to the Bernie Sanders campaign, said Trump will likely strike programs like overtime rules, reforms in labor law and inspections to stop wage theft that will hurt the very people who voted for him.
Jennifer Lundquist, professor of sociology, spoke about the impact a Trump presidency may have on immigration. She called the United States and Mexico border “one of the great ironies” of the election.
“Building a wall makes such an effective campaign slogan, but the reality doesn’t really matter,” Lundquist said. “The proposed wall … which has devolved more into series of fences, is unlikely to have any effect on migration at all except add to a climate of exclusion and hostility.”
To help undocumented immigrants in the country, Lundquist urged the audience to push for legislation that creates a path to citizenship.
Paul Musgrave, a professor of political science, said he expects Trump’s administration to be “at best, weakly mediocre” when it comes to foreign policy.
“In one sense we are in uncharted waters. In another sense we are in very familiar territory,” Musgrave said. “We are likely to see a world less safe, less free and less wealthy than it has been.”
According to Musgrave, Trump’s foreign policy has been the least vetted since Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign. Musgrave believes the country will likely see the end of the liberal trade order under Trump’s leadership and U.S.-led alliances will weaken in Europe and Asia.
The world will be less healthy, Musgrave added, if Trump withdraws from global initiatives to combat climate change.