本次讲座探讨了导致2016年政治反弹的经济、人口和文化根源，重点关注身份政治的复兴和茶党运动。 讲座者首先考察了茶党的几个核心信条：反精英主义、相信阴谋论（尤其是关于媒体的阴谋论），以及对税收和政府的敌意，特别是对联邦政府的敌意。讲座将反税收情绪与对少数族裔的焦虑以及对奥巴马总统公民身份的质疑联系起来，阐释了经济和种族不满情绪之间复杂的相互作用。 然后，讲座过渡到导致反弹的经济因素。虽然金融市场在2008年危机后迅速复苏，但实际工资停滞不前，生产力提高并未转化为更高的时薪。工会成员人数的下降、收入不平等的加剧以及中产阶级工人日益增加的职业不安全感，描绘了一幅普遍存在的经济焦虑的景象，而这种焦虑并不局限于工人阶级选民。讲座者引用了丹·马科维茨关于“精英陷阱”的书，强调了技术和全球化如何侵蚀中产阶级职业。报告指出，唐纳德·特朗普的主要选民并不局限于刻板印象中的“蓝领工人”。 讲座还分析了阿莉·霍克希尔德（研究路易斯安那州石油工人）和凯瑟琳·克莱默（研究威斯康星州农村工人）的民族志研究，她们都观察到白人选民中普遍存在一种深刻的怨恨感。霍克希尔德的“深层故事”描绘了人们在美国梦的队列中等待，却看到少数族裔、妇女、移民甚至濒危动物在奥巴马总统领导下的联邦政府的帮助下“插队”。这种被忽视和羞辱的感觉助长了针对政府而非企业的愤怒。克莱默在她的威斯康星州农村研究中也呼应了这些观点。 讲座的核心在于探讨美国种族关系的历史背景，追溯融合与排斥的漫长历程。从剥夺黑人公民身份的德雷德·斯科特判决，到表面上促进种族平等的内战修正案，讲座者展示了每一次走向融合的步伐都遭到了反弹。吉姆·克劳法的兴起，《社会保障法》中排除家庭和农业工人的妥协，以及实施布朗诉教育委员会案的斗争都说明了这种模式。 讲座将马丁·路德·金的融合愿景与马尔科姆·X的黑人民族主义分离呼吁进行了对比。它还考察了具有里程碑意义的事件，例如1964年《民权法案》和1965年《选举权法案》，随后是莫伊尼汉报告，该报告引发了关于黑人底层阶级社会病态的激烈辩论。尼克松的南方战略被认为是故意利用种族分裂来获取政治利益。民主党的麦戈文-弗雷泽改革导致了妇女和少数族裔代表的配额。这加速了一些人认为某些群体比其他群体更受优待的现象。 讲座引用了巴基最高法院的案例。杰西·杰克逊的彩虹联盟试图将大熔炉的理想与多元身份的现实相协调，但被一些人解读为民主党正在形成一个排除白人的少数族裔拼凑联盟的信号。创建少数族裔占多数的选区，虽然旨在增加少数族裔的代表性，但也是试图沿着种族和民族界限重新划分界线的又一次尝试。康涅狄格州RIC诉德斯蒂法诺案被作为围绕公平问题产生冲突叙事的例子呈现。 讲座最后指出，关于赔偿问题的辩论也会产生高度情绪化和相互排斥的叙述，这些叙述往往适得其反。通过对美国种族问题的历史进行深入研究，讲座指出，人们倾向于抓住特定的事实这一趋势十分明显。

This lecture explores the economic, demographic, and cultural origins of the political backlash leading up to 2016, focusing on the resurgence of identity politics and the Tea Party movement. The lecturer begins by examining the Tea Party's core tenets: anti-elitism, belief in conspiracy theories (particularly regarding the media), and hostility toward taxes and government, especially the federal government. The lecture ties the anti-tax sentiment to anxieties about ethnic minorities and the questioning of President Obama's citizenship, illustrating a complex interplay of economic and racial resentments. The lecture then transitions to the economic factors contributing to the backlash. While financial markets recovered quickly after the 2008 crisis, real wages stagnated, and productivity gains did not translate into higher hourly wages. The decline of union membership, the rise in income inequality, and the increasing job insecurity for middle-class workers paint a picture of widespread economic anxiety that is not limited to working-class voters. The lecturer cites Dan Markovitz's book on the "Maritocracy Trap," highlighting how technology and globalization are eroding middle-class occupations. Primary voters for Donald Trump, it is noted, were not limited to the stereotypical “Joe lunch bucket.” The lecture also analyzes ethnographic research from Arlie Hochschild (studying oil workers in Louisiana) and Katherine Kramer (studying rural workers in Wisconsin), both of whom observed a profound sense of resentment among white voters. Hochschild's "deep story" depicts people waiting in line for the American dream, only to see minorities, women, immigrants, and even endangered animals "cutting in line," facilitated by the federal government under President Obama. This sense of being overlooked and humiliated fuels anger directed not at corporations, but at the government. Kramer echoes these sentiments in her study of rural Wisconsin. The crux of the lecture explores the historical context of race relations in America, tracing a long arc of inclusion and exclusion. From the Dred Scott decision, which denied citizenship to Black Americans, to the Civil War amendments ostensibly promoting racial equality, the lecturer shows how each step toward integration was met with backlash. The rise of Jim Crow laws, the compromise in the Social Security Act that excluded domestic and agricultural workers, and the struggles to implement Brown v. Board of Education illustrate this pattern. The lecture contrasts Martin Luther King's integrationist vision with Malcolm X's Black nationalist call for separation. It also examines landmark events such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, followed by the Moynihan report, which raised contentious debates about the social pathologies of the Black underclass. Nixon's Southern Strategy is cited as a deliberate exploitation of racial divisions for political gain. The McGovern-Fraser reforms in the Democratic Party led to quotas for women and minority representation. This accelerated what some perceived as preferential treatment for some groups over others. The lecture references the Baki Supreme Court case. The Jesse Jackson rainbow coalition sought to reconcile the ideals of a melting pot with the reality of diverse identities, but was interpreted by some as a signal that the Democratic Party was forming a patchwork of minorities excluding whites. The creation of majority-minority districts, while intended to increase minority representation, was another attempt to redraw lines of separation along racial and ethnic lines. The Connecticut RIC v. De Stefano case is presented as an example of conflicting narratives surrounding fairness. The lecturer concludes by noting that debates about reparations also produce highly charged emotional and mutually exclusive narratives that are often self defeating. With a thorough look at the history of racial issues in the United States the lecture notes there is a clear trend of people glomming onto specific facts.