Book Review: The Color of Politics

Published in 1997, The Color of Politics: Race and the Mainsprings of American Politics written by Michael Goldfield is a political science/labor-studies book about class, economics, political, and racial issues within American society.  The book is divided into three parts: Critical Turning Points in Early U.S. History; Twentieth Century Politics; and Part III – Conclusion.

In part 1 of the book, Goldfield explores the contradictory nature of early American leaders.  For example, 5 of the first 7 presidents and the majority of the presidential cabinet members & Supreme Court justices were slave owners.  Although he hated slavery, President Abraham Lincoln still held racist beliefs, Goldfield writes. 

In Part 2, Goldfield argues that present-day racial segregation can be attributed to policies that existed decades ago.  On page 205, Goldfield writes: “The high degree of segregation in many U.S. cities in the present period can, at least in part, be traced to federal housing policy under FDR.”  Continuing on page 206, he writes that African Americans “were heavily discriminated against in the granting of Federal Housing Authority (FHA) and Veterans Administration (VA) loan guarantees and subsidies.” 

Racial discrimination also has impacted hiring selections for jobs.  On page 206, Goldfield continues: “Initial policies in the defense industry in 1940 led many companies to hire only white workers, few if any even considering Black workers for skilled jobs.”

Goldfield points out that during the 1980s, the United States went from being the largest creditor nation in the world to being the largest debtor nation in the world.  Goldfield also explains that wage disparities in the United States, which are greater than in any other economically developed capitalist country in the world, have continued to rapidly increase.

Throughout the book, Goldfield raises insightful questions about the role that class, economics, politics, and race play in American life.  One segment in Part III of the book is particularly noteworthy. 

Goldfield writes on page 342: “Contrary to the claims of critics, quotas and preferences abound throughout the society.  They may be right, they may be wrong, but they are rarely attacked.  The Constitution, for example, says that each state is entitled to two senators, clearly an undemocratic quota because citizens in New York State and California have a far smaller fraction of the influence in choosing their senator than more favored citizens in Wyoming.  Who has been making an issue of this quota?  We have seen the even more extreme legislative preferences that existed in most southern states for the first two-thirds of this century, quotas that were often accepted by many of the same people who now oppose all forms of affirmative action… More common today is the use of informal kinship and friendship networks for jobs.  Whatever the mechanism, they all add up to the exclusion of African-Americans on the basis of race, clear violations of the merit principle.  What solution do critics of affirmative action propose for these violations of the merit principle that they supposedly oppose, and where are their indignant expressions of protest?”