By: Summer

Isn’t It Racist To Assume That Ramaswamy’s Message Alienates An Entire Race Of People?

Jeff Charles is the host of “A Fresh Perspective” podcast and a contributor for RedState and Liberty Nation.

The views in this article are the writer’s own.

On the night of the second Republican presidential primary debate, entrepreneur and candidate Vivek Ramaswamy wrote a post on X in which he declared, “The real divide in this country isn’t between black & white or even between Democrat & Republican. It’s between the 80% of Americans who agree with our founding ideals & the 20% who wish to apologize for a nation founded on those ideals.”

Yet Ramaswamy has faced backlash coming from Black Americans—on both sides of the political spectrum—who do not appreciate his rhetoric when it comes to the Black community. His supporters have defended his approach on the grounds that he is only holding up a mirror to Black America as he discusses the challenges of our community. But they are missing the central issue.

Our problem with Ramaswamy is not his message so much as his messaging approach. Specifically, there is something that is notably absent from his rhetoric about this demographic: actual solutions and the willingness to engage with Black Americans.

One of the key issues Ramaswamy has raised is the problem of too many Black children growing up without a father. This certainly is not a problem in all Black communities, but it is in some—indeed, it’s something we discuss amongst ourselves, on both sides of the political aisle.

But it’s worth asking: Can a president do anything to address this issue?

Fatherlessness is a societal problem that only society can solve. There is no real government solution to this problem other than rescinding policies that have contributed to fatherlessness.

So why is a presidential candidate making this a central plank of his campaign?

Moreover, what policies has Ramaswamy suggested removing to encourage more Black families to stay together?

So far, the only real policy related to Black people that he has made a key component of his campaign is to push for abolishing affirmative action, which has absolutely nothing to do with keeping Black fathers in the home.

Meanwhile, Ramaswamy seems to deny the impact of historically racist policies imposed specifically to create roadblocks for African Americans. And with the exception of gun control, the candidate has not even bothered to have in-depth discussions on policies that have a disproportionately negative impact on Black Americans.

Others on the Right have insisted that Black people are criticizing Ramaswamy because he is a Republican “telling the truth” about the Black community. This isn’t even close to being true. The objections have more to do with the fact that he is simply peddling the same hackneyed talking points that too many Conservative Inc. commentators and politicians have employed for decades—and not in order to uplift Black Americans.

When you walk around talking about problems in the Black community to a largely white audience, that’s not going to read as someone trying to court our votes. It’s going to read as an attack at best and pandering to racial stereotypes to get other people’s votes at worst.

In essence, Ramaswamy does not seem to be concerned with the true causes that have led to the conditions in which too many Black Americans live. He is simply reciting the same vapid script conservatives have used for decades, parroting tropes about African Americans that endear him to the conservative base instead of dialoguing with Black Americans about the actual issues facing their communities.

To his credit, Ramaswamy did visit Chicago after a fierce round of criticism came from Black conservatives and liberals against his rhetoric. Ramaswamy also made a couple of appearances on Black media. He engaged in a spirited debate on “The Breakfast Club” with Tezlyn Figaro, Charlamagne tha God, and other hosts. The candidate also participated in an interview with The Cartier Family. But as far as being on the ground with Black Americans, the Chicago visit seems to be the only instance to date. Since then, it does not appear he has bothered to appear in other predominantly Black communities to commiserate with the people whose problems he loves discussing on the campaign trail and on social media.

The Republican Party’s inability to reach a significant chunk of the Black population has been a source of consternation among conservative circles for years. Ramaswamy’s rhetoric and talking points provide a clear illustration of why this has been the case. Those criticizing Black people for voting Democrat at a rate of 90 percent are ignoring a reality that many on the Right aren’t willing to admit: The Republican Party does not appear to want Black voters—at least, if you judge by their actions and rhetoric.

The party has not made serious outreach to Black voters since the Barry Goldwater years. GOP candidates seeking office at all levels of government rarely venture into Black neighborhoods to court voters and win them over. If you were to ask the average black person living in Chicago or other cities when they last saw a Republican candidate in their communities, they would be hard-pressed to tell you.

The simple truth is that Black people can’t vote for a Republican mayor or city councilmember if none are running in their cities.

The former Party of Lincoln essentially abandoned Black voters for decades, and it will take a concerted effort over the long-term to start winning them back. But, like Ramaswamy, the GOP is content merely to talk about Black Americans—and loath to talk to Black Americans.

If the GOP wants this to change, they will have to evolve their overall outreach strategy. The question is: Are they willing?