What do you think?
Rate this book
Brown Is the New White: How the Demographic Revolution Has Created a New American Majority
* NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER * WASHINGTON POST BESTSELLER * Despite the abundant evidence from Obama's victories proving that the U.S. population has fundamentally changed, many progressives and Democrats continue to waste millions of dollars chasing white swing voters. Explosive population growth of people of color in America over the past fifty years has laid the foundation for a New American Majority consisting of progressive people of color (23 percent of all eligible voters) and progressive whites (28 percent of all eligible voters). These two groups make up51 percent of all eligible voters in America right now, and that majority is growing larger every day. Failing to properly appreciate this reality, progressives are at risk of missing this moment in history--and losing.
A leader in national politics for thirty years, Steve Phillips has had a front-row seat to these extraordinary political changes. A civil rights lawyer and a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, Phillips draws on his extensive political experience to unveil exactly how people of color and progressive whites add up to a new majority, and what this means for U.S. politics and policy. A book brimming with urgency and hope, Brown Is the New White exposes how far behind the curve Democrats are in investing in communities of color--while illuminating a path forward to seize the opportunity created by the demographic revolution
A leader in national politics for thirty years, Steve Phillips has had a front-row seat to these extraordinary political changes. A civil rights lawyer and a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, Phillips draws on his extensive political experience to unveil exactly how people of color and progressive whites add up to a new majority, and what this means for U.S. politics and policy. A book brimming with urgency and hope, Brown Is the New White exposes how far behind the curve Democrats are in investing in communities of color--while illuminating a path forward to seize the opportunity created by the demographic revolution
274 pages, Kindle Edition
First published February 2, 2016
69 people are currently reading
1135 people want to read
About the author
Steve Phillips
2 books44 followersSteve Phillips is a national political leader, bestselling author, and columnist. He is the author of The New York Times bestseller Brown Is the New White: How the Demographic Revolution Has Created a New American Majority and the newly released national bestselling book How We Win the Civil War: Securing a Multiracial Democracy and Ending White Supremacy for Good.
He is a columnist for The Guardian and The Nation, and an opinion contributor to The New York Times. He is also the host of “Democracy in Color with Steve Phillips,” a color-conscious podcast on politics. He is the founder of Democracy in Color, a political media organization dedicated to race, politics and the multicultural progressive New American Majority.
Phillips is a graduate of Stanford University and University of California College of the Law, San Francisco and practiced civil rights and employment law for many years. Phillips has appeared on multiple national radio and television networks including NBC, CNN, MSNBC and C-SPAN.
He is a columnist for The Guardian and The Nation, and an opinion contributor to The New York Times. He is also the host of “Democracy in Color with Steve Phillips,” a color-conscious podcast on politics. He is the founder of Democracy in Color, a political media organization dedicated to race, politics and the multicultural progressive New American Majority.
Phillips is a graduate of Stanford University and University of California College of the Law, San Francisco and practiced civil rights and employment law for many years. Phillips has appeared on multiple national radio and television networks including NBC, CNN, MSNBC and C-SPAN.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 64 reviews
May 25, 2016
Steve Phillips brings dose of realism to campaign demographics: the white vote is shrinking –and the white swing vote which both parties have spent millions of dollars courting is shrinking with it. In pursuit of this vote the Democrats are ignoring their best demographic: people of color and white progressives. One chapter on the why of this phenomena is called "Blinded by the White".
He describes in charts and numbers the impressive growth of the “brown” potential voting block. In this group he includes groups from Blacks to Asians, to Native Americans, to Latinos and more. He notes that this group along with white progressives now comprises 51% of the potential electorate and it grows every day as more people in these demographic groups turn 18.
Phillips notes that this group is not interested in what the Democrats have offered the swing voter. They haven't been inspired enough by what they've heard and have sat out the two most recent off year elections, thereby handing decisive victories to the Republicans. He gives the example of Kentucky's Senate candidate Alison Lundergan’s refusal to acknowledge that she voted for Barak Obama (although she served as a delegate for him). How many swing votes did this get her? How many voters in the ascendant demographic were turned off and stayed home?
Nate Silver recently wrote of this in a different way. He said that the assumption that Independent voters were politically neither right nor left is challenged by the size of Bernie Sanders vote among those who typically don't vote.
Phillips covers other issues such as the issues that appeal to these voters and the amount of money spent on TV ads when staff for voter registration is more critical.
This is recommended for those interested in politics and elections and highly recommended for Democratic campaign consultants and candidates.
He describes in charts and numbers the impressive growth of the “brown” potential voting block. In this group he includes groups from Blacks to Asians, to Native Americans, to Latinos and more. He notes that this group along with white progressives now comprises 51% of the potential electorate and it grows every day as more people in these demographic groups turn 18.
Phillips notes that this group is not interested in what the Democrats have offered the swing voter. They haven't been inspired enough by what they've heard and have sat out the two most recent off year elections, thereby handing decisive victories to the Republicans. He gives the example of Kentucky's Senate candidate Alison Lundergan’s refusal to acknowledge that she voted for Barak Obama (although she served as a delegate for him). How many swing votes did this get her? How many voters in the ascendant demographic were turned off and stayed home?
Nate Silver recently wrote of this in a different way. He said that the assumption that Independent voters were politically neither right nor left is challenged by the size of Bernie Sanders vote among those who typically don't vote.
Phillips covers other issues such as the issues that appeal to these voters and the amount of money spent on TV ads when staff for voter registration is more critical.
This is recommended for those interested in politics and elections and highly recommended for Democratic campaign consultants and candidates.
April 6, 2016
This book wasn't at all what I was expecting, but, wow, it's powerful. I thought Brown Is the New White was going to read like a history book discussing the changing demographics in the United States, etc. And though that IS how author Steve Phillips begins the book, his main points go way beyond that.
Phillips reminds us that minorities are set to become the majority in the US in the very near future. (This is probably something most of us know by now.) As a group, they have enormous potential to influence the politics of this country. Phillips argues that this potential power isn't being properly harnessed--not by Democrats OR Republicans--and whichever political party gets to these people first, is probably going to be the side that wins elections. Since he is a Democrat, Phillips obviously wants his own party to attract as many minority voters as possible, especially since he believes that minority voters coupled with progressive White voters have some serious staying power and can change the future of this country RIGHT NOW.
Phillips argues pretty strongly that the Democratic Party is overly fixated on wooing undecided White voters. (This is a dynamic I didn't even know existed before reading this book.) Instead of wasting so many resources on trying to win over those undecided White voters, he believes that the Democratic Party should, instead, focus most of its attention, money, and time on winning over minority voters. And to do this, he argues that people of color should be in leadership positions (especially within campaigns), since they know what minority voters want and need. "Smart ass white boys," (as he calls them, eek), just don't have what it takes to understand and persuade minorities--so employ people of color on your campaign who do. "The fact remains," he says, "that the world of progressive politics is dominated by White men at a time when the future of the progressive movement depends on solidifying the support of the growing numbers of people of color in America." He makes a strong point.
Ultimately, this was an eye-opening read for me. Very well-written, nicely structured, and with clear and focused arguments. I only hope that Democrats DO make a concentrated effort to bring the soon-to-be majority minority voters to their side. It makes me hopeful to imagine what we can all accomplish together.
ARC provided by Amazon Vine. See more of my reviews at www.BugBugBooks.com.
Phillips reminds us that minorities are set to become the majority in the US in the very near future. (This is probably something most of us know by now.) As a group, they have enormous potential to influence the politics of this country. Phillips argues that this potential power isn't being properly harnessed--not by Democrats OR Republicans--and whichever political party gets to these people first, is probably going to be the side that wins elections. Since he is a Democrat, Phillips obviously wants his own party to attract as many minority voters as possible, especially since he believes that minority voters coupled with progressive White voters have some serious staying power and can change the future of this country RIGHT NOW.
Phillips argues pretty strongly that the Democratic Party is overly fixated on wooing undecided White voters. (This is a dynamic I didn't even know existed before reading this book.) Instead of wasting so many resources on trying to win over those undecided White voters, he believes that the Democratic Party should, instead, focus most of its attention, money, and time on winning over minority voters. And to do this, he argues that people of color should be in leadership positions (especially within campaigns), since they know what minority voters want and need. "Smart ass white boys," (as he calls them, eek), just don't have what it takes to understand and persuade minorities--so employ people of color on your campaign who do. "The fact remains," he says, "that the world of progressive politics is dominated by White men at a time when the future of the progressive movement depends on solidifying the support of the growing numbers of people of color in America." He makes a strong point.
Ultimately, this was an eye-opening read for me. Very well-written, nicely structured, and with clear and focused arguments. I only hope that Democrats DO make a concentrated effort to bring the soon-to-be majority minority voters to their side. It makes me hopeful to imagine what we can all accomplish together.
ARC provided by Amazon Vine. See more of my reviews at www.BugBugBooks.com.
December 7, 2018
A good, thorough and useful book, but it needs a serious post-2016 update. In a way, it was prescient--that Republicans can count people of color too. I just don't think demographics are going to shift as much as predicted because as recent research shows, a lot of latinos, asians, etc vote Republican and also within a few generations, they stop even identifying as people of color. So I guess I am not all that hopeful about just waiting for a majority minority nation. The progressives need to actually present a vision instead of just taking the black and brown vote for granted, which is what they have done.
May 17, 2020
Finished: 17.05.2020
Genre: non fiction
Rating: C
Conclusion:
Well researched....but as another reader mentioned
...this is all pre-Trump and it felt dated.
Stats based books are best read soon after publication.
Genre: non fiction
Rating: C
Conclusion:
Well researched....but as another reader mentioned
...this is all pre-Trump and it felt dated.
Stats based books are best read soon after publication.
Want to read
January 26, 2016Just ordered this on Amazon! Can't wait to see what insight Steve Phillips has.
March 20, 2019
Very informative with a lot of statistical data helps to forecast where American voting majority is headed.
June 20, 2020
The devastating electoral loss in 2016 has been dissected numerous times and the media narrative that has taken hold is that Hilary Clinton lost because she did not court enough white working-class voters. As a result, Democratic leaders and op-ed writers have been almost singularly focused on how to win back this group of voters. But in this post-2016 update to his book, Mr. Phillips makes a compelling argument that it was the Democrat’s failure to court voters of color to come to the polls, the same voters of color who delivered the White House Barack Obama twice and have been the backbone of the Democratic Party since the 1960s, that lost the election for Clinton. On top of that, Mr. Phillips also makes the compelling argument that the future of the Progressive movement in America runs through the ever increasing number of voters of color and not the ever shrinking number of white voters.
Using demographic information from the most recent presidential elections, and even further back at times, as well as recent census data, Mr. Phillips shows how critical voters of color are to the future success of the progressive movement and how the movement’s calls for addressing the wrongs of America’s past can have a strong appeal to voters of color and progressive whites. Indeed, time and again, Mr. Phillips shows how the number of voters of color who stayed at home on Election Day in 2016 far outstrips Pres. Trump’s vote margins in key Midwest states and beyond. Using that information, Mr. Phillips calls for significant investment by the Democratic Party and Progressives into engaging voters of color, long-term investing in communities of color, and recruiting persons of color into volunteer and leadership positions throughout the country. He also argues that Progressives need to stop worrying about what the shrinking number of white swing voters will think about a particular policy and instead aggressively court voters of color with a bold Progressive platform. While this book was updated before the 2018 midterm election and well before the recent reanimation of the Black Lives Matter movement, it seems to me that Mr. Phillips’ analysis is right on the money for how Democrats won the House of Representatives in 2018, how the country, and Progressives in particular, can begin the long process of making social justice more attainable by investing long-term in communities of color, and what the roadmap to victory looks like in 2020.
My only gripe about this book is Mr. Phillips’ policy chapter. As one of the longest chapters in this book, Mr. Phillips tries to show how Progressive’s policy positions dovetail nicely with the New American Majority of progressive voters of color. However, he doesn’t point to any specific policies, just generalities about how different policy areas are important to Progressives and different demographic groups. It’s almost as if Mr. Phillips is implying that readers should already know what are some specific policy proposals in those areas. I am familiar with some of them, but not all of them and some readers may know even less. So, some more details in this section would’ve been nice. That said, this book is not a strictly policy-oriented book, so I understand why he did not devote too many details to this section.
Mr. Phillips’ analysis is stunning and should be read by all Progressives in this country. I just hope political leaders in the Democratic Party and the Progressive movement take Mr. Phillips’ recommendations to heart before the November election- and before it is too late.
Using demographic information from the most recent presidential elections, and even further back at times, as well as recent census data, Mr. Phillips shows how critical voters of color are to the future success of the progressive movement and how the movement’s calls for addressing the wrongs of America’s past can have a strong appeal to voters of color and progressive whites. Indeed, time and again, Mr. Phillips shows how the number of voters of color who stayed at home on Election Day in 2016 far outstrips Pres. Trump’s vote margins in key Midwest states and beyond. Using that information, Mr. Phillips calls for significant investment by the Democratic Party and Progressives into engaging voters of color, long-term investing in communities of color, and recruiting persons of color into volunteer and leadership positions throughout the country. He also argues that Progressives need to stop worrying about what the shrinking number of white swing voters will think about a particular policy and instead aggressively court voters of color with a bold Progressive platform. While this book was updated before the 2018 midterm election and well before the recent reanimation of the Black Lives Matter movement, it seems to me that Mr. Phillips’ analysis is right on the money for how Democrats won the House of Representatives in 2018, how the country, and Progressives in particular, can begin the long process of making social justice more attainable by investing long-term in communities of color, and what the roadmap to victory looks like in 2020.
My only gripe about this book is Mr. Phillips’ policy chapter. As one of the longest chapters in this book, Mr. Phillips tries to show how Progressive’s policy positions dovetail nicely with the New American Majority of progressive voters of color. However, he doesn’t point to any specific policies, just generalities about how different policy areas are important to Progressives and different demographic groups. It’s almost as if Mr. Phillips is implying that readers should already know what are some specific policy proposals in those areas. I am familiar with some of them, but not all of them and some readers may know even less. So, some more details in this section would’ve been nice. That said, this book is not a strictly policy-oriented book, so I understand why he did not devote too many details to this section.
Mr. Phillips’ analysis is stunning and should be read by all Progressives in this country. I just hope political leaders in the Democratic Party and the Progressive movement take Mr. Phillips’ recommendations to heart before the November election- and before it is too late.
August 9, 2016
I'm very glad this book was written. That said, I didn't find much in the text that was new or different in terms of information, strategy, etc. The caveat though is that I'm a political activist with years of experience working in political campaigns and community-based organizations active on issues that leverage opportunities for bottom-up racial equity organizing, activism, and policy advocacy.
The one weakness I found in the book is that author's focus on the "smart-ass white boys" who constitute the overwhelming majority of the liberal and conservative political operatives, particularly at the level of elite national politics. I agree that the policy analysts and political campaign consultants he critics are extremely problematic. Having worked on political issues inside the Washington, D.C. beltway, I ca attest to the overwhelming whiteness, maleness, and absolute arrogance of the class of political operators there who dictate much of what can and can't happen in mainstream politics while making themselves quite well-0ff financially, thank you.
These white boys control the "consensus" on what's practical and possible, including on issues of race and the participation in politics of people of color, even when, in the overwhelming majority of instances in my experience, they have absolutely no experience working on political issues or as service providers in communities of color. In other words, they have nothing to base their assumptions on, but when challenged will actually site the "laugh test," a standard by which political efforts, positions, etc., is often judged...by them, btw. Issues that don't meet the standard they exercise huge influence over are laughed at, is the logic, and those who advocate for such efforts are therefore laughable and get marginalized.
But, while I agree that they're a problem, I think the author's analysis invests too much in the smart-ass attitudes of these white boys and not enough in the power dynamics that put them in the position they're in, and that, once in position, they're defending. An economic analysis would help here as power arrangements generally have to do with gaining the position to dictate the distribution of money, which in turn tends to reproduce those power relations.
My point is that the non-governmental institutions of the political class at every level of politics, from local to state to national is, for the most part, controlled by white boys who don't have the cultural competency, social connections, strategic and tactical expertise to organize communities of color to participate in elections. They're paid for their expertise. They have a financial interest to avoiding being put in a position of having their pre-existing expertise challenged. Moreover, building a base for Democratic politics in communities of color isn't all that profitable. It requires diffusion of financial resources. Concentrating those resources allows consultants to make more money while investing less.
This may be why, as the author noted, a few institutions of influence have made a real investment in promoting people of color into leadership. However, those institutions are not-for-profit charitable organizations. Mission-driven organizations are much more likely to promote diverse leadership and invest strongly in building relationships with low-propensity voters who are disproportionately represented in low-income communities and communities of color who have become alienated from the political process for good reason; political pragmatism as dictated by smart-ass white boys means the issues that are addressed in progressive campaigns are rarely the issues that connect most strongly with the hearts and minds of people in communities of color.
Where I most strongly agree with the author is on this - in order to break the control of smart-ass white boys, we need to figure out how to work through people of color-led organizations rooted organically in communities of color and build a permanent base for progressive politics. This requires us to make ongoing investments in community organizing on issues of direct and specific concern to targeted communities between election years.
We also need to partner with and/or create for-profit enterprises in order to gain access to communications networking technologies, develop apps specifically tailored to communities of color, and form partnerships around shared interests (which is not incompatible with holding a critical view of capitalism, in case we're confused on this point). Finally, my opinionated opinion is that we need to also invest in and partner with direct service providing community institutions, including but not exclusive to food banks, domestic violence shelters, health clinics, adult education and job training programs, GED preparatory programs and alternative schools, and literacy programs. Service providing institutions led by those who are most affected by the concerns they address can do much more than advocacy groups in building long-term relationships with low-income communities, and often serve as community hubs, providing multiple services to communities, including through providing cultural and social opportunities.
All of this, of course, will require us to make philanthropic reform a major initiative of progressives. As a former philanthropic executive, I know there are real limits to what philanthropy can (and should) do. But, here's the rub. Foundations divert money from the public and distribute them according to their preferences. That's our money. We should be trying to shape their preferences.
One last point in my opinionated "review" (call it a diatribe if you like) is this. Immigration is the biggest driver of demographic change. We should acknowledge this and invest in building progressive service organizations that assist with immigrant and refugee resettlement and integration, including through partnering with liberal and progressive faith-based institutions. Time to go to church.
These same prescriptions also apply to the major unions, btw.
The one weakness I found in the book is that author's focus on the "smart-ass white boys" who constitute the overwhelming majority of the liberal and conservative political operatives, particularly at the level of elite national politics. I agree that the policy analysts and political campaign consultants he critics are extremely problematic. Having worked on political issues inside the Washington, D.C. beltway, I ca attest to the overwhelming whiteness, maleness, and absolute arrogance of the class of political operators there who dictate much of what can and can't happen in mainstream politics while making themselves quite well-0ff financially, thank you.
These white boys control the "consensus" on what's practical and possible, including on issues of race and the participation in politics of people of color, even when, in the overwhelming majority of instances in my experience, they have absolutely no experience working on political issues or as service providers in communities of color. In other words, they have nothing to base their assumptions on, but when challenged will actually site the "laugh test," a standard by which political efforts, positions, etc., is often judged...by them, btw. Issues that don't meet the standard they exercise huge influence over are laughed at, is the logic, and those who advocate for such efforts are therefore laughable and get marginalized.
But, while I agree that they're a problem, I think the author's analysis invests too much in the smart-ass attitudes of these white boys and not enough in the power dynamics that put them in the position they're in, and that, once in position, they're defending. An economic analysis would help here as power arrangements generally have to do with gaining the position to dictate the distribution of money, which in turn tends to reproduce those power relations.
My point is that the non-governmental institutions of the political class at every level of politics, from local to state to national is, for the most part, controlled by white boys who don't have the cultural competency, social connections, strategic and tactical expertise to organize communities of color to participate in elections. They're paid for their expertise. They have a financial interest to avoiding being put in a position of having their pre-existing expertise challenged. Moreover, building a base for Democratic politics in communities of color isn't all that profitable. It requires diffusion of financial resources. Concentrating those resources allows consultants to make more money while investing less.
This may be why, as the author noted, a few institutions of influence have made a real investment in promoting people of color into leadership. However, those institutions are not-for-profit charitable organizations. Mission-driven organizations are much more likely to promote diverse leadership and invest strongly in building relationships with low-propensity voters who are disproportionately represented in low-income communities and communities of color who have become alienated from the political process for good reason; political pragmatism as dictated by smart-ass white boys means the issues that are addressed in progressive campaigns are rarely the issues that connect most strongly with the hearts and minds of people in communities of color.
Where I most strongly agree with the author is on this - in order to break the control of smart-ass white boys, we need to figure out how to work through people of color-led organizations rooted organically in communities of color and build a permanent base for progressive politics. This requires us to make ongoing investments in community organizing on issues of direct and specific concern to targeted communities between election years.
We also need to partner with and/or create for-profit enterprises in order to gain access to communications networking technologies, develop apps specifically tailored to communities of color, and form partnerships around shared interests (which is not incompatible with holding a critical view of capitalism, in case we're confused on this point). Finally, my opinionated opinion is that we need to also invest in and partner with direct service providing community institutions, including but not exclusive to food banks, domestic violence shelters, health clinics, adult education and job training programs, GED preparatory programs and alternative schools, and literacy programs. Service providing institutions led by those who are most affected by the concerns they address can do much more than advocacy groups in building long-term relationships with low-income communities, and often serve as community hubs, providing multiple services to communities, including through providing cultural and social opportunities.
All of this, of course, will require us to make philanthropic reform a major initiative of progressives. As a former philanthropic executive, I know there are real limits to what philanthropy can (and should) do. But, here's the rub. Foundations divert money from the public and distribute them according to their preferences. That's our money. We should be trying to shape their preferences.
One last point in my opinionated "review" (call it a diatribe if you like) is this. Immigration is the biggest driver of demographic change. We should acknowledge this and invest in building progressive service organizations that assist with immigrant and refugee resettlement and integration, including through partnering with liberal and progressive faith-based institutions. Time to go to church.
These same prescriptions also apply to the major unions, btw.
July 28, 2020
Phillips convincingly argues the Democrats should focus more on the concerns of people of color since this group is growing, currently leans Democratic but votes much less frequently than progressive whites. He also points out research showing that white swing voters are almost nonexistent and so should not be considered when developing a strong Democratic platform. Generally, Democrats would be best served spending resources on grassroots organizing to register and get out the vote in communities of color. Further, Democrats should adopt an ambitious progressive agenda and recruit leaders from communities of color to drive that agenda. I deducted a star because he misuses statistics on occasion. Not with the intent to mislead but just a poor presentation. For example in chapter two depicting the states in the US shaded by NUMBER not rate. So, we learn several times that California, Texas New York and Florida are the most populous states and nothing else. Further along is at least one more obvious numbers mistake.
November 15, 2020
Very inspiring book on what actually happened beneath the past few US presidential elections while offering insights into the future.
April 13, 2016
An informative and important read! A certain presidential candidate claims that Hispanics love him, after he cheerfully insulted a group of them (among others). I couldn't help but think about this particular drama (for lack of a better term since it's an ongoing thing) when reading this book. Is demographics destiny? Could this candidate win the White House despite saying this and other facepalm-worthy (at best...) things?
Steve Phillips takes a look at the changing face of the US voter and why parties (arguably both) in the US aim for the wrong voters instead of galvanizing the ones who have perhaps remained untapped in terms of releasing their potential as an electoral force. He looks at immigration/birth rates, the focus and tenor of campaigns (both electoral and legislative), the structure of political campaigning itself and proposes HOW the Democrats (although really this is something the Republicans should really work on very much) can help harness these voters.
Some of the information was quite redundant for me: I follow elections (although I am certainly no expert!) and a lot of what he was saying wasn't new. However, it was nice to have a book focused about this topic. It was also helpful to read up on certain things like the employment and utilization of people of color in campaigns.
Phillips writes a large majority of political consultants are white. In itself there's nothing wrong with that (although I personally found it maddening since I've found it's been impossible to get a full-time job that is NOT limited by the election cycle in this field), but Phillips makes the case of why it can be helpful to have people of diverse backgrounds to reach the constituents the parties are trying to talk to: he describes a situation where a consultant used the census data to find Arab-American voters. An employee who happened to work for the consultant pulled 10 times more potential voters, because she was aware of how these potential voters identify (they may not have marked themselves as such on the census). Even if she was wrong it was still a MUCH bigger group to tap into.
Or, for example, another case that is playing out in the primaries: the over reliance on TV ads. Aside from the decline of general TV watching, Phillips (in a recent talk at UC Berkeley) noted that not all candidates need to rely on TV ads now for exposure. Social media can take care of that if done well. It's worth noting that certain parties get cuts from TV ads, which perhaps plays into why campaigns rely on them so much.
That said, even though the topic was really interesting I didn't like the writing style of the book. I can't quite put my finger on it, but I found that it was actually really difficult to read even though I was VERY interested in the topic. The only thing that kept me going was the topic in itself. As I wrote, some people won't like this for being too "101-textbook"-ish (telling them what they already know) or for focusing solely on race/ethnicity.
Overall I'd recommend it. And yes, while it's written for the Democrats/left/progressives/ the Republican Party could stand to read this as well. Their "autopsy" report after the 2012 found that outreach to the same groups Phillips writes about was lacking. It appears no one in their party actually read the autopsy or didn't bother learning from it, so they could probably learn a bit by reading this book. I'd also recommend 'Dog Whistle Politics' by Ian Haney López (which gets a mention in this book) to read as well. It discusses a different topic, but it's a good read about political messaging for anyone.
Borrowed from the library but I think this would be a good purchase for the right person. I also wouldn't be surprised if it pops up in a college class syllabus or as campaign reading.
Steve Phillips takes a look at the changing face of the US voter and why parties (arguably both) in the US aim for the wrong voters instead of galvanizing the ones who have perhaps remained untapped in terms of releasing their potential as an electoral force. He looks at immigration/birth rates, the focus and tenor of campaigns (both electoral and legislative), the structure of political campaigning itself and proposes HOW the Democrats (although really this is something the Republicans should really work on very much) can help harness these voters.
Some of the information was quite redundant for me: I follow elections (although I am certainly no expert!) and a lot of what he was saying wasn't new. However, it was nice to have a book focused about this topic. It was also helpful to read up on certain things like the employment and utilization of people of color in campaigns.
Phillips writes a large majority of political consultants are white. In itself there's nothing wrong with that (although I personally found it maddening since I've found it's been impossible to get a full-time job that is NOT limited by the election cycle in this field), but Phillips makes the case of why it can be helpful to have people of diverse backgrounds to reach the constituents the parties are trying to talk to: he describes a situation where a consultant used the census data to find Arab-American voters. An employee who happened to work for the consultant pulled 10 times more potential voters, because she was aware of how these potential voters identify (they may not have marked themselves as such on the census). Even if she was wrong it was still a MUCH bigger group to tap into.
Or, for example, another case that is playing out in the primaries: the over reliance on TV ads. Aside from the decline of general TV watching, Phillips (in a recent talk at UC Berkeley) noted that not all candidates need to rely on TV ads now for exposure. Social media can take care of that if done well. It's worth noting that certain parties get cuts from TV ads, which perhaps plays into why campaigns rely on them so much.
That said, even though the topic was really interesting I didn't like the writing style of the book. I can't quite put my finger on it, but I found that it was actually really difficult to read even though I was VERY interested in the topic. The only thing that kept me going was the topic in itself. As I wrote, some people won't like this for being too "101-textbook"-ish (telling them what they already know) or for focusing solely on race/ethnicity.
Overall I'd recommend it. And yes, while it's written for the Democrats/left/progressives/ the Republican Party could stand to read this as well. Their "autopsy" report after the 2012 found that outreach to the same groups Phillips writes about was lacking. It appears no one in their party actually read the autopsy or didn't bother learning from it, so they could probably learn a bit by reading this book. I'd also recommend 'Dog Whistle Politics' by Ian Haney López (which gets a mention in this book) to read as well. It discusses a different topic, but it's a good read about political messaging for anyone.
Borrowed from the library but I think this would be a good purchase for the right person. I also wouldn't be surprised if it pops up in a college class syllabus or as campaign reading.
October 4, 2020
ReedIII Quick Review: Backed with history, statistics and statistical analysis Phillips explains the political importance of 1) Progressives and 2) the previous ethnic minority / now political increasing majority. Timely when published early in 2016, but needs an update. Excellent information on institutional racism with history and effects.
February 7, 2024
While this book was published before the 2016 election, I believe its basic premise remains valid; the U.S. is a multi-racial and multi-cultural country and white fence-sitters are no longer the group to placate. I think the author made this case very well.
February 24, 2021
- Predicted Trump’s election would occur because of Democrats focusing on the white middle class swing voters instead of mobilizing the New American Majority (when you add together White progressives + progressive People of Color, we make up a majority of America — we just need to mobilize and energize everyone to get to the polls)
- Explains many of the historical factors that have set up POC at a disadvantage in the US that still have resounding residual effects today - especially the GI Bill, which made homeowners out of and brought wealth to a large white middle class, but enforced Jim Crow laws on POC, setting up the stage for where we are now
- Gives solid, tangible ideas for ways we can turn things around by reforming policies around immigration, the criminal justice system, housing, education, and job training funded in a realistic and achievable way
- Explains many of the historical factors that have set up POC at a disadvantage in the US that still have resounding residual effects today - especially the GI Bill, which made homeowners out of and brought wealth to a large white middle class, but enforced Jim Crow laws on POC, setting up the stage for where we are now
- Gives solid, tangible ideas for ways we can turn things around by reforming policies around immigration, the criminal justice system, housing, education, and job training funded in a realistic and achievable way
June 18, 2017
The premise of the book is all in the title: "Brown IS the New White." Well written, exhaustively documented, and understandably graphed as the book was, reading the first chapter and the graphs in Appendix A made Mr. Phillips' point-- that people of color and the progressive whites who support humane public policy -- now make up 51% of the electorate.
The rest of the book was simply filler. Me. Phillips also made some good points on how campaign dollars should be spent: on the ground, not in television ads. I gave the book four stars for it being longer than it needed to be -- and for wondering how I fit into campaigning for the next progressive presidential candidate, as I don't fit into a "necessary" demographic as a White, progressive baby-boomer woman.
The rest of the book was simply filler. Me. Phillips also made some good points on how campaign dollars should be spent: on the ground, not in television ads. I gave the book four stars for it being longer than it needed to be -- and for wondering how I fit into campaigning for the next progressive presidential candidate, as I don't fit into a "necessary" demographic as a White, progressive baby-boomer woman.
January 27, 2018
I would give this 3.5-4 stars. Phillips makes some salient, data-backed points that land like a punch in the gut for us living in the post-2016 election world. The main thesis of the book is sobering: the number of progressive voters in the US is enough to win national elections, but Democrats continue chasing the shrinking White swing voter pool instead of getting out the vote among people of color, to their detriment.
“After so many years of focusing on and chasing White swing voters, many cannot conceptualize or comprehend a reality in which White people are not the most important voters to prioritize.”
Party leaders should sit up and take notice.
“After so many years of focusing on and chasing White swing voters, many cannot conceptualize or comprehend a reality in which White people are not the most important voters to prioritize.”
Party leaders should sit up and take notice.
Want to read
February 3, 2016For those of you who haven't already purchased a copy, please consider doing so THIS WEEK (until 2/6/16), to help support Teachers 4 Social Justice (T4SJ), an amazing grassroots teacher org in San Francisco, CA that I am a part of! Every book purchased by 2/6 and using the following link (www.brownisthenewwhite.com/teachers_4...) will help T4SJ receive a $10 profit. Thank you so much!!
June 12, 2016
As someone who follows elections and is an activist in issues surrounding said elections, I would give this book to every Democrat in congress or who is even thinking of running.
Although I had a little trouble getting into the book, once I managed that, it was an easy, although very worthwhile read. Much of what he says, I've been saying for years.
My only problem with the book is the tables--they are not explained that well.
Although I had a little trouble getting into the book, once I managed that, it was an easy, although very worthwhile read. Much of what he says, I've been saying for years.
My only problem with the book is the tables--they are not explained that well.
February 18, 2019
Great analysis of the power of the "New American Majority" to win elections. The book outlines how the Democrat's focus on trying to win the "White swing vote" is misguided. If you take the White progressive vote and the vote of people of color it should be more than enough to win elections. Very interesting book, especially in light of the current presidential administration. It helped me understand a lot about the upcoming 2020 election.
August 29, 2017
Really good and inspiring book about building a multiracial coalition for a progressive agenda. One of the first books to really look closely at the political implications of demographic change in America. Would be very curious to read a postscript after the 2016 election. I think the argument is still right but it's a very different context.
December 2, 2017
Phenomenal
A page Turner at every second. Extensive research and empirical data that makes this book a must read (even if you're not drawn to these types of books). You will come away with a wealth of knowledge and questions as to why the political landscape for Democrats remains so complex when you have guidebooks like the one Steve writes. Don't miss out on this book
A page Turner at every second. Extensive research and empirical data that makes this book a must read (even if you're not drawn to these types of books). You will come away with a wealth of knowledge and questions as to why the political landscape for Democrats remains so complex when you have guidebooks like the one Steve writes. Don't miss out on this book
October 4, 2018
Truly a must read for anyone working in or around progressive politics. The author goes a long way to illustrate the goals and priorities needed to mount a successful progressive political campaign in the 21st century. Some new ideas for me here, but also a lot of things I have observed over the last decade of being involved in progressive politics.
December 19, 2018
Excellent! The color of America is changing and it’s hue will be drawn across every line in America. It’s a new day in America as the majority becomes the minority’s. Phillips captures its political impact
This is a must read. This book help me to understand the present white American rage and desperation as both privilege and power is eroding before our eyes.
This is a must read. This book help me to understand the present white American rage and desperation as both privilege and power is eroding before our eyes.
April 1, 2018
Excellent book describing the new American majority and how we need to utilize it to win progressive seats and policies. Should be required reading for all progressive leadership heading political campaigns
May 21, 2018
I have fallen in line with the "Smart-Ass White Boys" of the campaign world before. After 2016, no realistic attempt for political power should continue the "white swing voter" strategy. Standing up for "New American Majority" policies should be the bar future politicians are measured.
July 24, 2017
Very interesting analysis of the make-up of the American voting public and how those with a progressive agenda can take advantage of changing demographics and attitudes to win more elections.
March 26, 2021
Brown Is The New White
# Just by the numbers, people of color are on track to become to voting majority in the US.
1965-2016: people of color goes from 12% to 36% of the US population
US pop in 2021: 330 million, 220 million are eligible to vote
A funny Mark Twain quote: “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”
# On racism in America
A crazy study: they sent out resumes to job listings, where the only tweak was the ethnicity of the names: Emily and Gregory vs. Lakisha and Jamal. The black-sounding names got half as many callbacks as the white-88sounding names.
# America has made compromise after compromise, accepting racist policies/systems because of their practicality and popularity.
Thomas Jefferson, in the early drafts of the Declaration of Independence, wanted to include language that condemned King George III for being ‘determined to keep an open market where men are bought and sold.” Southern delegates pressured him to remove the language.
Lincoln said, in this ever presidential debates: “I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.” Come on Abe.
The GI bill helped 8 out of 10 American men born int he 1920s, and dramatically favored Whites in job assignments, housing laws, etc.
# On the Democratic parties refusal to get behind POC because they think it will alienate white moderates
In a nutshell, Phillips tells the Dems to “dance with the one that brung ya”. He thinks that it’s irrational to cater so much to white people because they simply don’t have as many votes as the POC who could be brought into the party, but he we are alienating.
For example, on Obama and the ACA: he compromised the bill in the name of bipartisanship. The plan limped out of the gate, and didn’t help POC in the ways at could have, which ended up alienating POC’s and didn’t help bipartisanship in the least.
Another example: Obama cracked down on Latinos at the border by breaking up families, again, trying to appeal to the other side as being tough on crime. All this did was alienate Latinos and again, didn’t garner bipartisanship.
p. 67: I think I don’t understand the argument here. I must be missing something, because it doesn’t make sense to me.
# White men control a disproportionate amount of aspects of the Democratic party. There is not equal ethnic representation, and it’s not strategic.
They make up 23% of Democratic voters, yet control 80% of non-profits, consultancies and foundations that invest in elections.
Obama demonstrated “cultural competence”, when he cunningly navigated the Reverend Wright drama. Wright said some very anti-American stuff, which they feared would alienate whites during the 2008 election. He straddled the line perfectly and spoke both to Black and White voters in a manner that soother both sides.
If we can put people with such cultural competence in power, we stand to gain…
# Conservatives target POC through suppression and seduction
Suppression: voter ID laws, false claims of fraud, eliminating same-day voter reg, early voting, weekend voting.
Seduction: they elect POC’s, and the Dems are afraid to!
A “dog-whistle”: coded racism. Saying things that are subtly racist (like a dog whistle can only be heard by dogs, racist underpinnings are heard by Whites).
# Just by the numbers, people of color are on track to become to voting majority in the US.
1965-2016: people of color goes from 12% to 36% of the US population
US pop in 2021: 330 million, 220 million are eligible to vote
A funny Mark Twain quote: “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”
# On racism in America
A crazy study: they sent out resumes to job listings, where the only tweak was the ethnicity of the names: Emily and Gregory vs. Lakisha and Jamal. The black-sounding names got half as many callbacks as the white-88sounding names.
# America has made compromise after compromise, accepting racist policies/systems because of their practicality and popularity.
Thomas Jefferson, in the early drafts of the Declaration of Independence, wanted to include language that condemned King George III for being ‘determined to keep an open market where men are bought and sold.” Southern delegates pressured him to remove the language.
Lincoln said, in this ever presidential debates: “I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.” Come on Abe.
The GI bill helped 8 out of 10 American men born int he 1920s, and dramatically favored Whites in job assignments, housing laws, etc.
# On the Democratic parties refusal to get behind POC because they think it will alienate white moderates
In a nutshell, Phillips tells the Dems to “dance with the one that brung ya”. He thinks that it’s irrational to cater so much to white people because they simply don’t have as many votes as the POC who could be brought into the party, but he we are alienating.
For example, on Obama and the ACA: he compromised the bill in the name of bipartisanship. The plan limped out of the gate, and didn’t help POC in the ways at could have, which ended up alienating POC’s and didn’t help bipartisanship in the least.
Another example: Obama cracked down on Latinos at the border by breaking up families, again, trying to appeal to the other side as being tough on crime. All this did was alienate Latinos and again, didn’t garner bipartisanship.
p. 67: I think I don’t understand the argument here. I must be missing something, because it doesn’t make sense to me.
# White men control a disproportionate amount of aspects of the Democratic party. There is not equal ethnic representation, and it’s not strategic.
They make up 23% of Democratic voters, yet control 80% of non-profits, consultancies and foundations that invest in elections.
Obama demonstrated “cultural competence”, when he cunningly navigated the Reverend Wright drama. Wright said some very anti-American stuff, which they feared would alienate whites during the 2008 election. He straddled the line perfectly and spoke both to Black and White voters in a manner that soother both sides.
If we can put people with such cultural competence in power, we stand to gain…
# Conservatives target POC through suppression and seduction
Suppression: voter ID laws, false claims of fraud, eliminating same-day voter reg, early voting, weekend voting.
Seduction: they elect POC’s, and the Dems are afraid to!
A “dog-whistle”: coded racism. Saying things that are subtly racist (like a dog whistle can only be heard by dogs, racist underpinnings are heard by Whites).
July 11, 2017
If there were half a star, I would give this 3.5 stars. It's good, it's just not quite what I wanted. I slightly knew Steve Phillips when he was organizing in the Bay Area; he was much younger then and I didn't realize how much of a Democrat he is now. So it was somewhat disappointing to me that he's not really moving outside of the two-party paradigm. But I love his policy proposals and he does a great job of showing in a data-driven way that's hard to argue with (although I am sure some will try) that these proposals will be popular with a wide swath of the electorate and are capable of mobilizing the "new majority."
There are a lot of people who need to read this book. I may not have been one of them, although I'm glad I did. I think it's great for people to be exposed to Phillips' deep rumination about whether or not to capitalize "White," and his pointing out that 97% of Democratic party money goes to white consultants and what that means about their assumptions. That said, although he gets down in the weeds early on, looking at the exact makeup, demographics and political preferences of the "New Majority" - which is really a group of minorities - when he states that "the new majority is inherently progressive," that hides some pretty deep assumptions that might not pan out.
I think this book should be required reading for every single Democratic party official in every state. But others will find it useful as well, especially if you know people who will argue that the Democrats need to hew to the right in order to court or win back or not lose conservative white swing voters.
There are a lot of people who need to read this book. I may not have been one of them, although I'm glad I did. I think it's great for people to be exposed to Phillips' deep rumination about whether or not to capitalize "White," and his pointing out that 97% of Democratic party money goes to white consultants and what that means about their assumptions. That said, although he gets down in the weeds early on, looking at the exact makeup, demographics and political preferences of the "New Majority" - which is really a group of minorities - when he states that "the new majority is inherently progressive," that hides some pretty deep assumptions that might not pan out.
I think this book should be required reading for every single Democratic party official in every state. But others will find it useful as well, especially if you know people who will argue that the Democrats need to hew to the right in order to court or win back or not lose conservative white swing voters.
December 23, 2024
Somewhat conflicted about this book. The book offers immensely wise advice to the Democratic Party on how to better engage black and Hispanic voters. "Putting money where our mouth is" has not been a strategy employed by the party since the end of the Obama era. The book rightly identifies areas of improvement on this front: more Spanish-language advertising, more genuine engagement with black and Hispanic communities, more candidate recruitment with authentic ties to these communities, hiring folks from these communities who can shape policy and messaging to get them out to the polls and convince them to vote for Dems, etc. All wise and valid points.
However, the book also falls into the fatal trap that got the Democratic Party into the 2024 election mess in the first place: "Demographics is destiny". The results this past November showed America that is not the case. Trump saw gains with black men. Half of Hispanics, including a majority of Hispanic men, voted for Trump. The book rightfully identifies that the Democratic Party is dominated by an educated, suburban class and has given up on genuinely engaging these voters BUT falls short by saying engagement is all that is needed. That black and Hispanic voters will be swayed by social progressivism if only engaged to do so. It fails to tackle the persuasion aspect of politics.
Again this is all in hindsight given 2024 but the book gets halfway there. Engagement is direly needed but engagement is not enough. If the Democratic Party wants to win these voters back it cannot just engage but also persuade and invite these voters to shape the party's policy and messaging to get them to vote for them.
However, the book also falls into the fatal trap that got the Democratic Party into the 2024 election mess in the first place: "Demographics is destiny". The results this past November showed America that is not the case. Trump saw gains with black men. Half of Hispanics, including a majority of Hispanic men, voted for Trump. The book rightfully identifies that the Democratic Party is dominated by an educated, suburban class and has given up on genuinely engaging these voters BUT falls short by saying engagement is all that is needed. That black and Hispanic voters will be swayed by social progressivism if only engaged to do so. It fails to tackle the persuasion aspect of politics.
Again this is all in hindsight given 2024 but the book gets halfway there. Engagement is direly needed but engagement is not enough. If the Democratic Party wants to win these voters back it cannot just engage but also persuade and invite these voters to shape the party's policy and messaging to get them to vote for them.
October 10, 2016
I read a good chunk of this book during the second Clinton-Trump Presidential debate, so I feel indebted to Philips for giving me some hope and sanity tonight!
Phillips' basic premise is that the conventional political wisdom that presidential elections are decided by working-class white swing voters is misguided. Instead, he argues, progressive candidates should shift their focus to the so-called New Progressive Majority that includes the growing number of people of color as well as progressive white voters.
Exhibit A: He contrasts the 2004 and 2008 elections Kerry hinged his election on "swing state" working class white voters and fell just short. Contrast this with Obama's base coalition of black, latino and progressive white support - with blue collar white voters helping him to run up the score. Sure, economic conditions, the lack of an incumbent in 2008 and other factors all had a significant impact but Phillips underlying point is valid.
These ideas have been building for some time and it's awesome to see this thinking summarized into a well-reasoned argument supported by numbers and studies.
Phillips takes it a step further by looking at the Obama administration's messaging around health care and economic reforms. He questions whether the losses in the 2010 mid-terms were the result of reverting to a focus on white swing-state voters and not keeping this new coalition engaged. Again, one could argue other factors where equally/more important like mid-term elections traditionally have low voter turnout or point out that odd trend where the party of the incumbent president often suffers losses in the first mid-term election. Still, this is an interesting idea and we should be questioning whether a shift has taken place. Maybe we've finally hit a point where a progressive politician can succeed nationally by presenting a balanced - or even a black-latino centric - messaging instead of the stale swing state narrative. If so, then perhaps we can finally move past divisive and limiting thinking like red-state/blue-state. Wouldn't that be nice?
Lastly, the book takes a looks at how these politics affect fundraising and non-profits as well as efforts by the Republican party to win over this New Progressive Coalition.
So, I obviously enjoyed this book. As we head into the 2016 election it will be fascinating to see the turnout and if Hillary can build on this new coalition or if we'll revert back to 2004. Well, fascinating or horrifying.
Phillips' basic premise is that the conventional political wisdom that presidential elections are decided by working-class white swing voters is misguided. Instead, he argues, progressive candidates should shift their focus to the so-called New Progressive Majority that includes the growing number of people of color as well as progressive white voters.
Exhibit A: He contrasts the 2004 and 2008 elections Kerry hinged his election on "swing state" working class white voters and fell just short. Contrast this with Obama's base coalition of black, latino and progressive white support - with blue collar white voters helping him to run up the score. Sure, economic conditions, the lack of an incumbent in 2008 and other factors all had a significant impact but Phillips underlying point is valid.
These ideas have been building for some time and it's awesome to see this thinking summarized into a well-reasoned argument supported by numbers and studies.
Phillips takes it a step further by looking at the Obama administration's messaging around health care and economic reforms. He questions whether the losses in the 2010 mid-terms were the result of reverting to a focus on white swing-state voters and not keeping this new coalition engaged. Again, one could argue other factors where equally/more important like mid-term elections traditionally have low voter turnout or point out that odd trend where the party of the incumbent president often suffers losses in the first mid-term election. Still, this is an interesting idea and we should be questioning whether a shift has taken place. Maybe we've finally hit a point where a progressive politician can succeed nationally by presenting a balanced - or even a black-latino centric - messaging instead of the stale swing state narrative. If so, then perhaps we can finally move past divisive and limiting thinking like red-state/blue-state. Wouldn't that be nice?
Lastly, the book takes a looks at how these politics affect fundraising and non-profits as well as efforts by the Republican party to win over this New Progressive Coalition.
So, I obviously enjoyed this book. As we head into the 2016 election it will be fascinating to see the turnout and if Hillary can build on this new coalition or if we'll revert back to 2004. Well, fascinating or horrifying.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 64 reviews