Why Now? A Political Junkie Podcast

Claire Potter
Why Now? A Political Junkie Podcast

Where contemporary history and politics meet the challenge of today. clairepotter.substack.com

  1. DEC 2

    Episode 64: How We Fight

    Competing reproductive rights protesters outside the Supreme Court on March 26, 2024. Photo credit: Philip Yabut/Shutterstock On October 28, 2023, the morning of her baby shower, 18-year-old Nevaeh Crain was nauseous, running a fever, and in pain. Soon, the Texas teenager began to bleed and she started to vomit. Nevaeh’s mother, Candice Fails, took her to the hospital, where Nevaeh was diagnosed with strep throat and sent home. A second visit also resulted in no care. Both times, ER staff ascertained that the fetus she was carrying had a heartbeat. That was a problem—for Nevaeh. Texas operates under the strictures of a fetal heartbeat law, passed in 2021 and in full effect since the summer of 2022, when the Supreme Court of the United States handed down its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. Dobbs has since activated abortion restrictions in 41 states; 13 states make no exceptions for rape, incest, non-viable pregnancies, or sparing the life of the mother. But a few states, like Texas, also rushed to criminalize anyone who participates in terminating the life of a fetus, no matter how non-viable, and no matter how close a woman is to death. Let me be clear: no one in an emergency room wants a woman to bleed to death or die of septic shock. They are just too afraid, and in some cases, too ignorant, to touch her until that fetus’s heart stops. In the podcast, Candice remembers their third, and last visit to the hospital, as Navaeh died from miscarrying a baby she wanted. Those of us who grew up in the pre-Roe v. Wade era tend to think about abortion as being about choice: that a woman has a right to decide whether to be a mother, and an equal right to a safe, professional termination. Roe, decided in 1973, was always a compromise in that regard. Under that decision, women could not be denied an abortion until the third trimester, when a fetus is technically viable. That made 99% of all abortions legal. Fewer than 1% of abortions were done in the third trimester, usually when fetuses died in the womb or could not survive outside it; or other medical needs were overriding. Since Dobbs, there has been a rolling reproductive care crisis in the United States. Sometimes it looks like the pre-Roe world—women and girls who are pregnant, don’t want to be, and will do what they can not to have that baby, whether it is legal or not, and no matter how far they must travel. Yet, it also looks like Nevaeh Crain. Or Amber Nicole Thurman, who obtained a legal abortion in North Carolina, and got sepsis back in Georgia because no doctor would touch her until it was too late. It looks like women who are forced to carry dead fetuses until they get sick, and their bodies expel them. It looks like women in all the Dobbs states who just want pregnancy care—and can’t get it, because the local OBGYN specialists have closed their practices. It looks like women who ask to be sterilized because they don’t trust medical professionals to let them live. As women die and become infertile for lack of care, president-elect Donald Trump continues to brag about appointing the Supreme Court Justices who are responsible for this catastrophe. For this, and many other reasons, it’s going to be a long four years, and the harm from treating women separately and unequally will be lasting. There will be more Nevaeh Crains, more Amber Thurmans, and millions more women who will enter what should be a joyful time—getting ready to have a child—with all the protections and safety their great-great-grandmothers had in the 19th century. So, it’s time to fight, my friends, and fortunately there are feminist activists, community organizers, lawyers and health care providers all over the country who are showing us what that looks like. That’s why I invited sociologist Krystale Littlejohn and historian Ricki Solinger on the show to talk about their edited collection, Fighting Mad: Resisting the End of Roe v. Wade (University of California Press, 2024). The authors of these essays are angry, but hopeful. They point out that Roe was never enough, and that we don’t want that world back—we want a better one. One where women aren’t just allowed to live, but also given the resources and care they need to thrive. Show notes: * Ricki says that she knew that right to abortion rights would be reversed when Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Ruth Bader Ginsburg died on September 18, 2020. Eight days later, President Donald J. Trump nominated Amy Coney Barrett, a judge with known anti-abortion views, to replace Ginsburg on the Court. * Krystale points to her earlier work, Just Get on the Pill: The Uneven Burden of Reproductive Politics (University of California, 2021). * You can see other titles in Ricki’s series, Reproductive Justice: A New Vision for the 21st Century, co-edited with Krystale and three other feminist scholars, here. * Claire refers to “the leak:” a draft of the Dobbs decision was leaked by persons unknown on May 2, 2022. * Claire mentions Ricki’s foundational history of the debate over women’s sexual autonomy, Wake Up Little Susie: Single Pregnancy and Race Before Roe v. Wade (Routledge, 1992). * Ricki mentions the escalating birth rate in Texas since Dobbs: according to the Texas Tribune, 16,000 more babies (or 2% more) were born in 2022, after that state passed its own restrictive law. Births rose again in 2023. * Claire and Krystale discuss the role of, and impact on, men when the law reduces reproductive rights and degrades institutions devoted to women’s healthcare. For example, Planned Parenthood is a leading provider of men’s healthcare, including vasectomies, STD testing, and gender-affirming care. You can download this podcast here or subscribe for free on Apple iTunes, Spotify, Google Podcasts, or Soundcloud. You can also keep up with Political Junkie content and watch me indulge my slightly perverse sense of humor on Bluesky, Instagram, Threads, YouTube, and TikTok. You can support my work with only a click: If you enjoyed this episode, why not try: * Episode 49, Without Mothers, There Is No War: A conversation with political scientist Cynthia Enloe about her book "Twelve Feminist Lessons of War." * Episode 45, Why Abortion Alone Does Not Make Women Free: Historian Felicia Kornbluh and I mark Roe v. Wade with a conversation about "A Woman's Life Is a Human Life: My Mother, Our Neighbor, and the Journey from Reproductive Rights to Reproductive Freedom." * Episode 17, Abortion On Demand: Feminist journalist Katha Pollitt explains why we should treat ending a pregnancy as normal. Political Junkie is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. And here’s a bonus: all new annual paid subscriptions include a free copy of my book about political media, Political Junkies: From Talk Radio to Twitter, How Alternative Media Hooked Us on Politics and Broke Our Democracy (Basic Books, 2020.) Get full access to Political Junkie at clairepotter.substack.com/subscribe

    32 min
  2. NOV 18

    Episode 63: To The Constitution, With Love

    As a freshman representative from Texas, Barbara Jordan sat on the House Judiciary Committee hearing the Watergate case in 1974. Photo credit: United States House of Representatives/Wikipedia Commons In the summer of 1974, I was glued to the television for most of the day. For the first time in my life, my parents didn’t insist that I shut it off, go outside—do something useful. That was Watergate Summer, the weeks that a national drama played out all day on public television, with coverage hosted by Robert McNeil and Jim Lehrer, and interspersed with experts who explained the ramifications of testimony by White House staff for President Richard M. Nixon’s possible impeachment. Then, on July 25th, a first-term Representative from Texas’s 11th Congressional District, a large African American woman with a commanding voice and demeanor, used her introductory fifteen minutes to express her love for a Constitution that had also permitted and protected American slavery. That woman was Barbara Jordan. I cried as I listened to her speech, not just because it was so beautifully written and delivered, but because it expressed the love I also felt for my country—for its history, and its laws—at a time when Nixon was being held to account for his crimes. Presidents weren’t above the law, Jordan argued. It was not just the right, but also the duty of the legislative and judicial branches to apply the checks and balances that the Founders intended—those same Founders who ensured that slavery endured for almost another century after the Constitution was adopted, and a legal, racial caste system for almost another century after that. This is, of course, also the same Constitution and nation of laws that President Donald J. Trump, just elected to a second term, as well as the entire Republican Party, plans to wipe their collective asses with in the next four years. And it is up to us to stop them. This is why I wanted to bring Mary Ellen Curtin, Associate Professor of Critical race, Gender, and Culture Studies at American University on the show. Curtin is the author of She Changed the Nation: Barbara Jordan’s Life and Legacy in Black Politics (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2024), a book I have been looking forward to reading since I heard that it was in the pipeline. As you can probably tell, Jordan is one of my heroes. Her service in Congress was short by any standards: only six years. But it was the penultimate stage of a career in which Jordan used every public platform she had, from childhood on, to make the promise of the Constitution real. A slightly informal note: listeners may recall that the last episode featured David Greenberg’s biography of Congressman John R. Lewis. I had hoped that the Lewis episode and this one would bookend the election of our first woman president. As a precaution, Mary Ellen and I taped two endings. We had to use the wrong one. But, although it is going to be a hard fight, as Barbara Jordan famously said on July 25, 1974, my faith in the Constitution is whole, it is complete, it is total. I still believe in freedom. And I believe in you. Show notes: * Mary Ellen cites a previous biography, Mary Beth Rogers’ Barbara Jordan: American Hero (Penguin/Random House, 1998.) * Mary Ellen mentions Leon Higgenbotham’s early impressions of Jordan: for those who do not know him, Higgenbotham (1928-1998) was a prominent jurist: you can read more about him here. * Claire and Mary Ellen discuss the importance of excellent, if segregated, Black schools for boosting Black men and women into professional and leadership roles: for a case study on this topic, see Vanessa Siddle Walker, Hello Professor: A Black Principal and Professional Leadership in the Segregated South (University of North Carolina Press, 2009). * One of the court decisions that paved the way for Jordan’s career was Smith v. Allright (1944), a Texas case organized by Jordan’s pastor and decided by the United States Supreme Court that abolished the white primary. * Claire mentions Bella Abzug’s published diary of her first year in Congress, Bella! Ms. Abzug Goes to Washington (Saturday Review Press, 1972.) * If you want to read more about the famous “Class of 1974” that bolstered the progressives elected to the House of Representatives in 1972, check out Claire Potter and John Lawrence, “The Watergate Babies: What the Congressional Class of 1974 can teach us about political change,” Public Seminar, August 15, 2018. * You can read more about the life that Barbara Jordan and Nancy Earl made together in Lisa Moore, “Looking Back at Barbara Jordan,” QT Voices (LGBT Studies, UT-Austin, July 7, 1972) You can download this podcast here or subscribe for free on Apple iTunes, Spotify, Google Podcasts, or Soundcloud. You can also keep up with Political Junkie content and watch me indulge my slightly perverse sense of humor on Instagram, Threads, YouTube, and TikTok. If you enjoyed this episode, why not try: * Episode 62, We Shall Not Be Moved: A conversation with historian David Greenberg about nonviolent resistance, the legacy of an iconic civil rights organizer, and his new book, "John Lewis: A Life." * Episode 37, Black Resistance, Black Joy: A conversation with political theorist Christopher Paul Harris about his book, "To Build a Black Future: The Radical Politics of Joy, Pain, and Care." * Episode 34, We Demand Equality--NOW! A conversation with historian Katherine Turk about her book, "The Women of NOW: How Feminists Built an Organization That Transformed America." Political Junkie is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. And here’s a bonus: all new annual paid subscriptions include a free copy of my book about political media, Political Junkies: From Talk Radio to Twitter, How Alternative Media Hooked Us on Politics and Broke Our Democracy (Basic Books, 2020.) Get full access to Political Junkie at clairepotter.substack.com/subscribe

    40 min
  3. OCT 31

    Episode 62: We Shall Not Be Moved

    Georgia Congressman John Lewis at the Lincoln Memorial at the 50th Anniversary of the March on Washington, August 24, 2013. Photo credit: Joseph Sohm/Shutterstock There is no question that Donald Trump, a former President who is on the ballot next Tuesday, November 5, is not only a man in love with violence, but one who also understands violence as a way to get what he wants. On May 1, 1989, Trump took out a full-page ad in the New York Daily News demanding that New York State execute five Black teenagers who were (as it turns out, falsely) accused of beating and raping a woman in Central Park. In fact, Trump has, himself, repeatedly been accused of sexually assaulting women. Although she later retracted it, Trump’s first wife, Ivana, accused him of raping her and pulling her hair out; and on January 26, 2024, a civil jury convicted Trump of raping journalist E. Jean Carroll. Trump has, over time, seen extremist militias as allies, and on January 6, 2021, those militias attempted—at his urging—to overthrow a legally constituted election which he lost. He has incited violence against those he perceives as political enemies, particularly immigrants and protesters. He has promised—if he is elected President again—to violently deport 11 million undocumented people living and working peacefully in the United States. He has promised to use the United States military against peaceful protesters. As Vice President Kamala Harris pointed out last week, as she prepared to face voters in a CNN Town Hall, Trump promises to rule violently, something his rally goers and right-wing media supporters have repeatedly cheered. But the use of violence against political enemies is, unfortunately, not unprecedented in the United States. Although it is illegal to deploy the military against American citizens as Trump has promised to do, police, hired security, and Ku Klux Klan mobs have assaulted strikers, protesters, and civil rights activists since the 19thcentury. On May 4, 1970, Ohio National Guard troops murdered four peaceful antiwar protesters at Kent State University. Perhaps the most sustained use of political violence against American citizens has been the deployment of police and deputized mobs against Black Americans. This violence intensified in the 1950s and 1960s as a Black-led, interracial coalition of students and activists across the Jim Crow South organized and demonstrated nonviolently for the right to vote, and to desegregate public accommodations, transportation, and public schools. Politicians unhesitatingly deployed armed men against these brave souls, and refused to intervene when vigilantes beat, murdered, and raped activists. One of those activists was John Robert Lewis, born in Pike County Alabama in 1940, and the first in his family to attend college. While attending a Nashville seminary, Lewis became involved in sit-ins organized to desegregate restaurants and other public places, and he quickly rose to a leadership position. Lewis eventually became the Chairman of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, or SNCC, an organization committed to nonviolent protest that organized the Freedom Rides in 1961 and helped to organize the March on Washington in 1963. At the March, Lewis—like many young people today who protest Israel’s War on Gaza—expressed his disillusionment with politics, and the failure of either party to deliver racial justice. Yet, Lewis’s social revolution bore fruit as politics, and he himself—like many movement activists--eventually became a politician. After President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in November 1963, President Lyndon Johnson used his political capital to pass federal civil rights bills in 1964 and 1965. Lewis then took his activism into government itself and was elected to the United States House of Representatives in 1986, where he became part of the Democratic Party leadership and served the people of the United States until his death in July 2020. It's hard not to think of Lewis, his fight for justice and against violence, as voters in the United States face their most consequential election in 150 years. I think Lewis’s spirit is watching over Vice President Kamala Harris in this last week of the campaign, and that’s why I invited David Greenberg, the author of John Lewis: A Life (Simon and Schuster, 2024) to come and talk to us about a civil rights icon who helped to transform the Democratic Party that Harris now leads. Show notes: * There are many secondary sources on Lewis’s branch of the movement, but the best contemporary account of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee is Howard Zinn, SNCC, The New Abolitionists (Beacon Press, 1964.) * David and Claire discuss why the Nashville student movement was both part of, and distinct from, the larger civil rights movement. To get a sense of the dynamism of that local activism, take a look at Kathryn E. Delmez, ed. We Shall Overcome: Press Photographs of Nashville during the Civil Rights Era (Vanderbilt University Press, 2018). * Claire asks David why Lewis became so committed to Israel. David believes it was partly because he was aware of antisemitism from an early age, and partly because Jewish activists were so deeply committed to the movement. Listeners who want to pursue this may wish to read Deborah Schultz, Going South: Jewish Women in the Civil Rights Movement (New York University Press, 2001). * Claire and David talk a lot about Martin Luther King and Bayard Rustin. Listeners who want to follow up may wish to read Jonathan Eig, King: A Life (Farrar, Straus, % Giroux, 2023) and John D’Emilio, Lost Prophet: The Life and Times of Bayard Rustin (Free Press, 2003.) * Claire raises the question of how John Lewis came to understand LGBT Atlantans as part of his coalition. Listeners interested in how LGBT voters became part of the Democratic coalition may wish to read Randy Shilts, The Mayor of Castro Street: The Life and Times of Harvey Milk (St. Martin’s Press, 1982) and Timothy Stewart-Winter, Queer Clout: Chicago and the Rise of Gay Politics (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2016). You can download this podcast here or subscribe for free on Apple iTunes, Spotify, Google Podcasts, or Soundcloud. You can also keep up with Political Junkie content and watch me indulge my slightly perverse sense of humor on X, Instagram, Threads, YouTube, and TikTok. If you enjoyed this episode, why not try: * Episode 58, Picturing Asian America: A conversation with historian Mae Ngai about "Corky Lee's Asian America: Fifty Years of Photographic Justice. * Episode 48, “The Bright Sunshine of Human Rights: A conversation with journalist and historian James Traub about liberalism and his book, "True Believer: Hubert Humphrey's Quest for A More Just America." * Episode 43, Where In the World Is Merze Tate? A conversation with historian Barbara Savage about freedom, independence, and her new biography, "Merze Tate: The Global Odyssey of a Black Woman Scholar." Political Junkie is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. And here’s a bonus: all new annual paid subscriptions include a free copy of my book about political media, Political Junkies: From Talk Radio to Twitter, How Alternative Media Hooked Us on Politics and Broke Our Democracy (Basic Books, 2020.) Get full access to Political Junkie at clairepotter.substack.com/subscribe

    41 min
  4. OCT 21

    Episode 61: How the GOP Killed Dissent

    Republican Nelson Rockefeller (left) with Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson at the White House on June 10, 1968. Photo credit: Yoichi Okomoto/Lyndon Baines Johnson Library/Wikimedia Commons Ana Navarro is probably best known for her work on the popular daytime talk show, The View. But she also has serious chops as a Republican political strategist. She served on Florida Governor Jeb Bush’s staff—you may recall that Bush was leveled by Donald J. Trump early in the 2016 Republican primary season—and, as co-chair of the GOP’s National Hispanic Advisory Council Navarro worked with establishment conservatives in her party like Arizona Senator John McCain and Utah Governor Jon Huntsman. In other words, Navarro was the kind of Republican that no longer exists, a Reagan conservative in a party where extremists had been on the offensive for at least two decades. By 2016, people like Navarro were, depending on where you stood in the GOP, thought of moderates, squishes, or not Republicans at all. After the Billy Bush tape, in which Trump unknowingly joked over an open mic about sexually assaulting women, Navarro became what we now call a “Never Trump” Republican. She declared that she would vote for Democrat Hillary Clinton, and when Trump won the election, she spoke out against his harsh anti-immigrant policies. On August 27, 2017, a little over seven months into after Trump took office, Dana Bash, a co-host of CNN’s Sunday talk show, SOTU, invited Navarro to join the Democratic party. Another guest, Trump campaign advisor Michael Caputo, jeered that Navarro was already just a Democrat in disguise. That’s right: those who oppose Donald Trump’s domination of the GOP are shown the door. Today, dozens of prominent Republicans have, at least temporarily, crossed party lines to endorse Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 election, even as they cling to their identities as conservatives. But when did this polarization begin? Was it in 2016, when Trump obliterated his primary opponents and then defeated Clinton in one of the most divisive elections the United States had seen in 150 years? Was it earlier—1992, when populist Patrick J. Buchanan endorsed incumbent president George H.W. Bush at the Republican convention by urging the party to fight a culture war against immigrants, gays, and liberals? Or was it 1980, when Ronald Reagan was elected with the backing of the so-called New Right, an insurgent movement that that laid the tracks for Trump and pushed liberal Republicans—especially women—into the Democratic Party? Yet there was a time when both parties had liberal and conservative factions. We probably shouldn’t call it a “golden age,” because although liberals reached across party lines to pass important civil rights legislation, especially in the 1960s, conservatives in both parties also fought those changes, eventually clustering in the GOP, where they remain today. At least one politician argued against polarization, proposing that Republicans ought to simply ask whether a policy idea was good or bad, without characterizing its partisan quality. Here’s New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller, a scion of one of the wealthiest families in the United States at the time, being interviewed in 1961 by television newsman Max Goldberg about whether he thought of himself as liberal or conservative. One way to think about Rockefeller’s politics is that he was a liberal Republican. Another way to characterize him is as moderate: a conservative, but one who was open to liberal ideas that, after 1980, were systematically stamped out in the GOP. Rockefeller remains hard to classify today, as historian Marsha Barrett points out in Nelson Rockefeller’s Dilemma: The Fight to Save Moderate Republicanism (Cornell University Press, 2024). For example, his draconian anti-drug policies in New York State became a template for similarly harsh laws around the country. These so-called “Rockefeller laws” devastated poor Black communities through incarceration and brutal policing, even as the international drug trade boomed. At the same time, as Governor of New York, Rockefeller promoted the public good, pumping money into public higher education, medical care, and the arts. And significantly, as the Republican Party spun ever rightward after 1964, Rockefeller learned that the office he craved, President of the United States, would forever be out of reach. Show notes: * Rockefeller’s disapproval of Governor Orville Faubus referenced the Arkansas segregationist’s 1958 decision to shut down the Little Rock public schools rather than bow to the Supreme Court’s order to desegregate. * Listeners who are interested in the Rockefeller family may wish to read Peter J. Johnson and John Ensor Harr, The Rockefeller Century: Three Generations of America's Greatest Family (Scribners, 1988). * To understand moderate Republicanism in the long history of the party, listeners may wish to read Heather Cox Richardson, To Make Men Free: A History of the Republican Party (Basic Books, 2021). * Marsha addresses the shift of Black voters from the Republican to the Democratic Party, beginning in the New Deal: Nancy Weiss Malkiel delves into this shift in Farewell to the Party of Lincoln: Black Politics in the Age of FDR (Princeton University Press, 1983). * Claire and Marsha discuss 1964 as a turning point where Black conservatives are increasingly fighting a rearguard action to protect a civil rights agenda in the GOP. Listeners may be interested in Leah Wright Rigueur’s deep dive into this transformative moment, The Loneliness of the Black Republican: Pragmatic Politics and the Pursuit of Power (Princeton University Press, 2015). * Marsha and Claire also discuss how the Democratic Party was changing, as Rockefeller’s moderation became more marginal in the GOP: feminism and racial equality were changing the party, but so were suburban voters, a key constituency for moderate Republicanism: see Lily Geismer, Don't Blame Us: Suburban Liberals and the Transformation of the Democratic Party (Princeton University Press, 2014). * Listeners interested in the Rockefeller Laws and the turn to incarceration as a critical phase in the 20th century war on drugs may wish to read my review essay, “The Suburbs Made the War on Drugs in Their Own Image,” The New Republic, February 27, 2024. * Claire and Marsha discuss the Attica prison uprising as a turn away from moderation for Rockefeller: for a terrific history of this moment, see Heather Ann Thompson, Blood in the Water: The Attica Prison Uprising of 1971 and Its Legacy (Pantheon, 2016). You can download this podcast here or subscribe for free on Apple iTunes, Spotify, Google Podcasts, or Soundcloud. You can also keep up with Political Junkie content and watch me indulge my slightly perverse sense of humor on X, Instagram, Threads, YouTube, and TikTok. If you enjoyed this episode, why not try: * Episode 55: The Ten-Dollar Founding Father: Chatting with historian William Hogeland about Alexander Hamilton, debt, taxes, visionaries, and his new book, "The Hamilton Scheme: An Epic Tale of Money and Power in the American Founding.” * Episode 48, “The Bright Sunshine of Human Rights: A conversation with journalist and historian James Traub about liberalism and his book, "True Believer: Hubert Humphrey's Quest for A More Just America." * Episode 20, Extremism in Defense of Liberty Is No Vice: A conversation with historian Matthew Dallek about his book, "Birchers: How the John Birch Society Radicalized the American Right." Political Junkie is a reader-supported publication. To receive all new posts and support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber for as little as $5/month. Annual subscribers receive a free copy of my book, Political Junkies or any book mentioned in this episode or its show notes. And here’s a bonus: all new annual paid subscriptions include a free copy of my book about political media, Political Junkies: From Talk Radio to Twitter, How Alternative Media Hooked Us on Politics and Broke Our Democracy (Basic Books, 2020.) Get full access to Political Junkie at clairepotter.substack.com/subscribe

    41 min
  5. OCT 6

    Episode 60: When We Lose, We Win

    On July 20, 1925 the Washington Times published three front page stories about Tennessee v. Scopes—along with Prohibition, crime, and a woman who was arrested for drinking and driving, the Scopes Trial raised sensational questions about modern American life. In 2016, white evangelical Christians showed up at the polls in force for Donald J. Trump, part of a diverse movement that defied expectations to sweep him into the White House. In the past decade, scholars and journalists have spilled a lot of ink on what seemed initially like a strange affinity of highly religious people for a base, immoral and violent man. But Trump’s opportunism and libertarianism offered opportunities for policies on which establishment Republicans—even Ronald Reagan—had failed to deliver. One of those has been to fuel public morality by returning prayer and Biblical teachings to public school systems across the country. As recently as May 30, 2014, South Carolinian Sheri Few, already a failed three-time candidate for state office, campaigned to become superintendent of education on a platform of parents rights that included the teaching of “intelligent design” in science classes. In case you have never heard that phrase, intelligent design is the theory that the world must have been created by an intelligent being—in other words, God. Sheri was promoting creationism, rebranded as intelligent design, to make it appear to be a science. In fact, evolution is a science—intelligent design is a religious philosophy that has no basis in science. Other Republican candidates easily portrayed Sheri as a crank. She lost her primary and set out to change politics instead. She devoted herself to parental control of education, a cause that traces its history in southern states to white politicians and their constituents opposing, often violently, the integration of public schools after Supreme Court-ordered desegregation in 1954. Sheri had been the president of South Carolina Parents Involved in Education since 2000; in 2014, it became United States Parents Involved in Education, or USPIE—as in apple pie. Today, PIE has chapters in 14 states, and—like its more successful counterpart, Moms for Liberty—is engaged in a grassroots fight to end the teaching of race and sexuality, and refuse federal dollars that mandate education standards and nondiscrimination. PIE also wants to create “Education Sanctuaries” where, by refusing federal dollars, state systems can reorient school curricula to the “traditional values of Faith, Family, and Country.” The movement to put Christian teachings back in public schools, which ended when the Supreme Court determined in the 1962 decision Engel v. Vitale that Christian prayer violated the establishment clause, has been a consistent goal of right-wing conservatism for the last 60 years. It has spurred the massive growth of home schooling, Christian private schools, and the school voucher movement. But the MAGA movement has pushed Christian extremism into state and federal government too. Using a strategy of directly confronting federal law, these politicians and officials now see Trump-appointed Supreme Court justices as a route to religious control of the public sphere. On June 27, 2024, Oklahoma State Schools Superintendent Ryan Walters announced that all classrooms in his state would be supplied with a Bible and teachers of all subjects would be expected it use it in their lessons. It is already legal in Oklahoma to teach the Bible as part of a humanities curriculum, but not as “religious doctrine.” However, a Bible lesson in a biology, physics, or chemistry class would be just that: a religious explanation for the creation of the earth and every living thing on it. This is why I asked my New School colleague, historian Brenda Wineapple, to come talk to me about her new book, Keeping the Faith: God, Democracy, and the Trial That Riveted a Nation (Random House, 2024), a fresh take on the 1925 trial in which biology teacher John Thomas Scopes was charged with violating Tennessee’s law that only evolution was to be taught in the state’s public schools. A nationwide media spectacle, the so-called “Monkey Trial” was not just a showdown between science and religion, civil rights and censorship. It was also an epic battle between two of the leading public figures of the day: Christian politician William Jennings Bryan and trial attorney Clarence Darrow. You can watch silent footage of the Scopes trial; the audio track seems to be from a contemporary radio broadcast. (Courtesy of The History Channel) Show notes: * You can read The Butler Act, the Tennessee law that Scopes violated, here. * Ellis Cose has written a history of the American Civil Liberties Union’s first century, Democracy, If We Can Keep It: The ACLU’s 100-Year Fight for Rights in America (The New Press, 2020.) * Claire references Brenda’s last book about the impeachment of Andrew Johnson, The Impeachers: The Trial of Andrew Johnson and the Dream of a Just Nation (Random House, 2019.) * Claire and Brenda discuss the cultural importance of Inherit the Wind, a 1955 play by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee that dramatized the Scopes trial. * If you want to read more about William Jennings Bryan, try Michael Kazin, A Godly Hero: The Life of William Jennings Bryan (Knopf, 2006.) * Clarence Darrow fans may wish to try John A. Farrell, Clarence Darrow: Attorney for the Damned (Doubleday, 2011.) * Brenda mentions Baltimore journalist H.L. Mencken’s coverage of the trial, and Mencken’s disdain for rural America. You can read some of his columns from the Scopes trial in S. T. Joshi, Ed., H.L. Mencken on Religion (Prometheus Books, 2002.) * Like Claire, journalist Daniel Klinghard compared Bryan to Trump: see “Forget Hitler: Trump Is the New William Jennings Bryan,” U.S. News and World Report, March 4, 2016. You can download this podcast here or subscribe for free on Apple iTunes, Spotify, Google Podcasts, or Soundcloud. You can also keep up with Political Junkie content and watch me indulge my slightly perverse sense of humor on X, Instagram, Threads, YouTube, and TikTok. If you enjoyed this episode, why not try: * Episode 51, MAGA Is the Newest, and Oldest, American Myth: A conversation with American Studies scholar Richard Slotkin about his new book, "A Great Disorder: National Myth and the Battle for America." * Episode 32, The Court Room of History: A conversation with historian Jacquelyn Dowd Hall about her book "Sisters and Rebels: A Struggle for the Soul of America.” * Episode 28, Terrorism Begins At Home: A conversation with legal journalist Jeffrey Toobin about his new book, "Homegrown: Timothy McVeigh and the Rise of Right-Wing Extremism." Political Junkie is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. And here’s a bonus: all new annual paid subscriptions include a free copy of my book about political media, Political Junkies: From Talk Radio to Twitter, How Alternative Media Hooked Us on Politics and Broke Our Democracy (Basic Books, 2020.) Get full access to Political Junkie at clairepotter.substack.com/subscribe

    42 min
  6. SEP 19

    Episode 59: Before Kamala, There Was Shyamala

    Delegates holding a pro-choice banner at the 1977 National Women’s Conference in Houston, Texas. Photo credit: National Archives/Wikimedia Commons Before Vice President Kamala Devi Harris, there was Hillary Clinton—also, Jeannette Rankin, Nellie Tayloe Ross, Geraldine Ferraro, Patsy Mink, Margaret Chase Smith, Nikki Haley, Carol Mosely Braun, and dozens of other women “firsts” in politics. Most importantly, there was a woman who never ran for office, who most of us knew little about until recently, and who was also lifted up by feminism: Shyamala Gopalan. We’ll get back to her. Some of you probably noticed that I left someone out. I call it leaving the best for last. Because the first that Harris, the Democratic nominee for President of the United States, is most compared to is Congresswoman Shirley Anita St. Hill Chisholm, the first Black woman to be elected to Congress, and who represented New York’s 12th district in Brooklyn from 1969 to 1983. There are obvious similarities. Like Chisholm, Harris is a Black woman, a Democrat, and the daughter of immigrants. And as Chisholm did, Harris is running for President. If she succeeds, Harris will become the first woman, as well as the first Black and South Asian woman, to become President of the United States. There’s another similarity: both Chisholm and Harris promised that, as President, they would represent the people. In 1972, the United States, in the throes of a civil rights--and a newer, feminist--revolution, was not yet ready for Shirley Chisholm. At the convention, Chisholm was ultimately abandoned by feminists, civil rights leaders, and her own Congressional Black Caucus, all of whom rushed to support a white man, North Dakota Senator George McGovern—who then lost the election to Richard M. Nixon. Yet, when Harris took the stage at the Democratic National Convention on August 23, 2024 to accept her party’s nomination, she placed herself squarely in the Black feminist social justice tradition that Chisholm had pioneered a half century earlier. In her acceptance speech before the Democratic National Convention, Harris described her lifetime commitment as an attorney to extend power to the powerless, and voice to the voiceless. Could the United States be at a moment when feminist politics are just—politics? Harris presents herself as a feminist, supports traditionally feminist causes, talks about women, but rarely says the word “feminist.” She shows; she doesn’t tell. Harris disclosed in her speech, for example, that her best friend being sexually abused by a family member, and her mother’s admonition not to complain, but to “do something,” propelled her into her role as a prosecutor. In the years since Dobbs triggered a wave of restrictions to reproductive freedom and attacks on LGBT people, Harris has been President Joe Biden’s main link to feminist politicians and organizations across the nation. But she never labels her portfolio as the feminist causes that they have, historically, been. Rather, Harris presents the health and well-being of women and children as things a just society requires. Perhaps we no longer need to say the word “feminist” because there is no Kamala Harris, and there is no Democratic party as we know it in 2024, without feminism. In today’s episode, I’ll let journalist Clara Bingham tell you why. In her new book, The Movement: How Women’s Liberation Transformed America 1963-1973 (Simon & Schuster, 2024), Bingham tells the story of feminism’s rebirth in the 1960s as a movement that empowered women—politically, institutionally, socially, and culturally. It’s the story of a social revolution, made by and for women. Weaving radical feminist history into a story about liberal and institutional organizing, it’s easy to see why the multi-faceted women’s movement that exploding in 1972 made a Chisholm candidacy possible, and ultimately failed her; how radicals and liberals traded ideas; how organizations flourished, fell apart, and were reborn; and how ordinary, anonymous women like Kamala Harris’s mother—that’s right, Shyamala Gopalan Harris-- climbed the ladders that feminism built to open doors for themselves and their daughters. Show notes: * Clara begins by explaining that her storytelling style in The Movement, using only oral histories and primary sources, to tell a story, evolved from the method used by George Plimpton and Jean Stein, Edie: American Girl (Grove Press, 1982). * Clara references her book Witness to the Revolution: Radicals, Resisters, Vets, Hippies, and the Year America Lost Its Mind and Found Its Soul (Random House, 2016), an account of activism during the 1969-1970 school year, which left her wanting to know more about the women’s movement. * Clara praised Susan Brownmiller’s memoir of the radical feminist movement, In Our Time: Memoir of a Revolution (The Dial Press, 1999). * Claire and Clara discuss disagreements over fact in histories of the movement: Claire believes that the first women’s liberation group was formed in Seattle. * Clara argues that the Title IX legislation advanced equality for women on college campuses, partly through athletic scholarships. You can read more about Title IX in Susan Ware, Game, Set, Match: Billie Jean King and the Revolution in Women's Sports (University of North Carolina Press, 2011). * Claire and Clara discuss the “No More Miss America” protest in Atlantic City on September 7, 1968. You can read a press release about the event from the women’s liberation group Redstockings here. * Jo Freeman’s study of why women became radical feminists, The Politics of Women's Liberation: A Case Study of an Emerging Social Movement and Its Relation to the Policy Process (David McKay Company, 1975). * Claire references Ms. Magazine, which is still available as an online, nonprofit, publication. * Clara pinpoints the rise of popular interest in feminist books with the publication of Kate Millet’s Sexual Politics (Doubleday, 1970) * Claire talks about the Jane Collective, a group of Chicago feminists who facilitated safe, affordable abortions. You can learn more about these courageous women from watching the documentary The Janes (Tia Lessin and Emma Pildes: HBO Max, 2022). You can download this podcast here or subscribe for free on Apple iTunes, Spotify, Google Podcasts, or Soundcloud. You can also keep up with Political Junkie content and watch me indulge my slightly perverse sense of humor on X, Instagram, Threads, YouTube, and TikTok. If you enjoyed this episode, why not try: * Episode 45, Why Abortion Alone Does Not Make Women Free: Historian Felicia Kornbluh and I mark Roe v. Wade with a conversation about "A Woman's Life Is a Human Life: My Mother, Our Neighbor, and the Journey from Reproductive Rights to Reproductive Freedom." * Episode 34, We Demand Equality--NOW! A conversation with historian Katherine Turk about her new book, "The Women of NOW: How Feminists Built an Organization That Transformed America." * Episode 33, Seattle, the Feminist Soviet of Washington: A conversation with historian Barbara Winslow about her book "Revolutionary Feminists: The Women's Liberation Movement in Seattle." Political Junkie is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. And here’s a bonus: all new annual paid ubscriptions include a free copy of my book about political media, Political Junkies: From Talk Radio to Twitter, How Alternative Media Hooked Us on Politics and Broke Our Democracy (Basic Books, 2020.) Get full access to Political Junkie at clairepotter.substack.com/subscribe

    39 min
  7. SEP 4

    Episode 58: Picturing Asian America

    Photographer Corky Lee on 42nd Street. Photo credit: Jennifer Takaki/Wikimedia Commons On July 23, 2024, Vice President Kamala Harris reached the threshold of Democratic National Convention delegates that she needed to become the party’s de facto presidential nominee. In the two days since President Joe Biden had ceded the nomination, a diverse party had become re-energized around the 2024 race and its second, historic, multiracial nominee. While Harris would not be the first woman, or the first African American, at the top of the Democratic ticket, she would be the first Black woman and the first Asian-American woman. The daughter of immigrants, a Jamaican father and a South Asian mother, Kamala Harris will make history in her own right. It's a sweet moment. Harris’s political achievement is a signal that Asian Americans have arrived in United States politics. Significantly, if she is elected, Harris will take office in January 2025, exactly sixty years since Hawaii’s Patsy Takemato Mink became the first woman of color and the first Asian-American woman to be sworn in to Congress. Yet, Harris’s elevation coincides with another surge in anti-Asian hate. While the United States has a long history of vilifying immigrants from Asian nations and their American descendants, that xenophobia was purposefully revived by former President Donald J. Trump and his Republican allies, who have targeted China and its people as an economic and physical danger to the United States. By 2020, as Covid-19 ravaged communities, Trump and his allies labeled it a “Chinese virus” and the “Kung Flu,” reviving old tropes about immigrants, and specifically Asian immigrants, as carriers of disease. Chinese scholars and scientists have been targeted. In 2023, when he was competing with Trump for the Republican nomination, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis passed discriminatory legislation that, among other things, prohibited Chinese nationals from purchasing real estate, a painful reminder of pre-World War II discrimination that rendered all Asian immigrants as perpetual second-class citizens. Not coincidentally, random, violent attacks on Asian-Americans have surged in the United States. One of the first things the new Biden-Harris administration did in 2021 was to strengthen federal hate crimes laws, with special attention to Asian-American victims of violence. But you can’t tell this political story without also talking about over a century of Asian American activism. Immigrants and their descendants made themselves visible by building vibrant, physical communities that welcomed generation after generation of newcomers from multiple nations. From these communities, they fought back against racism and discrimination in the courts, formed unions, volunteered for military service, raised families, claimed the right to education, made art, mounted demonstrations, and formed businesses. One activist who documented this Asian American history in pictures until his death from COVID in 2021 was New York City photographer Corky Lee. A college history major and graduate of the city’s public education system, Lee began life as a conscientious objector and housing organizer. For almost fifty years, Lee documented New York City’s Chinatown, mostly in black and white. Hundreds of Lee’s photographs—Asian Americans living, working, striking, celebrating, protesting, and taking part in every activity that occurs in a now-shrinking part of the city—are now available, along with accompanying essays, in Corky Lee’s Asian America: Fifty Years of Photographic Justice (Penguin/Random House, 2024). It’s edited by the artist Chee Wang Ng and my friend, Columbia University historian Mae Ngai. Reprinted with permission from “Corky Lee's Asian America: Fifty Years of Photographic Justice.” Copyright © 2024 by the Estate of Corky Lee, Mae Ngai, and Chee Wang Ng. Published by Clarkson Potter, an imprint of the Crown Publishing Group, a division of Penguin Random House LLC, New York. Show notes: * Two Bridges Neighborhood Council, where Corky Lee began his activist career, still exists and provides services in Lower Manhattan. * Mae mentions the Basement Workshop, where Lee began to work with other politicized Asian American artists: you can learn more about it here. * Claire brings up the fact that Lee modeled himself on the photographer Weegee, who chronicled New York’s demimonde from the 1930s to the 1960s. Listeners who want to learn more may want to read Christopher Bonanos, Flash: The Making of Weegee the Famous (Picador, 2019). * Listeners who want to dig more deeply into the history of Asians in America may wish to consult Mae Ngai, Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern America (Princeton University Press, 2014). * Claire and Mae discuss Lee’s restating of the famous “Golden Spike” photograph, a moment of national reunification in 1869 when the two coasts were united by rail. That site is now part of the National Parks System. * Claire references the effort to keep Philadelphia from building a new basketball arena in that city’s Chinatown. * Listeners who want to know more about the emergence and evolution of Chinatowns across the country may wish to consult Bonnie Tsui, American Chinatown: A People's History of Five Neighborhoods (Free Press, 2010). * Claire and Mae discuss the controversy over a new municipal jail that New York City is trying to build in Chinatown. You can download this podcast here or subscribe for free on Apple iTunes, Spotify, Google Podcasts, or Soundcloud. You can also keep up with Political Junkie content and watch me indulge my slightly perverse sense of humor on Instagram, Threads, and TikTok. If you enjoyed this episode, why not try: * Episode 53, Nobody Else Has My Eyes: A conversation with historian and visual artist Nell Irvin Painter about her new book, "I Just Keep Talking: A Life in Essays." * Episode 43, Where In the World Is Merze Tate? A conversation with historian Barbara Savage about freedom, independence, and her new biography, "Merze Tate: The Global Odyssey of a Black Woman Scholar." * Episode 16, The Sunlit Path of Racial Justice: A conversation with historian Matthew Pratt Guterl about his book, "Skinfolk: A Memoir." Political Junkie is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. And here’s a bonus: all new annual paid subscriptions include a free copy of my book about political media, Political Junkies: From Talk Radio to Twitter, How Alternative Media Hooked Us on Politics and Broke Our Democracy (Basic Books, 2020.) Get full access to Political Junkie at clairepotter.substack.com/subscribe

    36 min
  8. JUL 17

    Episode 57: Waiting For the Academy To Catch Up

    Cover art from Susan Stryker, When Monsters Speak: A Susan Stryker Reader. Photo credit: Loren Rex Cameron. In the early 1980s, Christine Jorgensen, a performer, celebrity, and the most famous transgender woman in the United States, appeared on Hour Magazine, a television talk show. The host, Gary Collins, asked Christine if she felt more socially accepted since 1952, when she was publicly outed by the New York Daily News following her gender confirmation surgery. Jorgensen answered with a conditional yes: intellectuals and artists were welcoming to her, but in general, Americans still believed that there were two genders. The exception to that was young people, who were not just accepting, but interested by and engaged with her. Why? I found Jorgensen’s observations about who she was in the world fascinating for several reasons. First, she was fully engaged with history, correcting Collins when he referred to her as a pioneer, or unique. Jorgensen explained that people had been transitioning, and doctors had been developing techniques to help them do that, for decades before she made her own decision. In addition, Collins kept cajoling Jorgensen into a progress narrative, presuming that Christine—and others like her—must have become gradually more accepted by the public over time as other social minorities had been. But Jorgensen resisted that story as well, pointing to the conservative backlash that had produced Ronald Reagan’s presidency, and linking the new momentum of the anti-abortion movement to potentially more prejudice against women like her. But the other thing that interested me about Christine Jorgensen’s thinking was that she linked broader understanding of her humanity among the young to a new generation’s curiosity about themselves, and who they might be, and their belief that there were many identities, selves, and bodies available to them, some not yet imagined. If children had toys that could be taken apart and put together in creative new ways, Jorgensen implies, perhaps they could imagine reassembling their own bodies one day. Christine Jorgensen was no scholar, but she picked up on some themes that would, in ensuing decades, become critical to the history and theory of transgender people. Jack Halberstam, for example, talks about cartoons and children’s play as arenas for grappling with gender, and gender crossing, while historian Jules Gill-Peterson has identified twentieth century pediatrics as a laboratory for changing, and stabilizing, embodied sex. And notably, for a woman who in many ways sought to naturalize her femininity, Jorgensen briefly runs towards the idea of bodies as constructed things, available for assembly, disassembly, and reassembly, an insight that would be fully developed by historian Susan Stryker in 1994. “The transsexual body is an unnatural body,” Stryker writes in “My Words to Victor Frankenstein above the Village of Chamounix: Performing Transgender Rage,” a classic essay in the field. “It is the product of medical science,” Stryker continues; “It is a technological construction. It is flesh torn apart and sewn together again in a shape other than that in which it was born.” With that essay, even though she had no academic job and no prospect of getting one, Stryker may have inaugurated the field of transgender history. Born and educated in Oklahoma, she had just earned a Ph.D. at the University of California-Berkeley. As Susan made one transition—from graduate student to unemployed historian—she made her second, from one gender to the next. The job market was terrible, and the possibility of being employed as a transwoman was vanishingly small in the early 1990s. So, San Francisco became Stryker’s laboratory. She wrote, she researched, she became a filmmaker, she helped to build an archive, and she learned from other queers on the margins of academia—Patrick Califia, Gayle Rubin. In other words, created a space where transgender history could happen—a door that opened and that younger scholars, artists, and activists now walk through. And one day, the academy caught up, and came calling. Today, Stryker is Professor Emerita in the Women and Gender Studies Department at the University of Arizona. She has held multiple distinguished fellowships and is the executive editor of TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly. I’ll let Susan tell you the rest, a story in which she becomes one of the most distinguished historians of our generation, and a founding mother in her field. A new collection of Stryker’s essays. edited by McKenzie Wark, When Monsters Speak (Duke, 2024) is evidence of her life’s journey, her intellectual trajectory, and more. Show notes: * Do you want to learn more about Christine Jorgensen? You can read Christine Jorgensen: A Personal Autobiography, with an introduction by Susan Stryker (Cleis Press, 2000). * In my introduction, I namecheck Jack Halberstam’s The Queer Art of Failure (Duke University Press, 2011) and Jules Gill-Peterson’s Histories of the Transgender Child (University of Minnesota Press, 2018). * You can subscribe to TSQ: A Transgender Studies Quarterly here. * MacKenzie Wark, the editor of Susan’s book and my colleague, is Professor of Culture and Media at Eugene Lang College, The New School. You can take a look at some of her work here. * Susan mentions early work in the history of sexuality by John D’Emilio, Making Trouble (Routledge, 1993); and George Chauncey, Gay New York: Gender, Urban Culture, and the Making of the Gay Male World, 1890-1940 (Basic Books, 2008). * Susan mentions her time as executive director of the San Francisco GLBT Historical Society—where you can go to do your own research. * We discuss anthropologist Gayle Rubin: you can read a selection of her work in Deviations: A Gayle Rubin Reader (Duke University Press, 2011). She also mentions the importance of Patrick Califia, a journalist who wrote for the local queer press and has published multiple books. You can download this podcast here or subscribe for free on iTunes, Spotify, or Soundcloud. You can also keep up with Political Junkie content and watch me indulge my slightly perverse sense of humor on X, Instagram, Threads, and TikTok. If you enjoyed this episode, why not try: * Episode 36, The Reality of Desire: A conversation with feminist sex educator, filmmaker and podcast host Tristan Taormino about her new memoir, "A Part of the Heart Can't Be Eaten" * Episode 29, To Sexual Outlaws, With Love: A conversation with the legendary lesbian writer, activist, and community herstorian Joan Nestle about her new collection of essays, "A Sturdy Yes Of A People" * Episode 25, Lavender and Red: A conversation with historian Bettina Aptheker about her book "Communists in Closets: Queering the History, 1930s-1990s" Political Junkie is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. And here’s a bonus: all new annual subscriptions include a free copy of my book about political media, Political Junkies: From Talk Radio to Twitter, How Alternative Media Hooked Us on Politics and Broke Our Democracy (Basic Books, 2020.) Get full access to Political Junkie at clairepotter.substack.com/subscribe

    40 min

Ratings & Reviews

5
out of 5
6 Ratings

About

Where contemporary history and politics meet the challenge of today. clairepotter.substack.com

You Might Also Like

To listen to explicit episodes, sign in.

Stay up to date with this show

Sign in or sign up to follow shows, save episodes, and get the latest updates.

Select a country or region

Africa, Middle East, and India

Asia Pacific

Europe

Latin America and the Caribbean

The United States and Canada