Political Perspective of Working-class White Americans

[Kivhala]

I'm honestly sorry if anyone is going to read my post, this will be a rant of a high degree.

The American "dream" was fabled that people, all people, will have a fair shake of the dice in life. Mean even if you're able to get a good job doesn't mean you will, there are others, they may get it first. This means you must be competitive to a degree, but what about the people who don't want to be competitive? They still find jobs (mostly), just don't get as far that easy. I'm off point, a fair shake of the dice doesn't mean affirmative action. How is it fair if someone is given a job because of their race? While we as a people say racism is bad, we implemented policies which seemed great, but were in a basic sense racist. Now, does racism exist in our society? Yes, so does sexism, the fix of those is often slow change. Because change can't be fast in many countries, if it is it will cause innumerable losses of life, culture, and society. Examples are like the great leap forward, it was rapid change and it did modernize China, but at what cost? As well societal change (which racism & sexism should be under) takes a time to happen, the correct policies must be put in to not cause widespread hate of any side. But you must also let it sink in and take affect in the people, organizations like #BLM make hate worse and more widespread. They make people want to hate them by being the equals to domestic terrorists, is our justice system right? No. Is it justified racism because of what they did? No. Are they the first to cause it? No.

But, we should all realize a path to equality and freedom is best by peace and pacifism than violence. Anyway, in classes (simplified) the relations go like this. The poor want to be rich or in the middle class, the middle class hates the poor and envies the rich, and the rich don't care about them. Of course in individual matters it is different, as a whole they're going to be like that. The middle class hates the poor since they get free stuff, envies the rich since they're rich. Rest are rather self-explanatory. My paragraph above did state affirmative action, everyone should know what it is. In basic a middle class white is the epitome of a boiling pot of hate, they mostly worked for where they are, but they can be rejected on promotion or a job because of their skin color. As well they don't qualify for the free benefits the poor get, and they don't have the money the rich do. The middle class as a whole has that disdain somewhere in them, sadly. Still doesn't mean it's justified. Oh and taxes, since the progressive tax rate the poor get a much lower rate (good for them honestly), the middle class gets a decent tax rate not many deductibles, the rich get a high one but can have incomes that are harder to tax. So, who has the tax burden? The middle class.

Rant over. Adios.

P.S. Sorry for spelling mistakes and grammar issues on a mobile with no autocorrect, like it'd help.

[Korhe]

http://prospect.org/article/winning-some-middle-road-working-class-whites

American NSers (particularly those of you who are more supportive of Trump and the GOP), what do you think about this expose on WWC political opinions? Would you say this is an accurate characterization of your or your relatives' political views? And for those of you who are more left-leaning, how do you think the Democrats should better reflect the political and social interests of this voter bloc in coming election cycles?

I've seen a lot of alt-right and nativist accounts pop up in the last year or two and wonder how much of that is coming from the "white working class".

The most important characteristic of these middle-of-the-road white male workers is that they approach politics using a fundamentally distinct cognitive framework from that of white workers who hold a firm conservative or progressive ideology. In Molyneux’s Prospect article, he uses the term “white working-class moderates” as a succinct way to characterize these Americans—but it is worth noting that this is not how they generally would describe themselves. They themselves tend to describe their approach to making political decisions as using “practical common sense,” or “my personal philosophy.” They see themselves as trying to “think for myself” to “make up my own mind,” “do my own thinking” or “see both sides” of an issue. When analyzing a political topic, they will often use a distinct “on the one hand, on the other hand” mode of thought.

Observing the groups there were three significant patterns that emerged:

I. These white workers were overwhelmingly cultural traditionalists—but their comments illustrated the fact that there is a fundamental difference between cultural traditionalism and conservatism.

II. “Common sense,” "­middle of the road” white workers do indeed respect and endorse core traditional cultural values, but they also endorse a more unexpected social value—a deep and genuine belief in “tolerance.”

III. In an ironic twist, the admirable trait of “common sense,” “middle of the road” white working-class support for tolerance becomes also a demand that liberals should be tolerant themselves and respect white working-class values as well.

IV. “Common sense,” “middle of the road” white workers don’t see politicians as divided into left or right. They see them as all part of a single corrupt and parasitic new ruling class. Their hostility constitutes a modern form of class consciousness.

As Guy Molyneux said in his Prospect analysis of this same focus group data:

"These voters agree that the economic system is “rigged” as populists like Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders like to say, but with a crucial difference. It is rigged not only to the advantage of those at the top. The men in the focus groups complain that the rich and the poor get taken care of today, while those in the middle get left behind."

This view was perfectly summarized by one participant who said: “The left cares about the poor, the right cares about the rich. Nobody cares about us.”

Regarding the poor and minorities, there is a combination of genuine concern and willingness to help those who are genuinely in need, along with an intense fury and contempt for the lazy, the dishonest, and the criminal.

The participants expressed this dichotomy in many ways:

"If you’re in a wheelchair, yeah, we’ll help you. But if you’re able-bodied there’s no reason you’re not working.

My mom is 70 years old. She has congestive heart failure. She has all kinds of health problems. She cannot work. She has not been able to work for 15 years. … So yeah, she lives off $900 a month in assistance. She gets $16 in food stamps. But I have a friend who has never worked a day in her life but has five kids and also gets $900 a month in food stamps. That is not fair."

It's not just white working class Americans. I believe that most Americans who aren't part of the radical left or radical right believe just about everything on here.

[Lowell Leber]

Only 40% of the voting white working class. The majority of people.in this country do not vote.

I don't know where I saw this, so take it with a grain of salt, but IIRC the average died in the wool Trump supporter was someone with a steady job with limited advancement opportunities but a liveable wage, in an economically depressed community. People like county sheriff deputies, janitors, fast food management, etc. Their gripe wasn't what they made- it was the limited opportunities for anything more than that, the lack of opportunities for their friends and family to have similar positions, and the destructive effects on their communities from it. They weren't blaming heroine use in New York, they were blaming it in their next door neighbors.
So, basically, these people were slightly luckier members of the working class in rural, disadvantaged areas. They're pissed because their kids have no choice but to go on disability to make ends meet, that drug use is running rampant- there's something to the distinction between moral conservatives and moral traditionals, after all- and that no one seems to care about problems in their communities. Transgender bathrooms don't cause them anger because they care how you pee. They cause anger because it looks to them like focusing on incredibly minor or even imaginary problems of people who seem slightly... Confused(if even your four year old granddaughter can tell the difference between man and woman, why can't some college educated city boy?)... Instead of real, actual problems that affect regular, hardworking folk.
It's these same people who vote most consistently out of the working class, and who largely inform the votes of those less well off.

Well said!

[Nouveau Yathrib]

http://prospect.org/article/winning-some-middle-road-working-class-whites

American NSers (particularly those of you who are more supportive of Trump and the GOP), what do you think about this expose on WWC political opinions? Would you say this is an accurate characterization of your or your relatives' political views? And for those of you who are more left-leaning, how do you think the Democrats should better reflect the political and social interests of this voter bloc in coming election cycles?

I've seen a lot of alt-right and nativist accounts pop up in the last year or two and wonder how much of that is coming from the "white working class".

It's not just white working class Americans. I believe that most Americans who aren't part of the radical left or radical right believe just about everything on here.

Most SJWs and alt-righters probably do too, but you wouldn't think that based on what goes down on NSG.

[Telconi]

Get to the point please.

Unions are inherently socialist as they fight to resist capitalist bourgeoisie oppression upon the working man. The working man does all of the work and produces capitol, should not the working man deserve a better wage and condition and not be worked to death. There must be equality! The working man does all of the work, therefor the working man shall own the work!

The Soviet Union was founded upon unions, both workers, soldiers, sailors and those weird Ukrainian anarchists who got turned on (bless Nestor Makhno). Of course Stalin fucked this shit up. The Spartasict uprising and those German leftists who started the German Civil War of 1918 and 1919 were all in Unions or the nucleus was a union.

Soviet is basically Russian for Council.

Well I understand that, but I highly doubt any significant membership in US labor unions is long term looking to overthrow the government and seize the means of production. It's an inherently capitalist relationship, the union is as much a firm as the company is, they simply control a needed resource (people).

[Kash Island]

as a working-class white American my biggest issues are just people/government leaving me mostly alone. I don't mind paying taxes for things everyone uses like roads, bridges etc etc. But when money is being taken from me to fund silly shit it really frustrates me because working class people have enough to deal with and paychecks aren't always that large.

[The Florence Union]

Well I understand that, but I highly doubt any significant membership in US labor unions is long term looking to overthrow the government and seize the means of production. It's an inherently capitalist relationship, the union is as much a firm as the company is, they simply control a needed resource (people).

Well the modern US labor Unions are a joke. They are a shadow of what they once were. The great Western Federation of Miners and the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters of the early 1900's were the pinnacle of the US labor Unions.

[Telconi]

Well I understand that, but I highly doubt any significant membership in US labor unions is long term looking to overthrow the government and seize the means of production. It's an inherently capitalist relationship, the union is as much a firm as the company is, they simply control a needed resource (people).

Well the modern US labor Unions are a joke. They are a shadow of what they once were. The great Western Federation of Miners and the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters of the early 1900's were the pinnacle of the US labor Unions.

They're a joke because they pretend like they're some sort of grassroots socialist revolutionary red guards. If they would just get back to doing what they do, which is leveraging collective bargaining and labor controls to get better pay and benefits for their workers, they'd be fine.

[Kash Island]

Well the modern US labor Unions are a joke. They are a shadow of what they once were. The great Western Federation of Miners and the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters of the early 1900's were the pinnacle of the US labor Unions.

They're a joke because they pretend like they're some sort of grassroots socialist revolutionary red guards. If they would just get back to doing what they do, which is leveraging collective bargaining and labor controls to get better pay and benefits for their workers, they'd be fine.

Yeah they became all communist/socialist and it's very off putting.

[Kvatchdom]

They're a joke because they pretend like they're some sort of grassroots socialist revolutionary red guards. If they would just get back to doing what they do, which is leveraging collective bargaining and labor controls to get better pay and benefits for their workers, they'd be fine.

Yeah they became all communist/socialist and it's very off putting.

They've become less socialist. Corruption and feeding off employees' wages and doing nothing in return isn't anything like what they used to be when they were tied to left-wing organizations, back when the Democrats were still left-wing to a degree.

[Nouveau Yathrib]

https://www.voterstudygroup.org/publica ... and-beyond

Found this link on the voting patterns of so-called "populists" who are economically left-leaning and socially/identity-wise right-leaning, who actually formed half of Trump's support base last year but also voted in significant numbers for Mitt Romney in 2012.

Looking at these issues more closely, we can see that the Obama to Trump voter looks very much like Romney to Trump supporters on attitudes toward African-Americans, feelings on immigration, and attitudes toward Muslims. Interestingly, the Obama to Trump voter is not as conservative on moral issues, and looks like a Clinton voter on concerns about inequality. However, the Obama to Trump voter is in the middle (on average) on the role of government in the economy.

However, we already knew Obama to Trump voters were populists. Perhaps more interesting are the Obama voters who supported neither Clinton nor Trump. For the most part, they are more conservative than Obama to Trump voters, though slightly more disaffected about the nature of the political system. Though many on the far left argue that Clinton would have won had she been more progressive and excited more Sanders voters, the data here suggest that Clinton may have lost some Democratic voters because her campaign was too left leaning, particularly on the identity and social issues, but perhaps also some issues of government intervention as well. Again, these averages mask a certain degree of variation, so one should be cautious of overgeneralizing.

I'm personally torn on immigration and the globalism/nationalism divide- I agree with the emerging Right that there needs to be a coherent and unitary national culture (although I consider African-Americans to be a central part of that culture), but very strongly disagree with the idea that nonwhite immigration to the US is inherently bad or that racial and ethnic minorities can't integrate into mainstream society.

A Final Note On Immigration

Since immigration is emerging as a dominant issue, it is worth asking in a little more detail what impact it might have on the future of the party coalitions. Already, we saw that in 2016, many of the party switchers appear to have been motivated by identity issues. Obama to Trump voters were much more conservative on identity issues than Obama to Clinton voters, and Romney to Clinton voters were much more liberal on identity issues than Romney to Trump voters.

Are there still voters whose political beliefs are at odds with the candidate they supported in 2016? It turns out there are.

As we might expect, almost all the anti-immigration Clinton supporters are in the populist quadrant, torn between their economic liberalism and identity conservatism. Presumably, they will continue to be torn, and much may depend on how they break.

The misplaced Trump supporters are mostly a mix of libertarians and liberals. The libertarians make sense—like populists, they are torn between their social liberalism and economic conservatism, and like anti-immigration Clinton supporters, they voted on economic issues, not social/identity issues. More puzzling are the Trump supporters who are liberal on both identity and economic issues. Perhaps they are misinformed, or perhaps they are single-issue voters on some other set of issues.

Cue the suburban Chinese immigrants bent out of shape over affirmative action, the Indian immigrant Hindu identitarians who support Trump's tough talk against "radical Islam", otherwise genuinely liberal white people who're privileged enough to vote against Clinton because they personally don't have much to lose under a Trump administration, etc. There might be more and better worded examples of this, but I'm sure you get my point.

[Aillyria]

I find that the supposed view points of the WWC is very similar to the overarching aspects of my own viewpoint on American politics and culture, and I'm not even white. Is it possible this is a trend in working class Americans in general, regardless of race?

[Diopolis]

I find that the supposed view points of the WWC is very similar to the overarching aspects of my own viewpoint on American politics and culture, and I'm not even white. Is it possible this is a trend in working class Americans in general, regardless of race?

It's a trend among workers in skilled and semi-skilled labor in general. Historically, this group has been overwhelmingly white.
I would personally define "working class American" as having the following characteristics:
-Is here legally
-Works more than seventy hours a week at least four weeks out of the year, not necessarily contiguous
-Has less than a four year college degree
-Makes more than one and a half times minimum wage before overtime
If that person were described to you, who would you assume they voted for?

[Farnhamia]

Do not post in threads that have not had a new post in more than four weeks.