• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The Revenge of the Lower Classes and the rise of American Fascism

Status
Not open for further replies.

Boney

Banned
The column, written in March 5th, provides us with a detailed illustration of how the virtual absence of the welfare state for an entire generation has corroded civic solidarity among the working class in light of the economic contradiction of neoliberal policies.

It has all of GAF's favorite things, "economic anxiety", white working class, Hillary Clinton and Trump, so it should provide a good read.

College-educated elites, on behalf of corporations, carried out the savage neoliberal assault on the working poor. Now they are being made to pay. Their duplicity—embodied in politicians such as Bill and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama—succeeded for decades. These elites, many from East Coast Ivy League schools, spoke the language of values—civility, inclusivity, a condemnation of overt racism and bigotry, a concern for the middle class—while thrusting a knife into the back of the underclass for their corporate masters. This game has ended.

There are tens of millions of Americans, especially lower-class whites, rightfully enraged at what has been done to them, their families and their communities. They have risen up to reject the neoliberal policies and political correctness imposed on them by college-educated elites from both political parties: Lower-class whites are embracing an American fascism.

These Americans want a kind of freedom—a freedom to hate. They want the freedom to use words like “nigger,” “kike,” “spic,” “chink,” “raghead” and “fag.” They want the freedom to idealize violence and the gun culture. They want the freedom to have enemies, to physically assault Muslims, undocumented workers, African-Americans, homosexuals and anyone who dares criticize their cryptofascism. They want the freedom to celebrate historical movements and figures that the college-educated elites condemn, including the Ku Klux Klan and the Confederacy. They want the freedom to ridicule and dismiss intellectuals, ideas, science and culture. They want the freedom to silence those who have been telling them how to behave. And they want the freedom to revel in hypermasculinity, racism, sexism and white patriarchy. These are the core sentiments of fascism. These sentiments are engendered by the collapse of the liberal state.

The Democrats are playing a very dangerous game by anointing Hillary Clinton as their presidential candidate. She epitomizes the double-dealing of the college-educated elites, those who speak the feel-your-pain language of ordinary men and women, who hold up the bible of political correctness, while selling out the poor and the working class to corporate power.

The Republicans, energized by America’s reality-star version of Il Duce, Donald Trump, have been pulling in voters, especially new voters, while the Democrats are well below the voter turnouts for 2008. In the voting Tuesday, 5.6 million votes were cast for the Democrats while 8.3 million went to the Republicans. Those numbers were virtually reversed in 2008—8.2 million for the Democrats and about 5 million for the Republicans.

Richard Rorty in his last book, “Achieving Our Country,” written in 1998, presciently saw where our postindustrial nation was headed.

Many writers on socioeconomic policy have warned that the old industrialized democracies are heading into a Weimar-like period, one in which populist movements are likely to overturn constitutional governments. Edward Luttwak, for example, has suggested that fascism may be the American future. The point of his book The Endangered American Dream is that members of labor unions, and unorganized unskilled workers, will sooner or later realize that their government is not even trying to prevent wages from sinking or to prevent jobs from being exported. Around the same time, they will realize that suburban white-collar workers—themselves desperately afraid of being downsized—are not going to let themselves be taxed to provide social benefits for anyone else.

At that point, something will crack. The nonsuburban electorate will decide that the system has failed and start looking around for a strongman to vote for— someone willing to assure them that, once he is elected, the smug bureaucrats, tricky lawyers, overpaid bond salesmen, and postmodernist professors will no longer be calling the shots. A scenario like that of Sinclair Lewis’ novel It Can’t Happen Here may then be played out. For once a strongman takes office, nobody can predict what will happen. In 1932, most of the predictions made about what would happen if Hindenburg named Hitler chancellor were wildly overoptimistic.

One thing that is very likely to happen is that the gains made in the past forty years by black and brown Americans, and by homosexuals, will be wiped out. Jocular contempt for women will come back into fashion. The words “nigger” and “kike” will once again be heard in the workplace. All the sadism which the academic Left has tried to make unacceptable to its students will come flooding back. All the resentment which badly educated Americans feel about having their manners dictated to them by college graduates will find an outlet.


Fascist movements build their base not from the politically active but the politically inactive, the “losers” who feel, often correctly, they have no voice or role to play in the political establishment. The sociologist Émile Durkheim warned that the disenfranchisement of a class of people from the structures of society produced a state of “anomie”—a “condition in which society provides little moral guidance to individuals.” Those trapped in this “anomie,” he wrote, are easy prey to propaganda and emotionally driven mass movements. Hannah Arendt, echoing Durkheim, noted that “he chief characteristic of the mass man is not brutality and backwardness, but his isolation and lack of normal social relationships.”

In fascism the politically disempowered and disengaged, ignored and reviled by the establishment, discover a voice and a sense of empowerment.

As Arendt noted, the fascist and communist movements in Europe in the 1930s “… recruited their members from this mass of apparently indifferent people whom all other parties had given up as too apathetic or too stupid for their attention. The result was that the majority of their membership consisted of people who had never before appeared on the political scene. This permitted the introduction of entirely new methods into political propaganda, and indifference to the arguments of political opponents; these movements not only placed themselves outside and against the party system as a whole, they found a membership that had never been reached, never been ‘spoiled’ by the party system. Therefore they did not need to refute opposing arguments and consistently preferred methods which ended in death rather than persuasion, which spelled terror rather than conviction. They presented disagreements as invariably originating in deep natural, social, or psychological sources beyond the control of the individual and therefore beyond the control of reason. This would have been a shortcoming only if they had sincerely entered into competition with either parties; it was not if they were sure of dealing with people who had reason to be equally hostile to all parties.”

Fascism is aided and advanced by the apathy of those who are tired of being conned and lied to by a bankrupt liberal establishment, whose only reason to vote for a politician or support a political party is to elect the least worst. This, for many voters, is the best Clinton can offer.
Fascism expresses itself in familiar and comforting national and religious symbols, which is why it comes in various varieties and forms. Italian fascism, which looked back to the glory of the Roman Empire, for example, never shared the Nazis’ love of Teutonic and Nordic myths. American fascism too will reach back to traditional patriotic symbols, narratives and beliefs.
Robert Paxton wrote in “The Anatomy of Fascism”:

The language and symbols of an authentic American fascism would, of course, have little to do with the original European models. They would have to be as familiar and reassuring to loyal Americans as the language and symbols of the original fascisms were familiar and reassuring to many Italians and Germans, as [George] Orwell suggested. Hitler and Mussolini, after all, had not tried to seem exotic to their fellow citizens. No swastikas in an American fascism, but Stars and Stripes (or Stars and Bars) and Christian crosses. No fascist salute, but mass recitations of the pledge of allegiance. These symbols contain no whiff of fascism in themselves, of course, but an American fascism would transform them into obligatory litmus tests for detecting the internal enemy.[/]

Fascism is about an inspired and seemingly strong leader who promises moral renewal, new glory and revenge. It is about the replacement of rational debate with sensual experience. This is why the lies, half-truths and fabrications by Trump have no impact on his followers. Fascists transform politics, as philosopher and cultural critic Walter Benjamin pointed out, into aesthetics. And the ultimate aesthetic for the fascist, Benjamin said, is war.

Paxton singles out the amorphous ideology characteristic of all fascist movements.

Fascism rested not upon the truth of its doctrine but upon the leader’s mystical union with the historic destiny of his people, a notion related to romanticist ideas of national historic flowering and of individual artistic or spiritual genius, though fascism otherwise denied romanticism’s exaltation of unfettered personal creativity. The fascist leader wanted to bring his people into a higher realm of politics that they would experience sensually: the warmth of belonging to a race now fully aware of its identity, historic destiny, and power; the excitement of participating in a wave of shared feelings, and of sacrificing one’s petty concerns for the group’s good; and the thrill of domination.

There is only one way left to blunt the yearning for fascism coalescing around Trump. It is to build, as fast as possible, movements or parties that declare war on corporate power, engage in sustained acts of civil disobedience and seek to reintegrate the disenfranchised—the “losers”—back into the economy and political life of the country. This movement will never come out of the Democratic Party. If Clinton prevails in the general election Trump may disappear, but the fascist sentiments will expand. Another Trump, perhaps more vile, will be vomited up from the bowels of the decayed political system. We are fighting for our political life. Tremendous damage has been done by corporate power and the college-educated elites to our capitalist democracy. The longer the elites, who oversaw this disemboweling of the country on behalf of corporations—who believe, as does CBS Chief Executive Officer Leslie Moonves, that however bad Trump would be for America he would at least be good for corporate profit—remain in charge, the worse it is going to get.



https://www.truthdig.com/report/ite...ses_and_the_rise_of_american_fascism_20160302
 
Can someone actually explain to me what "neoliberal" means nowadays? I hear conflicting, unclear definitions, but I'm seeing it increasingly pop up post election
 
Most of what is written there is spot on. That's not Clinton's fault though.

I take huge issue with the blaming of college educated individuals however. Those who actually have an education that enabled them to critically think about the way things are going are 100% in concert at reviling at where we are headed.

Keep in mind I said "enabled them to critically think". Not all college educated individuals acquired that skill, believe me.
 

Orayn

Member
Bernie would have won.

Can someone actually explain to me what "neoliberal" means nowadays? I hear conflicting, unclear definitions, but I'm seeing it increasingly pop up post election

"Imperialism and capitalism are good as long as you like Hamilton and put a pink ribbon for breast cancer awareness on the drones you're using to blow up hospitals in other countries."
 

Boney

Banned
But none of that black nationalist BS, eh?
Didn't get to follow up on that thanks so Christmas Eve shenanigans, but it was in response of black power being radicalized into action, denying the existance of "white allies" who only benefit by their pretended solidarity. I don't like it one bit and I'm appalled at the normalization of it.

Since I couldn't follow up, I understand the snarkiness, but please let's leave that discussion for somewhere else.

There is no racist calling Michelle Obama a monkey to defend.
Not denouncing the shit bag is not in defense of him. Repeating for the zillionth time "that's horrible" in the forum serves no practical purpose because it's addressing no one.

And I just responded to it.
 

Biske

Member
Its perfectly fitting that the "lower classes" revenge is putting EVEN more super wealthy people in government to fuck them over.

Keep voting against your interests Americans.
 

Blackthorn

"hello?" "this is vagina"
Can someone actually explain to me what "neoliberal" means nowadays? I hear conflicting, unclear definitions, but I'm seeing it increasingly pop up post election
Here's a useful - but very much left wing - perspective from George Monbiot:

If you want an in depth look at neoliberalism's political and cultural failings, I highly recommend watching Hypernormalisation by Adam Curtis.
 

sphagnum

Banned
Can someone actually explain to me what "neoliberal" means nowadays? I hear conflicting, unclear definitions, but I'm seeing it increasingly pop up post election

Neoliberal has differing definitions in the same way that liberal and conservative have differing definitions. I just want to get that out of the way before kirblar or someone from PoliGAF comes in and says "It's just a slur!" It certainly CAN be used uncritically but it basically means, when being used in the current sense, a capitalist system that focuses on a turn to market solutions for everything. So whereas in the 20th century there was a lot of experimentation with government programs like public education and socialized healthcare, now we talk about charter schools and Obamacare. It's about the normalization of capitalist logic in public a economic life.

Since the rich are no longer seen as a class enemy but an element that the Democrats need to harness as a constituency for campaign funding, there is less of a focus on unions or workers' rights and more of a focus on technocratic solutions. Free trade, which primarily benefits businesses, is promoted. While you CAN harness the profits created by cpitalism and redistribute them, the technocratic wing has failed to do that or even convincingly make that argument seem like a priority (no doubt the GOP heavily hampered this, but the Dems still did a terrible job with messaging and came off as elitist).
 

Enzom21

Member
But none of that black nationalist BS, eh?
There is no racist calling Michelle Obama a monkey to defend.
I'm pretty sure it's only one specific group in the "lower classes" that was trying to get its revenge. The white ones.
This election was more about white people feeling threatened by the changing demographics of this country than people are willing to admit.

Bill O'reilly finally dropped the pretense:
"The left wants power taken away from the white establishment and they want a profound change in the way America is run," he said on his show, the O'Reilly Factor. "Taking voting power away from the white precincts is the quickest way to do that."
C0KXg45UQAAjWwz.jpg
This shit wasn't about "economic anxiety."

Didn't get to follow up on that thanks so Christmas Eve shenanigans, but it was in response of black power being radicalized into action, denying the existance of "white allies" who only benefit by their pretended solidarity. I don't like it one bit and I'm appalled at the normalization of it.

Since I couldn't follow up, I understand the snarkiness, but please let's leave that discussion for somewhere else.

You're more than welcome to actually respond to everyone had issue with your nonsense post in that thread.
 

ThisGuy

Member
Didn't get to follow up on that thanks so Christmas Eve shenanigans, but it was in response of black power being radicalized into action, denying the existance of "white allies" who only benefit by their pretended solidarity. I don't like it one bit and I'm appalled at the normalization of it.

Since I couldn't follow up, I understand the snarkiness, but please let's leave that discussion for somewhere else.
Got a link? I'd like to read a bit of what you two are discussing.


There is no racist calling Michelle Obama a monkey to defend.

...Jesus Christ
 

Boney

Banned
Most of what is written there is spot on. That's not Clinton's fault though.

I take huge issue with the blaming of college educated individuals however. Those who actually have an education that enabled them to critically think about the way things are going are 100% in concert at reviling at where we are headed.

Keep in mind I said "enabled them to critically think". Not all college educated individuals acquired that skill, believe me.
It's a systemic problem that cannot be blamed individually. But the intended coexistence of the educated and the non educated who don't speak the same language is exascerbated by the contradiction of the moral authority it evangelizes with the continued marginalization of the worker class. White working class bursts with the yearning of the legitimacy of white power of decades past.
 
There is a pecking order in society and the white working class had only the minorities to peck. Now, apparently they can't do that. So they revolted. And in doing so embraced neo-facism.
They saw minorities getting help, being treated a little better. And they asked "Where is OUR help?" There was none because there never is for the working class. Money stays with those with money.
So yeah, in the end they believed they had no one to peck on. Boo-fucking-hoo.
 

sphagnum

Banned
I'm pretty sure it's only one specific group in the "lower classes" that was trying to get its revenge. The white ones.

The article says that.

There are tens of millions of Americans, especially lower-class whites, rightfully enraged at what has been done to them, their families and their communities. They have risen up to reject the neoliberal policies and political correctness imposed on them by college-educated elites from both political parties: Lower-class whites are embracing an American fascism.

These Americans want a kind of freedom—a freedom to hate. They want the freedom to use words like “nigger,” “kike,” “spic,” “chink,” “raghead” and “fag.” They want the freedom to idealize violence and the gun culture. They want the freedom to have enemies, to physically assault Muslims, undocumented workers, African-Americans, homosexuals and anyone who dares criticize their cryptofascism. They want the freedom to celebrate historical movements and figures that the college-educated elites condemn, including the Ku Klux Klan and the Confederacy. They want the freedom to ridicule and dismiss intellectuals, ideas, science and culture. They want the freedom to silence those who have been telling them how to behave. And they want the freedom to revel in hypermasculinity, racism, sexism and white patriarchy. These are the core sentiments of fascism. These sentiments are engendered by the collapse of the liberal state.
 
Just like Brexit, the working classes place the right wing fringe politicians in positions of power and make them the new mainstream, shoving the moderates aside. And guess what these politicians want? To further cut social security, want EVEN MORE free trade, wipe out banking regulations, and race to the bottom on corporate taxation. Congratulations, you played yourself. And I don't have ANY sympathy at all for them when you get fucked over even more. The people who voted for it can suffer for all I care. At least the US has a chance to undo it in 4 years, the UK is fucked until we come to our senses.
 
The article is spot on, especially in that it takes pains to show, this is the product of failures by both parties and of the entire system. It doesn't at all absolve the racist hateful element, in fact it explains it, and shows how its all part of why we got to where we are.

I wish more people would read this, not just rightwingers, but lefties as well. A coherent explanation of what I think many of us have been saying or beating around the bush.
 
The article says that.

I know. The title implies otherwise.

(My point being that this is a bad title because it perpetuates the idea that the "working class" is made up of white people, ignoring the people of color that are also in the working class but who didn't choose to vote for Trump)
 
"Trumpism is a reaction to the lack of the welfare state, we need to be more like Denmark"-20 year old white dude on internet.

"Actually, fascism is good"-Denmark.

In Denmark’s 2015 parliamentary elections, the once-marginal Danish People’s Party (DPP) won more than 21 percent of seats, up from 12 percent, making it the second-most popular party in Denmark.

The DPP is perhaps best known for its anti-immigrant rhetoric. Their official platform argues that Denmark “is not an immigrant country and never has been,” and their leadership has sought to restrict immigration for asylum seekers and individuals without “jobs in hand.”

[How Hannah Arendt’s classic work on totalitarianism illuminates today’s America]

Recently, a DPP member of parliament (MP) drew heavy criticism for suggesting that immigrants trying to reach Europe by boat should be shot at, although he later clarified that the shots might simply be “warning shots.”



We conducted surveys of 3,550 Americans (via Survey Sampling International) in July and 2,311 Danes (via YouGov) in early December. (The Danish survey was overseen by Julien Christensen and Kristina Hansen, both PhD candidates in political science at Aarhus University.) The Danish sample was nationally representative, and the U.S. sample was weighted to resemble the population on several factors, including, race, age, education and income. The survey questions and response options are not identical in each country, but they are similar enough to allow some comparisons.

[Here’s the real reason Rust Belt cities and towns voted for Trump]

First, we asked respondents about a ban on Muslim immigration. The American sample was asked “Do you support or oppose a ban on people who are Muslim from entering the U.S.?” and the Danish sample was asked whether they agree that “there is a need to ban Muslim immigration to Denmark.”

Responses were similar in both countries. About 34 percent of Americans support this ban, while 36 percent of Danes agree that Muslim immigration ought to be banned. Similarly, 40 percent of Americans oppose the ban, while 37 percent of Danes disagree with a need for a ban.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-as-the-united-states/?utm_term=.8be9df9f63a0
 

G.ZZZ

Member
Its perfectly fitting that the "lower classes" revenge is putting EVEN more super wealthy people in government to fuck them over.

Keep voting against your interests Americans.

It's always been this way though. I don't see what's so surprising. History is there for anyone to see. People in bad situations would voluntarily elect a dictator. Many of my friends from norhtern/africa the middle east look at Turkey as an example to follow, because screw democracy and rights, he made the life of the average citizens much better. Democracy and rights come much after that, if even (see China).

If we lack an enemy, people will make one. See Europe. Jews, disabled people, immigrants, whatever. Genocide on chrirstian minorities (the albiges for example) wasn't even uncommon.

The reason the world progressed so much after the two world wars wasn't because we suddendly became illuminated. Illuminism and humanism and utilitarism phylosophy are much older anyway. It progressed because people constantly improved their situation for 30 odd years and people could focus on non-immananent problems, those who fall in the realm of ethics. Turn back to the shitter, and we're not so different from 3 generations ago that we won't resort back to war or plain old genocide. People just refuse to admit that by and large, humans are feeble and predictable.
 

G.ZZZ

Member
"Trumpism is a reaction to the lack of the welfare state, we need to be more like Denmark"-20 year old white dude on internet.

"Actually, fascism is good"-Denmark.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-as-the-united-states/?utm_term=.8be9df9f63a0

No, it's not what it's argued there. Globalism and neo-liberalism (or corporativism if "neoliberalism" is too much of a made-up word, unlike every other word) is hitting europe too. What's argued it's always relative perception. To have less is always defined relative to something else, else human path to morality would be esponential. Don't be purposefully dense. It's like some of you instead of focusing on the economical problems would rather think that someway white people all of sudden decided that they had to hate others because they're genetically ingrained to do so. Please all of you, recognize the patterns of history and think about what we can do instead of accusing others, that won't lead us anywhere.
 
No, it's not what it's argued there. Globalism and neo-liberalism (or corporativism if "neoliberalism" is too much of a made-up word, unlike every other word) is hitting europe too. What's argued it's always relative perception. To have less is always defined relative to something else, else human path to morality would be esponential. Don't be purposefully dense. It's like some of you instead of focusing on the economical problems would rather think that someway white people all of sudden decided that they had to hate others because they're genetically ingrained to do so. Wake the fuck up, really.

Most of Trump's voters had their childhood in an apartheid state.
 

Boney

Banned
I know. The title implies otherwise.

(My point being that this is a bad title because it perpetuates the idea that the "working class" is made up of white people, ignoring the people of color that are also in the working class but who didn't choose to vote for Trump)
Worker class I assume is being used in a scale of political power, where just like Brexit, it's overpowering the ruler class interests, with no benefits associated with them. Whites are mobilized but the existing condition affects black working class as well, resulting in apathy and not showing up to vote since no one represents their interests.

"Trumpism is a reaction to the lack of the welfare state, we need to be more like Denmark"-20 year old white dude on internet.

"Actually, fascism is good"-Denmark.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-as-the-united-states/?utm_term=.8be9df9f63a0
But their hasn't reached majority in Denmark. And while technically it hasn't done so for America either, it's the states that have the worse average standard of living who voted trump.

The relation between terrorism, the media and xenophobes with material capital is complex, but it should go beyond racists are racists because they are racists.

And I'm Latino :p
 

shintoki

sparkle this bitch
"Fascism is aided and advanced by the apathy of those who are tired of being conned and lied to by a bankrupt liberal establishment, whose only reason to vote for a politician or support a political party is to elect the least worst. This, for many voters, is the best Clinton can offer. "

This shit is dead on with exactly what a lot of fucking people said on voting for Clinton.
 

Ogodei

Member
It's a sort of democratic failure because they feel like the elites in neither party represent them, the Democrats because of their lack of narrative control and their surrender of class-based rhetoric because they think people don't want to hear it, and the Republicans because they want to destroy the entire bottom 99%, but tell a lot of these people what they want to hear.

Neither party represents them, but they're stuck within the confines of the two-party system. That's also why the UK's gone full bananas while the rest of Europe seems to be managing the plague better; a system that gravitates towards a two-party system will create coalitions, and these coalitions may not make a whole lot of sense, like white working class folks hitching their star to the party of the plutocrats.

The problem being that it's only going to get worse because the Dixiecrats have nobody who will listen to them, between the Dems' anti-racism and the GOP's voodoo economics designed to terrorize that class.

Proportional Representation would likely release the pressure valve, then we'd just get an American Freedom Party that would run about 25% of the vote and would force the GOP to maintain the welfare state if and when they entered a coalition with them.
 

Slayven

Member
Minorities trail behind white people in just about measurable metric. They didn't embrace facism despite being at the bottom of the totem for far longer and in worse conditions. That is why I don't believe it is all "class"
 
Worker class I assume is being used in a scale of political power, where just like Brexit, it's overpowering the ruler class interests, with no benefits associated with them. Whites are mobilized but the existing condition affects black working class as well, resulting in apathy and not showing up to vote since no one represents their interests.

Again, its only the white working class that decided to take "revenge." Are you implying that black people in the working class didn't show up to vote this year? Because that's not really true nor is it the problem - the problem is that the white working class as a whole decided to unapologetically and forcefully vote for a white supremacist as president.

(Hillary won those making $50k and under pretty handily, either way.)
 

G.ZZZ

Member
Most of Trump's voters had their childhood in an apartheid state.

So what? Do Denmark people did too? You were talking about how it's not about worsening economicals and posited Denmark as a counter-example, which was a strawman. Now you're calling out the fact that most Trump voters (citation needed) lived in an apartheid state, and i recall you that a lot of those Trump voters voted , twice, a black person called Barack Hussein Obama in office. Did 4-5 million people suddendly became racist in the last 8 years (even less considering the changing demographics)? Or maybe it's more about the message both those candidate tried to carry with themselves?

What's the endgame of some narrative proving that the white man is ultimately incapable of not hating the other? Where do you go from there, assuming the absurd that you even can prove something that inane?

No one want to help the poors, and then complain that the poors send everyone to the shitter even at the cost of their own well-being. Well good day sir, it's democracy. Pay your taxes or face social annihilation.
 

Altazor

Member
Just like Brexit, the working classes place the right wing fringe politicians in positions of power and make them the new mainstream, shoving the moderates aside. And guess what these politicians want? To further cut social security, want EVEN MORE free trade, wipe out banking regulations, and race to the bottom on corporate taxation. Congratulations, you played yourself. And I don't have ANY sympathy at all for them when you get fucked over even more. The people who voted for it can suffer for all I care. At least the US has a chance to undo it in 4 years, the UK is fucked until we come to our senses.

well, that's one of the consequences of rampant neoliberalism: fetishizing competition, imposing the idea that it's "every (wo)man for him/herself" and, thus, "why should my taxes pay for other people's shit? Why can't they be responsible?"
When you feel everybody else is out to get you, then no real solidarity can occur. It's replaced by charity, something to quell that nagging sense of guilt a bit while also maintaining your (perceived) higher status - you don't really see the "other" as an equal.

Add to that the constant demonization of public infrastructure/public services (with subsequent underfunding) and you've got masses of people complaining that they are badly run and a waste of money and other resources. So the idea of "competition" comes into public spaces, and masses of people start to vie for better places in the queue - and, once again, the "other" is seen as an enemy: "why is s/he getting treated before me? i pay my taxes and s/he doesn't, why does s/he get preferential treatment? Why do we have to pay for this shit?" This (apparently) doesn't happen in the private sector - or, at least, that's the idea they sell you. That you just pay what the invisible hand, in its supreme and infinite wisdom, decides, and voila - you're set. It "works" when public services don't. It's "efficient" when public services aren't. Freeloaders don't get a pass. Hooray.

And, if you ask me, the worst possible combination is one like the Chilean right (which I'm sure they got from the US right): fetishizing, at the same time, the idea of rampant neoliberalism and the practice of authoritarianism/totalitarism. They want their supposed free market and a strong military that quells dissent. They say they hate the State and want it out of mostly every economic sphere imaginable but they want to dictate everybody's personal lives. And, of course, there's no real free market here in Chile: it's mostly an oligopoly in everything that matters - 4 or 5 firms/families control the banks, the media, retailers, and so on. So they just want the State to turn a blind eye to whatever shady shit they do.

Just my 2 cents, though.
 

sphagnum

Banned
Minorities trail behind white people in just about measurable metric. They didn't embrace facism despite being at the bottom of the totem for far longer and in worse conditions. That is why I don't believe it is all "class"

It's not, but class is a big element. White workers have felt for ages that nobody represented them because of both parties being dominated by corporate interests, but unlike black voters who have an immediate and prevailing reason to vote Democratic and frankly have a clarity about the role of race that many white voters just don't have, many white voters heard a guy blaming their problems on "the other" and voted for him because it made sense to them. Racism isn't caused by classism - that would be reductionist - but it is certainly abetted by the capitalist system.

Black voters would have no reason to vote for a fascist, because they're not the ones being appealed to. They are the target. At least here. If this were in another country where there's a nonwhite population, a dictator could easily take advantage of people's economic fears and blame whoever the other in that country is to placate them. It happens all the time.
 
So what? Do Denmark people did too? You were talking about how it's not about worsening economicals and posited Denmark as a counter-example, which was a strawman. Now you're calling out the fact that most Trump voters (citation needed) lived in an apartheid state, and i recall you that a lot of those Trump voters voted , twice, a black person called Barack Hussein Obama in office. Did 4-5 million people suddendly became racist in the last 8 years (even less considering the changing demographics)? Or maybe it's more about the message both those candidate tried to carry with themselves?

What's the endgame of some narrative proving that the white man is ultimately incapable of not hating the other? Where do you go from there, assuming the absurd that you even can prove something that inane?

No one want to help the poors, and then complain that the poors send everyone to the shitter even at the cost of their own well-being. Well good day sir, it's democracy. Pay your taxes or face social annihilation.

"Most Trump voters grew up in an apartheid state" is a response to "did white people just become racist?!?!" by pointing out that America is so racist that it was an apartheid state prior to 1965.

A fuckton of Trump voters are 65 or older and thus they grew up in an apartheid state.

Many Obama to Trump voters were indifferent towards black people and voted for Obama because they liked him and didn't vote for Hillary because they didn't like her because Hillary sent emails. Almost all Obama to Trump voters have a positive approval rating of Obama despite Hillary being to Obama's left on every economic issue.
 

Slayven

Member
It's not, but class is a big element. White workers have felt for ages that nobody represented them because of both parties being dominated by corporate interests, but unlike black voters who have an immediate and prevailing reason to vote Democratic and frankly have a clarity about the role of race that many white voters just don't have, many white voters heard a guy blaming their problems on "the other" and voted for him because it made sense to them. Racism isn't caused by classism - that would be reductionist - but it is certainly abetted by the capitalist system.

Black voters would have no reason to vote for a fascist, because they're not the ones being appealed to. They are the target. At least here. If this were in another country where there's a nonwhite population, a dictator cold easily take advantage of people's economic fears and blame whoever the other in that country is to placate them. It happens all the time.
That I can agree with, and it is not even new.

I just hate the erasure of minorities from the working class that happen since the election.
 

Boney

Banned
Minorities trail behind white people in just about measurable metric. They didn't embrace facism despite being at the bottom of the totem for far longer and in worse conditions. That is why I don't believe it is all "class"
Can't speak for anybody here, but no sane person will deny that race in America is just as strong status element as class.
Again, its only the white working class that decided to take "revenge." Are you implying that black people in the working class didn't show up to vote this year? Because that's not really true nor is it the problem - the problem is that the white working class as a whole decided to unapologetically and forcefully vote for a white supremacist as president.

(Hillary won those making $50k and under pretty handily, either way.)
My interpretation of events is based on how under 50k are in constant interaction with public services, especially urban ones which is where democrats skyrocket. A positive relationship helps build political support that is able to counteract demagoguery.

I agree that non white worker was significantly less predisposed to support this fascism, especially with how Democrats have built minorities as a default voting block. But the crux of the matter for the author and myself, is that the voters and the votes casted are a consequence of the current class mobility system in America, and it's not about assigning the responsibility to that demographic, but how can one curb out this voting tendency.
 

kirblar

Member
Can someone actually explain to me what "neoliberal" means nowadays? I hear conflicting, unclear definitions, but I'm seeing it increasingly pop up post election
It's a far-lefty slur for anything they don't like. There is no consistent definition outside of '80s economic reforms.

The idea that there was ever civic class solidarity in the US is hilarious. Again, if you're ignoring race, you're wrong. (The lack of solidarity is due to racism. This is why white nationalism works with the WWC.)
 

Raven117

Member
That I can agree with, and it is not even new.

I just hate the erasure of minorities from the working class that happen since the election.
Wait, what?

I'm not challenging. Just asking if there are reports that minorities have been "erased" (your word) since th election of trump who hasn't taken office yet.

Not saying you are wrong. Just curious.
 
I disagree with the suggestion that labor unions are partially responsible. The US has the largest labor pool in the world and yet are severely behind other 1st world countries in regards to labor unions. If labor unions flourished here instead of Republicans dismantling them then Trump doesnt win.

It's just ridiculous to me why underpaid nonunion laborers voted for Trump.

It's ridiculous to me why all skilled workers don't unionize.
 

Raven117

Member
I disagree with the suggestion that labor unions are partially responsible. The US has the largest labor pool in the world and yet are severely behind other 1st world countries in regards to labor unions. If labor unions flourished here instead of Republicans dismantling them then Trump doesnt win.

It's just ridiculous to me why underpaid nonunion laborers voted for Trump.

It's ridiculous to me why all skilled workers don't unionize.
You have to balance strong unions with the fact corporations can globalize exceedingly easily. That's the rub.

The rub of a lot of this is that "we" don't have an answer for globalization for Those who can be underbid.
 

kirblar

Member
I disagree with the suggestion that labor unions are partially responsible. The US has the largest labor pool in the world and yet are severely behind other 1st world countries in regards to labor unions. If labor unions flourished here instead of Republicans dismantling them then Trump doesnt win.

It's just ridiculous to me why underpaid nonunion laborers voted for Trump.

It's ridiculous to me why all skilled workers don't unionize.
Unions were hurt by globalization in general. Much of their leverage was geographic and when things can move easily from place to place, that went away.
 
If anything the US needed to unionize and push back agains laws that eroded unions a long time ago. Countries that are more unionized although still having economic troubles see their work forces fair better with better safety nets and more jobs kept due to unions.
 
Can't speak for anybody here, but no sane person will deny that race in America is just as strong status element as class.

My interpretation of events is based on how under 50k are in constant interaction with public services, especially urban ones which is where democrats skyrocket. A positive relationship helps build political support that is able to counteract demagoguery.

I agree that non white worker was significantly less predisposed to support this fascism, especially with how Democrats have built minorities as a default voting block. But the crux of the matter for the author and myself, is that the voters and the votes casted are a consequence of the current class mobility system in America, and it's not about assigning the responsibility to that demographic, but how can one curb out this voting tendency.

If the votes are a consequence of the current class mobility system, why did people of color in the working class not vote for fascism? And why did white people of every income level vote for it?

Wait, what?

I'm not challenging. Just asking if there are reports that minorities have been "erased" (your word) since th election of trump who hasn't taken office yet.

Not saying you are wrong. Just curious.

Not literally erased, if that's what you're thinking. But since the election people (like the title of this article) have talked about the lower class and the working class to mean the white working class, completely ignoring people of color who are also in the working class but did not support fascism.
 

Wilsongt

Member
The problem I see with this "lower class" uprising is that they rose up and put the very people who have fucked them, and will continue to fuck them into power.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Inaccurate title ✔
Use of neoliberal ✔

Must be a Boney thread.

Hardcore Sanders supporters really have difficulty seeing the issues of race in this country.
 

Kayhan

Member
The problem I see with this "lower class" uprising is that they rose up and put the very people who have fucked them, and will continue to fuck them into power.

The lower classes have been fucked by both the Democrats and the Republicans.

The Clinton Democratic party is the party of the Millionaire Donors. And we all know the republicans.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom