Book about the white working class

Sadly no. Because Taibbi's assumptions (at least as reflected in your passage) are incorrect:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...-working-class-trump-cultural-anxiety/525771/
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1718155115#ref-5
https://mirror.explodie.org/schaffner_et_al_trump.pdf

 

The opiates issue is another that always gets my interest. It is absolutely correct that the effect of opiates has been devastating, largely in these communities. And I agree that empathy and treatment are the correct public policy responses.

But man in the 80s that was not the impulse with crack. Then it was a pure law enforcement approach, with zeal.

 

NWO sheeple don't.

 

Two problems, just with that passage you quoted, are (1) Obama had a roaring economy with full employment and the stock market growing about 300% at the end of his terms, so the "it's a bad economy" angle Trump was playing made no sense, and anyone who looked the economic news would know that.

And (2), it's undeniable that Trump tried like hell to attract the votes of racists, sexists, LGBT haters, bigoted and nationalist voters. Trump even pretended he didn't know who David Duke was when given the opportunity to dismiss his endorsement. And that was clear from the amount of Nazi, Racists, Proud Boys, anti Muslim, anti Jewish, etc. groups that marched for Trump. And Trump embraced them .... "There are good people on both sides" ... "Proud boys need to stand by" ... It's not hard to see why, "I'm not a racist/sexist/bigot, I just vote for the guy that coddles them" isn't a good look, and those people should be embarrassed.

 

I'm not sure the OP is going to agree with the authors argument that the Democrats should go in on social democracy, unionism and opposition to big money rather than 'get less woke' to appeal to WWC voters

 

Good article from the NYT on all the reasons. It’s race, class, jobs, education, and a host of other things.

Their America Is Vanishing. Like Trump, They Insist They Were Cheated. (Published 2022)

 

I'm pretty sure that when the media covered discontent in coal mining towns, for example, it talked about poverty, drugs, etc. It didn't attribute it all to racism.

 

The problem with these statements: we are currently at nearly full employment with inflation largely driven by the lack of workers to fill jobs. The unemployment rate during the "good ole days" was much higher.

 

So when was America great?

 

The problem was, and to a degree still is, that the Democrats are a combination of a moderate pro business technocrat wing, and a socialist leaning identity politics wing. A pro labor culturally conservative (or even moderate) presence was pretty small.

I think it’s simplistic to try to assign blame to one of the other. It was both. Certain areas of the country did not benefit to the degree urban areas did, and that created both economic and cultural resentments.

In terms of listening, sure that is great, but Hillary Clinton trying to convince coal miners they would be ok just didn’t ring very true.

 

While she wasn't very empathetic when she tried to convince the miners that they would be OK, the reality is that most of the coal mining jobs disappeared much more so as the result of technology (far fewer miners are required to produce a ton of coal now than it was the case decades ago) and the availability of cheap natural gas thanks to fracking the consequence of which was the replacement of old coal fired power plants by newer gas fired plants obsolete than "liberal" environmental policies. Although he was indeed effective at convincing them that he could restore jobs in the industry Trump essentially conned miners when he in effect promised them that he could turn back the clock. The same was also true of the steel industry. While imports did reduce demand for American-produced steel far fewer workers are required now to produce a ton of steel than were required in the '70s when obsolete steel mills were being shut down. No matter how much he promised or promises to do so Trump cannot turn back the clock.

 

I'm not sure its a big mystery TBH, the Democrats have made gains among the college educated (even before Trump), so that is going to add a somewhat progressive/pro management bent to the party which is going to conflict with the trade unionists who also support the party. The people that largely control and shape the messaging (not to mention run for office) are from the former group. I tend to agree with the author that people from a WC background arent any more conservative than the average person for the most part, there is nothing really about their attitudes that makes them more likely to be conservative other than where they live and how their parents voted. The biggest conservatives in rural and urban areas are always going to be the wealthiest and oldest demographics, just like everywhere else. The Trumpiest guy in rural America is probably a 55 year old GC who drives an $80k pickup and pretends he's a hillbilly on the weekends because he likes guns and wears camo, not a guy who works at a meatpacking plant (I mean that guy is probably a 16 year old El Salvadoran TBH). These guys exist in cities and suburbs too, but maybe only the rural guy gets coded as "working class" because he lives on a spread of land instead of a grotesque McMansion.

 

I feel like there's constant concern - from both sides - about making sure that "White Working Class" voters/Republicans are heard, understood, and even told how much they are valued. It's laudable to care about them just on a human level, of course, so I'm not against seeing journalists and pundits hanging out with White folks in diners and trying to learn about their concerns and dreams. Having said that, does the same pressure exist for the media and the political establishment to understand working class voters who are not White? They have had to deal with many of the same issues (and likely more) such as loss of manufacturing jobs, the wealth gap, higher costs of living, etc.

 

Other than the simple angle of white people getting the most attention from media in general, it is a group that is a vital voting block for both parties. None of them can afford to lose too many votes from that block to win the EC as it stands. It does seem to me that the focus is almost exclusively in red or red-leaning states. I'm sure there are plenty of conservatives in New England, but I'm not sure Dems are struggling with working class voters there in what are pretty demographically white places too (Where you live is still a powerful driver of how you vote). Biden has done well among white voters too, certainly better than Clinton did. But I feel like 2016 is the election that never ended, even though we are literally going to redo the 2020 election.

 

My frustration with this issue is that white rural voters are already favored in our political system by structure. The structure of the Senate and the Electoral College and even general federalism all favor white rural power.

That is not to say that white rural frustration is not real or that life is easy. Privilege does not mean your life is effortless; it just means you have less obstacles than similarly situated individuals.

But since this is a political board, it's fair to note that you would usually address a discrete group that faced problems that could be addressed by public policy by considering if they are underrepresented. But in this case it is the exact opposite. They already have disproportionate power as a group. And yet they still grieve that they are collectively disadvantaged.

 

You are also answering the question of "why do people always talk about them." Perhaps this is an indictment of the American system in general, even overrepresentation in government and outsized media attention fails to deliver the goods for struggling people. Because its just geography voting at the end of the day.

 

Well said - absolutely