[Discussion] Now is the winter of our discontent

This thread is for the discussion of voting demographics that feel disenfranchised by the current US political landscape. In the run up to the election I expect that there will be a lot of focus on the right-wing Trump supporters, but my impression is that there is widespread discontent across the political spectrum. Is there? And if so, how widespread is it and what are the causes?

(Despite the immediate focus on the US political landscape, examples from across the globe are welcomed, especially if you provide context.)

(Note: not about voter suppression, ID-laws, or the like. We have a different thread for that. Talking about why a group is afraid of that fits just fine, though.)

OG_slinger wrote:

It's an awkward listen because it's essentially 45 minutes of white people trying to say they aren't being racist when they're clearly being racists.

Hey I was listening to that episode of TAL yesterday, except it was about a school losing accreditation and the black students transferring to the nearby white school.

OG_slinger wrote:

This week's This American Life took a deep dive into how the residents of St. Cloud, MN have dealt with an influx of Somali refugees and how this relates to the split in the Republican party and this year's election.

It's an awkward listen because it's essentially 45 minutes of white people trying to say they aren't being racist when they're clearly being racists.

I was listening to part of that in the car and came to the same conclusion you did.

Same here. It was disturbing. Everyone kept saying variants on the theme of "they're totally wrong about the immigrants, but they are still good people". And by "wrong", what was meant was "racist".

Robear wrote:

Same here. It was disturbing. Everyone kept saying variants on the theme of "they're totally wrong about the immigrants, but they are still good people". And by "wrong", what was meant was "racist".

That's Minnesota Nice!

smdh

I wonder how long "Prairie Home Companion" would have last if it were narrated by Kojo Nnamdi...

I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but it does disturb me that this dude in Iowa who tried to start a race riot in a high school football game and shot and murdered two police officers is not getting more play.

Paleocon wrote:

I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but it does disturb me that this dude in Iowa who tried to start a race riot in a high school football game and shot and murdered two police officers is not getting more play.

Yeah, me too. Then again, I'm sequestered and traveling for work, so I guess I just didn't expect to hear anything but it's been on the back of my mind.

Haven't had much interaction with the usual suspects, but my guess is that the alleged perpetrator doesn't fit the 'blue lives matter' narrative, so there are a lot of people struggling to reconcile their knee-jerk support for the uniform and the actions of one of their own.
Just waiting for the evidence that this person had mental health issues and is just another victim of Obama's healthcare system.
/cynical exhaustion

Turns out he is a neonazi and a Trump supporter.

Color me surprised.

Paleocon wrote:

I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but it does disturb me that this dude in Iowa who tried to start a race riot in a high school football game and shot and murdered two police officers is not getting more play.

It was the headline on most news sites this AM and as of now it is still on the front page of HuffingtonPost, CNN, USA Today, and Fox News.

I don't see how there could be much "more play"

Rezzy wrote:

Haven't had much interaction with the usual suspects, but my guess is that the alleged perpetrator doesn't fit the 'blue lives matter' narrative, so there are a lot of people struggling to reconcile their knee-jerk support for the uniform and the actions of one of their own.
Just waiting for the evidence that this person had mental health issues and is just another victim of Obama's healthcare system.
/cynical exhaustion

Lone disturbed gunman with mental health issues.. no way part of a broader problem like BLM and the war on cops.

I guess we should just be happy they didn't post his lap times.

“I understand that Trump is a terrible person,” she said. “Everyone does. We’re not that stupid, and we know he’s out to con us. But people around here are angry. We’re so angry we want to be conned. And maybe while he’s destroying the planet, he’ll wipe out my student debt, too. Get it?”
Jonman wrote:
cheeze_pavilion wrote:

: D

The message I've gotten is, that on issues such as this, to defer to the people with skin in the game. It doesn't matter what you as an outsider thinks--if they want your opinion of disagreement, they'll ask. Until then, signal boost.

*respect knuckles*

But to expand on your initial question, I think that there are a lot of levers available to a government to address the demographic-change anxieties, where "classical" racism is a much harder problem to tackle. A lack of "good jobs" for the next generation is definitely something a government can address through a range of policy interventions, right? And there's of course racial elements to that policy, in ensuring that opportunities are equally available across racial groups (or even targeted towards the racial groups who are most affected), for instance, but that entire policy arena is bread-and-butter for a government.

So yes, drawing a distinction between the two is invaluable at the policy level.

With some time to think, I believe the next question is "are you at the policy level?"

In other words, when you go do speak, you consider your audience. If your audience is interested in what you have to say about policy level solutions, then sure. If your audience is not, then don't.

In my experience, audiences are interested in something closer to consciousness raising than they are in finding solutions at the policy level. The relationship to policy is less about crafting them, and more about how some particular policy already in play at that level is good or bad and needs support or opposition.

cheeze_pavilion wrote:

With some time to think, I believe the next question is "are you at the policy level?"

To bring this full circle, this entire discussion sprung from a quote in an Ezra Klein interview with Francis Fukiyama.

Those guys? Absolutely at the policy level, yes. You'd be hard pressed to find wonkier policy-wonks.

You and me? Not so much.

Jonman wrote:
cheeze_pavilion wrote:

With some time to think, I believe the next question is "are you at the policy level?"

To bring this full circle, this entire discussion sprung from a quote in an Ezra Klein interview with Francis Fukiyama.

Those guys? Absolutely at the policy level, yes. You'd be hard pressed to find wonkier policy-wonks.

You and me? Not so much.

That may be the answer: don't worry so much about how people not at a policy level respond to some specific wonk's quote. If the idea is important enough, there will be another wonk with the relevant lived experience who can make the point.

farley3k wrote:
“I understand that Trump is a terrible person,” she said. “Everyone does. We’re not that stupid, and we know he’s out to con us. But people around here are angry. We’re so angry we want to be conned. And maybe while he’s destroying the planet, he’ll wipe out my student debt, too. Get it?”

No. No, I do not "get it."

Only someone unfamiliar with actual revolution would ever say something that asinine.

There are bullet riddled walls all over Central America, Asia, and Africa with human shaped silhouettes on them that were the last living scenes of folks who thought "this revolution thing couldn't be so bad".

Poe's Law, guys.

Jonman wrote:

Poe's Law, guys.

I don't think this really applies here. It would if she were not sincerely ready to toss the nation into a trash heap of political and social chaos because she was disgruntled with her personal circumstances, but she is.

I took a 10 day motorcycle trip through the Mekong Delta back in the 90's. It was decades since either Vietnam or Cambodia had seen conflict, but the scars of the cataclysm that defined that area in our national consciousness were still very visible. Bombed out buildings, craters in the middle of the jungle breeding malaria, folks still suffering from malnutrition and stunted infrastructure.

During that trip, I noticed an older woman who looked near 90. In reality she was probably all of 40 but worn down from decades of hard living. She was, generously, 4'10" and bent over from a lifetime of hard labor. Most striking, however, was her sh*t eating grin.

Here she was in the middle of the scorching heat in the middle of the sunburnt, ass end of the Mekong Delta chopping logs into kindling with a knife and selling the bundles for pennies and she was blissfully happy in a manner I have rarely seen here in America.

I asked her why she was so happy and she replied that she was from Cambodia and had lived through the revolution, the Khmers, starvation, war, and worse if you can imagine it. And now that she was in Vietnam, she finally had her "better life".

Folks who fantasize about the chaos have never seen the chaos.

farley3k wrote:
“I understand that Trump is a terrible person,” she said. “Everyone does. We’re not that stupid, and we know he’s out to con us. But people around here are angry. We’re so angry we want to be conned. And maybe while he’s destroying the planet, he’ll wipe out my student debt, too. Get it?”
Gremlin wrote:

Honesty compels me to include: The Only Article You Need To Read About Why Trump Voters Are Angry

Farley's quote is from the article Gremlin posted. That is the article you're responding to, aaaaaaand....

That.
Article.
Is.
Satire.

Once again, Poe's Law, guys.

I do agree with Paleocon's larger point, though: there are people who are fantasizing about revolution without counting the cost. Probably because few people in the US have any inkling of what the cost of revolution is. Our last real internal war was a hundred and fifty years ago. There's no living memory of that time, and a lot of romanticizing about what it was like.

This year especially, there's been a lot of fantasizing about revolution from both sides of the spectrum. More from the right, at the moment, but there's Bernie-or-Bust voters out there too, people who have said they're voting for Trump in the hopes that he causes everything to break so they can rebuild from the ashes.

Gremlin wrote:

This year especially, there's been a lot of fantasizing about revolution from both sides of the spectrum. More from the right, at the moment, but there's Bernie-or-Bust voters out there too, people who have said they're voting for Trump in the hopes that he causes everything to break so they can rebuild from the ashes.

Notably, most of the fantasizing about revolution has been from people who imagine themselves to survive the revolution and be on top of the heap when the new order shakes out.

I think a large percentage of people that hope for this would change once a shot is fired in their direction. Most of them think they'll be the only ones shooting.

karmajay wrote:

I think a large percentage of people that hope for this would change once a shot is fired in their direction. Most of them think they'll be the only ones shooting.

From my informal conversations with folks at work, I think they are convinced that they are the only ones clever enough to have stashed away canned goods and ammunition.

It also doesn't help that people fail to realize that most revolutions do not benefit the people at all. In most cases it means more of the same, but with different people. And at an extreme cost with lives lost.

I think that's especially prevalent here in the USA because of our own revolution. They think it will be like that and not like the countless revolutions that have occurred around the world.

BoogtehWoog wrote:

It also doesn't help that people fail to realize that most revolutions do not benefit the people at all. In most cases it means more of the same, but with different people. And at an extreme cost with lives lost.

You are going to have a very hard time selling the idea that revolution isn't great to the majority of Americans. I think the idea that we "rose up" against the evil British and created the greatest government in the history of the Universe is part of many American's identity.