General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsApartheid does make poor whites Aristocrats
A common explanation of racism among white 99%ers is that poor southern whites want to have somebody to look down on. That formulation is in the ballpark but, in my view, overlooks the degree to which apartheid makes even poor whites a form of aristocrat, allowing them to both look down and to look up without shame.
I would put it this way... in apartheid, all whites actually are aristocrats. Being an aristocrat means that people have to do what you say, look down and bow when you pass, agree with your stupid views.
But a Duke is a commoner relative to the King. Lots of aristocrats had little money. Lots of aristocrats got pushed around by 'bigger' aristocrats. There were plenty of aristocrats who lost their property and lived off the charity of other aristocrats.
But they had a place in society that was not the bottom and could never be the bottom.
The Duke bows to the King and the commoner bows to the Duke. But the commoner also bows to the King.
Relative to the commoner the Duke is, functionally, the same as the King.
It is not just that an oppressed person wants someone to look down on. (As a battered child might take out his frustrations on a pet.) The Duke also looks up. He is like the King.
Some non-rich whites vote against their economic self-interest, but economics is not everything to people. Those non-rich whites do vote in their perceived social interest.
In their sense of society they are the same, socially, as the governor, vis-a-vis non-white people. Their desired apartheid elevates them in a very real sense.
Through the lens of apartheid, when you see the richest man in town standing next to a white tennant farmer the first thing you see is two white guys.
Huey Long's populist anthem was "Every Man a King." In the deep south in the 1930s that actually meant something... as long as you were white.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)MadHound
(34,179 posts)I think you've got a handle on the issue of voting for their own best social interest, but racism isn't necessarily their only social interest, or even a social interest at all.
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)Many people vote their social self-interest.
Many people vote their moral self-interest. (What they can live with in themselves, what puts them closer to God, what makes them feel best about themselves.) A poor Mexican-American catholic may well vote the way he thinks his God intends him to vote, even though the anti-abortion folks are mostly also anti-minimum wage.
There is a variety of motivations.
I think that, nationally, at least 40% of working class whites vote Democratic. Not all lower-class whites vote against economic self-interest. Not all of any group votes for the same reasons.
But social self-interest is in the mix.
I happen to be fascinated by the deep attachment lower classes can have to class systems, and the OP suggests some elements of that that exist in America.
I believe that poor whites can, in the context of apartheid, more effectively identify with those above them, in a way that would not be so powerful in a racially homogeneous culture. And that is part of the reason that workers movement did better in Europe than in the US. IMO.
Racism (and nationalism) is a powerful bar to working class solidarity. But of course, as you say, not a solitary or universal motivation.
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)The Magistrate
(95,255 posts)Ante-bellum commentators like Mr. Fitzhugh make no bones about it....
"Romney loves America like a tick loves a dog."
MicaelS
(8,747 posts)I find a lot of Whites are what I call Populists. They are economically Liberal, but Socially Conservative because of their strong religious values.
They feel the Democratic Party has abandoned them, and the idea of Economic Justice, in favor of Social Issues and Social Justice. They feel that if the Democratic Party would abandon it's support for Atheism, Homosexuality, Abortion, and Feminism, ("the four evils", as one put it) then they would vote Democratic.
But as long as the Democratic Party continues to support what the Populists see as "evils", they will continue to vote against the Democratic Party, and thus against their own economic interest, (even if they hate Wall Street with a passion), in favor of any crackpot on the Right preaching "Family Values".
Unfortunately, the Right has been successfully hoodwinking the Populists since Reagan. Promising things they never deliver. Meanwhile making the 1% ever richer, and laughing at these poor idiots they have flim-flammed.
And yes some of these Populists are quite prejudiced and believe the myth of the welfare queen having baby after baby to get more money from the government.