Does this forum completely fail to understand working class whites?

[IceSpear]

inb4 IceSpear

(Also, yes, of course it does.)

This thread is ironic, because people are angry about me attacking "working class whites" when I attack racist hicks in West Virginia. So really, you guys are the ones implicitly assuming that all working class whites = racist hicks, not me.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

A solid majority of working class whites (outside of the South) are loyal Democrats, and most have more liberal views in general (but particularly on economic issues) than middle and upper class whites (which are the bulk of this forum's posters, so...).

Agreed, but many people think upper-income blue collar workers (like owners of a plumbing company), who are really Republican, are part of the working class.  That's the confusion, I think.

Eh, there's plenty of evidence that suggests that highly-skilled blue collar workers, who tend to operate as individual contractors, are fairly Democratic. This shouldn't be that surprising considering where "building trades" skills tend to be attained (as "apprentices" in union shops).

For instance, look at "verdant labs" project that lists the partisan affiliation of various occupations and notice the discrepancy between "skilled trades" and "construction". Those who define themselves as "electricians", "handymen", "carpenters", "welders" and "mechanics" are far more Democratic-leaning than their, typically skilled, peers who are "foremen". Plumbers are, well, unique in that they tend to make large sums of money and, oftentimes list themselves as "plumbers", they simply own plumbing businesses. Other skilled workers in the building trades who own their own "businesses" oftentimes own a business composed of one worker.

Also, without question, those in the building trades or, in general, who are "skilled" manual workers are working class. In fact, throughout history, they have defined the working class. Strangely enough, and contrary to what Marx would have predicted, it has been the labor aristocracy that has tended towards radical political action/organization and that tends to have the strongest sense of class identity. Organizing workers in heavy industry was a major challenge in the late 19th and early 20th century; artisans, on the other hand, have been in trade organizations for centuries, which, naturally, lends itself to political mobilization.

Note: much of this is an over-generalization and is a bit hyperbolic but it's worth considering. It's taken as conventional wisdom that, say, a custodian is, all else equal, going to be more left-wing than, say, an electrician but, in truth, the electrician is more likely to be a very active "union man" (or woman) who votes in every election.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

inb4 IceSpear

(Also, yes, of course it does.)

This thread is ironic, because people are angry about me attacking "working class whites" when I attack racist hicks in West Virginia. So really, you guys are the ones implicitly assuming that all working class whites = racist hicks, not me.

It's less about what people you're attacking and more about how you're attacking them.

[SATW]

the self-righteous pearl-clutching of some leftists here is extremely hypocritical. 

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

the self-righteous pearl-clutching of some leftists here is extremely hypocritical. 

In what respect?

[Mr. Morden]

This thread is ironic, because people are angry about me attacking "working class whites" when I attack racist hicks in West Virginia. So really, you guys are the ones implicitly assuming that all working class whites = racist hicks, not me.

Why bring class/culture into it with "hicks"?  Why not just leave it at "racist", to separate it out from the other factors?

[IceSpear]

This thread is ironic, because people are angry about me attacking "working class whites" when I attack racist hicks in West Virginia. So really, you guys are the ones implicitly assuming that all working class whites = racist hicks, not me.

Why bring class/culture into it with "hicks"?  Why not just leave it at "racist", to separate it out from the other factors?

Class has nothing to do with it. I'm sure there's lots of fairly well off racist hicks in West Virginia (and other places.)

[White Trash]

This thread is ironic, because people are angry about me attacking "working class whites" when I attack racist hicks in West Virginia. So really, you guys are the ones implicitly assuming that all working class whites = racist hicks, not me.

Why bring class/culture into it with "hicks"?  Why not just leave it at "racist", to separate it out from the other factors?

Class has nothing to do with it. I'm sure there's lots of fairly well off racist hicks in West Virginia (and other places.)

He's talking about the connotation the word hick has. There are plenty of hicks that aren't racist in the slightest. Hick is a term that refers to culture, environment and occupation.

[Torie]

Time to get back to the most important city in America again. This thread caused me to look into the percentage of those below the poverty level in Hudson, and guess what. It turns out, that the percentage of whites below the poverty line (21%), is slightly higher than the black percentage (19%). Hispanics, relatively few in Hudson, are much higher, at something like 40%.

I wonder in how many other cities, that is true, that there are a higher percentage of whites who are poor, than blacks.

[Figueira]

Still nobody, unless you count me meeting Mitt Romney as a toddler.

[Mr. Morden]

Still nobody, unless you count me meeting Mitt Romney as a toddler.

I don't buy it.  Mitt Romney was never a toddler.

[This account no longer in use.]

Still nobody, unless you count me meeting Mitt Romney as a toddler.

Wrong thread XD

[Figueira]

Still nobody, unless you count me meeting Mitt Romney as a toddler.

I don't buy it.  Mitt Romney was never a toddler.

He was ten years old once, though.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Source

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Eh, there's plenty of evidence that suggests that highly-skilled blue collar workers, who tend to operate as individual contractors, are fairly Democratic.

There is a really strange tendency world over seemingly to assume that tradesmen vote waaaay to the right of how they actually tend to. It annoys me for the same reason it annoys you I think

I wonder whether some of the issue is confusion between foremen (who are going to lean rightwards, though less than people in white collar management roles actually) and tradesmen for which we can often blame statistical agencies who have a habit of grouping them together.

[RFayette]

A solid majority of working class whites (outside of the South) are loyal Democrats, and most have more liberal views in general (but particularly on economic issues) than middle and upper class whites (which are the bulk of this forum's posters, so...).

Agreed, but many people think upper-income blue collar workers (like owners of a plumbing company), who are really Republican, are part of the working class.  That's the confusion, I think.

Eh, there's plenty of evidence that suggests that highly-skilled blue collar workers, who tend to operate as individual contractors, are fairly Democratic. This shouldn't be that surprising considering where "building trades" skills tend to be attained (as "apprentices" in union shops).

For instance, look at "verdant labs" project that lists the partisan affiliation of various occupations and notice the discrepancy between "skilled trades" and "construction". Those who define themselves as "electricians", "handymen", "carpenters", "welders" and "mechanics" are far more Democratic-leaning than their, typically skilled, peers who are "foremen". Plumbers are, well, unique in that they tend to make large sums of money and, oftentimes list themselves as "plumbers", they simply own plumbing businesses. Other skilled workers in the building trades who own their own "businesses" oftentimes own a business composed of one worker.

Also, without question, those in the building trades or, in general, who are "skilled" manual workers are working class. In fact, throughout history, they have defined the working class. Strangely enough, and contrary to what Marx would have predicted, it has been the labor aristocracy that has tended towards radical political action/organization and that tends to have the strongest sense of class identity. Organizing workers in heavy industry was a major challenge in the late 19th and early 20th century; artisans, on the other hand, have been in trade organizations for centuries, which, naturally, lends itself to political mobilization.

Note: much of this is an over-generalization and is a bit hyperbolic but it's worth considering. It's taken as conventional wisdom that, say, a custodian is, all else equal, going to be more left-wing than, say, an electrician but, in truth, the electrician is more likely to be a very active "union man" (or woman) who votes in every election.

This is fair.  I suppose plumbers were more the exception rather than the rule.  I assume the big GOP advantage among no college-degree whites is more related to construction foremen (mentioned previously), police and firemen (though this is a very recent shift), military veterans, and non-unionized skilled factory workers then.  

[Filuwaúrdjan]

There are a lot of people in well paying white collar and management jobs who do not have degrees, particularly if older than fifty.

[they don't love you like i love you]

There are a lot of people in well paying white collar and management jobs who do not have degrees, particularly if older than fifty.

I know more than one person with a high level software programming job with no degree. If you can prove that you can code well or have relavent work experience, whether you have a degree really means nothing in that field. (Although some sort of independent certification might be required)

[traininthedistance]

Yes, and, as with most invocations of the term, the "white" bit is unnecessary.

Given how often pundits say "working class" when they really mean "white working class," especially when they wish to offer some sort of "populist" attack on Democrats and/or liberals (from either the left or the right)... I think being precise with our language is vitally necessary.

To say nothing of PR's important point that you need to separate out North and South, as well.

This is not to say that Atlas is any good at understanding working class minorities, either.  But we're not going to do a better job by lumping all the various "working class"es together.

[Figueira]

Yes, and, as with most invocations of the term, the "white" bit is unnecessary.

Given how often pundits say "working class" when they really mean "white working class," especially when they wish to offer some sort of "populist" attack on Democrats and/or liberals (from either the left or the right)... I think being precise with our language is vitally necessary.

To say nothing of PR's important point that you need to separate out North and South, as well.

This is not to say that Atlas is any good at understanding working class minorities, either.  But we're not going to do a better job by lumping all the various "working class"es together.

Yeah, Atlas also misunderstands the non-white working class, but in a different way.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Yes, and, as with most invocations of the term, the "white" bit is unnecessary.

Given how often pundits say "working class" when they really mean "white working class," especially when they wish to offer some sort of "populist" attack on Democrats and/or liberals (from either the left or the right)... I think being precise with our language is vitally necessary.

To say nothing of PR's important point that you need to separate out North and South, as well.

This is not to say that Atlas is any good at understanding working class minorities, either.  But we're not going to do a better job by lumping all the various "working class"es together.

The reason why I specified whites is because I'm seeing this sort of mindset a lot:

-All working class whites are racist.
-Working class whites that vote for Democrats would vote for the Republicans if the Republicans were more blatantly racist.
-The most blatantly racist Republican candidate since the civil rights era is therefore guaranteed a landslide amongst working class whites.

[RFayette]

There are a lot of people in well paying white collar and management jobs who do not have degrees, particularly if older than fifty.

I agree with this factor, though I definitely think there has to have been a shift in manufacturing/construction as well to account for the difference, with respect to what is called "skilled workers."

http://themonkeycage.org/2012/02/understanding-the-zombie-confusion-about-class-and-voting/

[All Along The Watchtower]

There are a lot of people in well paying white collar and management jobs who do not have degrees, particularly if older than fifty.

Along with many small business owners, and many retired people who had been business owners, managers, white-collar workers in general, etc.

[Adam Griffin]

A solid majority of working class whites (outside of the South) are loyal Democrats, and most have more liberal views in general (but particularly on economic issues) than middle and upper class whites (which are the bulk of this forum's posters, so...).

This might be true if you set the income level low enough - it really depends on what constitutes "working class" - but even among the $50k and less crowd, whites are quite surprising in some states.

And holy crap: look at those "white working class" states that are supposedly voting said way because of racism. Look at West Virginia. Of course Atlas doesn't get it:

[RINO Tom]

For anyone who is interested, here is the 2008 map of Whites making OVER $50,000 for comparison:

In nearly every state, voters earning more than $50,000 voted more Republican than those who made less, but there were a few interesting exceptions: Georgia, Hawaii and Wyoming.

Hardly scientific and just for fun, but here is what 2012 would have looked like if you assume a uniform shift to Romney across all states:

[Antonio the Sixth]

A solid majority of working class whites (outside of the South) are loyal Democrats, and most have more liberal views in general (but particularly on economic issues) than middle and upper class whites (which are the bulk of this forum's posters, so...).

This might be true if you set the income level low enough - it really depends on what constitutes "working class" - but even among the $50k and less crowd, whites are quite surprising in some states.

And holy crap: look at those "white working class" states that are supposedly voting said way because of racism. Look at West Virginia. Of course Atlas doesn't get it:

What's your source for these maps? This looks like absolutely fascinating stuff.

BTW, I made a very similar point 4 months ago.