class hatred is real

Anglachel's Journal has a really excellent post called the Whiteness of the Whale:

The violent rejection of the Clintons on the Left is a rejection of “The South” and the working class by the Stevensonian elite, who see the success of Bill the “Bubba” as both a threat to their power and a repudiation of their policies and actions since 1968. They want to see themselves as simultaneously co-victims with AAs of white supremacy and also as the moral(istic) saviors of the oppressed, redeeming their part of the white population from the sin of racism. (Read the incomparable Bob Somerby’s write up of this phenomenon in his latest post.) Bill Clinton provided a different vision of how to move the party and nation forward, one that refused demonization, and this shook them to their ineffective foundations.

That link (embedded in the quote) has some really good stuff too:

...let’s get clear on what the Times did: They sent a reporter to Tarheel towns to get the views of African-Americans. (Good!) And they sent a reporter to Broad Ripple to get the views of upscale whites. (Good again!) But what did the Gotham paper do to get the views of less affluent whites? Simple! Instead of interviewing such rubes, they simply asked the swells to speak for them! This produced a pleasing second-hand view: Low-income whites, with their racial bad faith, may well be swayed by this story!

This "speaking for me" phenomenon has happened a lot during this campaign. It happened during Obama's beautiful speech, too. He spoke on behalf of working class whites - telling the world something of who we supposedly are and what we supposedly want. He used the opportunity to redefine us, away from the grievances we want heard, such as affirmative action policies that take too much from us and give society too little benefit in return. (If affirmative action really works so well, why is there still poverty today? Why aren't we allowed to ask that question? I have a funny feeling it does not reflect well on Rev. Wright - or his new 10,000sf house.)

In the new, revised view, our grievances are with outsourcing and corporations. We just don't understand the situation fully, is all. (Or so we're told.)

And we aren't qualified to have an opinion because, let's face it, we're uneducated. After decades of scholarships being earmarked for 'need' (meaning 'any color other than white') or 'merit' (meaning 'went to a private day school'), we who are neither black nor rich largely get our education from two-year colleges, vo-tech programs, and especially the military. We are therefore not qualified to have an opinion on anything, but especially not on questions such as whether safety net and poverty prevention programs should or should not be labeled "whites need not apply".

I think most people want to underestimate the contempt middle+ class America has for its working class. I know class is entirely behind my...shall I say bitterness toward Obama - not because he is upper class but because of the attitude he promotes toward working class.

I've said before and will no doubt say again: to claim that middle America hates Democrats because they are smart makes about as much sense (and follows the same logic) as Republicans saying "they hate us for our freedoms".

And that when Obama talks about race, he emphasizes the 'complexity' of the black experience - but he reduces working class whites down into simple, caricatured stereotypes, and so do most of what Anglachel calls "Stevensonian" Democrats. And it is only one of many stereotypes to assume that if we are poor, we must be stupid; 'cream naturally rises to the top', it is said - so even the smartest self-educated person must be inferior to even the lowest, drunkest frat boy.

My family worked to get our kids out of their inner city elementary school into an affluent, upper middle class high school*. I tell you what, I was ASTONISHED the first time the principle mocked me to my face. It was a shock to my belief that educators - or Americans in general - mostly agree with and approve of "all men are created equal", and all students deserve equal rights, equal opportunities - a fair chance. There is no pretending that low income types like me are welcome - or even human. They see us as lesser, and they don't bother to hide it. And the students take the cue from their parents.

And when a wealthy kid misbehaves, it is made out to be some lower income kids' fault, and I see the same logic that is being used in this Obama campaign. It is sort of like normal logic, only - like the Pirates of Penzance - certain assumptions are embedded. Not open to challenge. All Brits love their queen.

Meanwhile, my kids are pressured to conform - and after all, isn't that the point? Admittedly it usually happens at college, not high school - since high school is usually about being with your own kind, and it is the college you go to determines your social grouping.

So I agree wholeheartedly with Anglachel's post. While I am sure there are other things going on in this election, I think it is absolutely true that class and scapegoating is at the root of Clinton hatred. If you are going to stand 'outside' and pretend that YOU are not responsible for America's sins, then who is?
_______________________
*interesting side note: that while the inner city school we dealt with was largely all a single minority - with both whites and Latinos taking extraordinary actions to get out of those schools, even though there were rules in place specifically intended to make it difficult for whites to get out of black schools, and easy for blacks to get into white schools.

On the other hand. the affluent white school is not at all pure white. There are a variety of minorities - but not many blacks. The blacks who do get 'in' to a school of this sort are not what Rev. Wright would consider worthy of their blackness.

So, yeah, I think Michelle Obama is right - you do have to choose between your "blackness" and your being accepted by mainstream America. But you do not have to lose your "blackness" (whatever that means) to become wealthy in America, clearly.

It is also worth noting that while "blackness" appears to include some voluntary choice that is made (acceptance of a cultural code), "trashness" in the case of vulgar whites is based on something involuntary - mostly not having enough money to put up a good peacock's tail, to buy the right sort of clothes and car (see Karate Kid, first movie).