BOOK CLUB: Dec. "What's the Matter with Kansas" 1

[crispini]

Well, we have our Dec. and Jan books decided on, so I thought I'd go ahead and start the thread. I don't have the book yet... guess I'll go buy it tomorrow! Yay!

Meanwhile, here are our guidelines, please read before posting: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=209x365

And here is the queue for suggestions and nominations for future books:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=209x309

Have at it, Book Club denizens... Who's already got the book?

[NMDemDist2]

1. i don't but i'll PM my DU librarian pal and see if it's available at the

library

edit to add I'm # 27 on the list for this book :(

[Fovea]

11. I hate when that happens

And ILL takes forever.

[Crunchy Frog]

2. I've got my copy, ready to start reading.

Actually, I started awhile ago, but got sidetracked, so I have to start again.

When do we start actually discussing it? As soon as Dec. starts? Do we discuss it over the course of the whole month?

I'm not entirely sure how this whole thing works yet.

[crispini]

3. Hey, if you've got it, start now!

I think people will start coming on line with comments and questions in the next few days as they go get the book. I mean, the "official" start is Dec 1 but since we know what the book is, no reason to wait, right? The only thing is, if you're way ahead and you think you're going to post something spoiler-y, to use white font (see Guidelines thread for how-to).

Just whatever you come across in the book -- questions, things you think are a really good point, things you disliked, things you didn't understand, etc.

Here's some snips from Amazon's guide to Book Clubs:

How do we begin the discussion?

... It can be helpful to have each member bring one issue/question/comment to the table. ... Your group could decide to choose a leader for each meeting who will come prepared with questions and thoughts to help move things along. You can't be expected to remember every single thing you loved and hated about the book, so it helps to jot down notes as you read, marking pages and passages as you go.

How do we set the tone of the meeting?

The most successful reading groups are informal, friendly, and imaginative. It's important that all the members feel comfortable sharing ideas and experiences. Creating a trusting and open venue for meetings will encourage a free and lively exchange of thoughts and ideas....

Keep in mind that discussion is the heart of a good book club, and some of the best discussions can be over the myriad of ways that the members hated the book. Don't be afraid to disagree with something someone said--give members a chance to talk you out of hating (or loving) the books. You may not always agree, but you are certain to walk out of your meeting with a different perspective. Feel free to let the conversation stray off course. You don't have to stick to a rigid agenda. The most important thing about your reading group is that you talk about the book and have fun doing it.

from:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/feature/-/528845/103-5308093-5243033

[Crunchy Frog]

4. Thanks.

Is this the thread that we post to or is there a different one for that. I'll go ahead and bookmark this if it's the one.

[crispini]

5. This is it!

Until we decide it's "too long" whatever that is -- 200, 300 posts? and start a fresh one. :)

I always forget to use my bookmarks...

[Crunchy Frog]

6. OK then!

:)

[Tangledog]

7. I've got it on order

They ship "media mail", but they're only 2 (blue :)) states away and it should get here in good time.

Only thing is, Ms. Tangledog is going into the hospital next week and may have a long recuperation. I'll either have plenty of time to read and chat or I won't be around much at all.

[Fovea]

8. I have it

and I have a bit of an advantage living in Kansas currently.
It is a good book, and there is a lot I agree on in it.

[crispini]

9. So get us started....

got some specific points you agree / disagree with that you wanna share? :)

[Fovea]

10. Let me start by speaking generally about the cultural/economic divide

As Mr. Franks notes, there is a serious divide between the older monied Johnson County, and the middle and lower middle class Johnson county, as represented by Olathe KS.

Both of these cultures are predominately Republican, but represent in the first case, moderate to paleocon Republicans, and in fact, with the Democratically predominate Wyandotte County to the north, sent Dennis Moore back to Congress, the only blue seat from this red, red state.

Kansas was famous for their education system, and the Old Johnson County money is near fatally embarassed by the creation science set, who made a laughing stock of Kansas in the eyes of educated people everywhere.

At the Collegiate level, there is a culture war between Kansas State at Manhattan, and Kansas University in Lawrence. Typically, a Lawrence student will refer to the other as 'K-Straight' and the KSU student will slur Lawrence as 'Gay-U.'

Manhattan is a football power and Ag/Party school and Lawrence is a big basketball school and a serious university.

Economically, Olathe (my typical case for what's wrong with Kansas) is
a home for non managerial employees and low level managment, Prairie Villiage is Mid to Upper managment/ propriators. The latter is well educated, if a bit narrowly toward business and professions, the former is deeply anti-intellectual.

There is a great deal of class envy/class hauteur between these two communities. Their only commonality, is that they share the same love of the Shopping Mall. They are united in their consumerism, if nothing else. Ok, Perhaps this other thing --- They both fear the City.

They are both racist, though in different ways. Prairie Village distrusts brown people because they are often poor.
Olathe hates brown people because they are not poor enough.

They represent two different generations of white flight. Dispite this, they are different in critical ways. Mr. Frank is right about this.

As those of you just starting the book start to read, you will see how these differences manifest, and how they represent 2 of the 3 main Kansas architypes represented in the book.

More later, questions now...

[crispini]

12. Interesting.

So this is essentially a case of two different types of burbs?

Are these quotes, or your summary? Just curious.

Off to get the book now! Looking forward to it!

[Fovea]

13. This is my take on Frank's theory

It does go deeper than a rivalry across the tracks.
But I felt that it needed a bit of expansion.
The third major type in the book involves rural Kansas,
a dying place full of paranoia and well displaced anger.

[crispini]

15. Cool! Well, I just got it today,

So I'll be back tomorrow or so as I start to dig into it!

[hfojvt]

32. I have only been in Leavenworth for three years

Which is not to say the prison.
I cannot say I am a big fan of Dennis Moore. Of course, he must compromise in order to keep his seat, and he probably votes for the Democrats version of bills, but, for one example, he voted for Bush's Medicare Prescription Drug bill. Our Republican Ryun, voted against it.
Al Gore won our (Ryun's) Congressional district in 2000, and we are blue in the Kansas legislature with two reps and a state senator who are all D's, albeit DINOs to some degree.
I am not sure how the economic divisions in Kansas are different from anywhere else. You have the same rich (Edina, Bloomington) and poor suburbs in a red state like Minnesota. In Leavenworth, I bought my house for $35,000. One block away houses were listed for $120,000 and sold pretty quick.
Actually, it was cheap houses which brought me over the river, since I looked at almost the same house as mine in Edgerton, Mo for $57,000. That was just as far from my job near KCI and with no services - shopping, hospital, library, vets, restaurants, etc.

[Ethical Ennui]

34. Hate to burst your bubble, but...

Having lived in Minneapolis, near Edina and Bloomingham (Eden Praerie), I can tell you that Minnesota is not at ALL a red state. It has been getting closer and closer to going red, yes, but it's the only state to have voted for Mondale in 84, and has a Democratic voting record going back to 1976.

[hfojvt]

41. tanj

Obviously I knew that, my point was the class divisions in blue states, but I got the accursed red-blue division backwards, like my man Eric Alterman does frequently.
And if it was not obvious that I knew that, I was going to the U of M in 1984.

[buckettgirl]

39. question...

I am from Kansas, and am interested in reading this book because I would like to know what the hell is wrong with this state (and other reds) too...
However, in reading your post, I am not sure if it is worth it.
Does the author talk about other parts of the state besides from Topeka on eastward?
Most of the population here is rural. There are some dumb people and there are some smart people. There is some wealth, but there is more poverty. I personally don't believe that what goes on in Topeka/Lawrence/Manhattan/Kansas City and suburbs is typical of the rest of the state.
Does the author focus on rural issues that affect political thinking? As long as this book can emcompass the state as a whole, I think I would find it worthwhile, otherwise I am not sure.
Your opinions are appreciated
thanks

[Tafiti]

40. It's a pretty thorough examination of the whole state.

He gives an historical perspective of the state in the late 19th/early 20th century as a backdrop to what is happening today. He focuses on certain parts because it is where he grew up, so he addresses it with that context. But, like I said, he does examine the rural parts, more as a whole than anything else - probably because, as he implies, there is just not much there in Kansas.

As far as the rural areas go, he discusses Boeing and the agricultural setting, mostly the demise of the small farmer as a consequence of the rise of agricorporations. This, of course, ties into the discussion of denying their self-interest in the voting booth because of wedge moral issues, especially abortion. It's to the point where these Christian cultural conservatives are being elected on the local level and school boards - obviously a place where an elected offical would have ZERO influence on such cultural issues.

It's definitely worth reading, especially if you're from there. I doubt you'll be disappointed. Your opinions would be especially appreciated because you can give an "insiders" perspective, as Frank does himself.

[onecitizen]

14. This is on my.........

"Wishlist" for Christmas. And also: "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" (sorry, don't know the author).

[crispini]

16. So is anyone else having problems getting into this?

Not because it's BAD but because it's making me MAD. From the introduction:

"The leaders of the backlash (Republican) may talk Christ, but they walk corporate. Values may 'matter most' to voters, but they always take a backseat to the needs of money once the elections are won." (p.6)

I read this and I just get so damn MAD at the lies and deceit of the Rethugs and I scream and have to close the book and go do something else to calm down.

[Tafiti]

17. I know what you mean. I actually read this book about...

...three weeks ago, so it's not completely fresh. But you're right, even the introduction gets you mad, thinking, "why can't they see it?! why are they so blind?!" It's maddening, but that's why we need to discuss this, and discuss how we can overcome the deception of the right.

By the way, I ordered our January book (Lakoff), and couldn't wait, so I'm already about 3/4 of the way through it, and let me say it will be an EXCELLENT companion piece to Frank's book. The ideas presented in these 2 books are so important for us to examine - I wish all of DU would read these books, because it's high time these discussions took place. The right is way ahead, but we can make up ground if we gain some understanding. And a plan...

[crispini]

18. So, now I feel completely ignorant.

Who else didn't know that the Midwest was a hotbed of socialism in the 30's? (p. 15) Raise yer hand please! :evilgrin:

Thus, the book club, I guess. I need some edumacation.

[Tafiti]

19. Actually, I did know that, as of maybe a year ago. My source?

Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States: 1492 - Present" And when he says 1492-Present, he means it. It's a long, exhausting read, but it's thorough, and covers all decades and time periods. The whole point of the book is to present a "revisionist" history - that is, from the point of view not represented in high school history books that we all learned from, namely, non-WASPs without land and money (and thus influence).

When he covers the populist movement in the early 20th century, he points out that the haves were successful in quelling the concerns and grievances of the have-nots by not allowing them to develop class consciousness. Thus, the poor whites were fed loads of racist propaganda so that they wouldn't recognize that they, the Natives, and poor blacks could (and should) be working together to bring down the rich and powerful (or a reckless and irresponsbile capitalist system). This tactic of erasing class consciousness goes on today, of course, and is crucial to the success of the Republican party. And, of course, this is precisely Franks' underlying theme throughout the book, as you'll see.

[crispini]

20. I've heard so much about that, I have to put it on the reading list.

Sigh. along with 80,000 other things.

[jwirr]

30. I haven't read the book yet but I have some

personal knowledge of that socialist hotbed in the Midwest. Up in the mining area of northern Minnesota the miners were very interested in both the early days of the Russian Revolution and socialism. When we found newspaper between the cracks in our old log cabin recently they were "Workers of the World" papers and one of my neighbors tells of her trip with her father and brother to Russia to help the Revolution. There were many immigrated from the Range area to Russia during that era. She later escaped back over the boarder into Finland but she never saw her father and brother again. They just disappeared.

[stevebreeze]

95. Milwaukee had several socialist mayors

once upon a time.

[crispini]

21. This article seems to go with this thread.

http://www.alternet.org/story/20592

Thomas Frank: What's the Matter With Democrats?

A really good excerpt:

Q: So what do we do with the Democratic Party? Do we abandon it? Do we remake it? Do we take it over?

We have to take it over. There’s no choice because of the way the system is set up in this country. There are a few states where you could do third party activities, like New York state where third party activities are very successful. But in other states, after the populist outbreak in the 1890s, they passed laws against it. It’s not illegal to have a third party , but it’s effectively impossible.

Now, if you can change the law – and these are state laws – third party efforts are a very good idea. But short of that, you have to work within the Democratic party.

[Maddy McCall]

22. I want to join this club, and I would like to suggest book for Feb.

I am a professional historian--ethnohistory--and I'd like to suggest a book for February. Will D. Campbell's "Brother to a Dragonfly." It's about growing up in the south during Jim Crow from the white perspective, and it details the events that led him to be a founding member of MLK's Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC). I PROMISE that this book will not disappoint.

I am suggesting it for Feb, because I am sure that most people will have to order it through Amazon or BN.

Please trust me on this book. Please. Everyone to whom I have lent it has said that it was life altering, as far as their perspective on race relations in the South.

Thanks.

[crispini]

26. The thread for nominating books is here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=209x309

Thanks! Sounds good!

[fishnfla]

23. Ok I finished the book, ready for the quiz!

I think the most poignant aspect of the discussion is the "Mods and Cons" section about how the conservative wing of the GOP using grass roots, blue collar,christian soldiers primarily fueled by social issues (abortion) steamrolled even the moderate wealthier repubs whose primary concerns are economic issues (lower taxes)

this means that if you intend to vote republican in Kansas you are pulling the lever for the Christian right. Nationwide, of course these are Bush voters. Frank predicted the morals' voters of 2004. The marriage of the cultural wing and the economic wing makes it a tough team to beat.

The scary part about the Cons is that they vote their conscience, morals, and they will go to the wall for what they believe in (throw themselves under a moving car, as Frank puts it) and with their numbers they can out vote money.

Also the discussion on how liberals are viewed by society is interesting to me. The right wingers keep railing about Liberal culture (plentiplaint) keep putting more wingers in control, but nothing ever changes, abortion is still legal, hollywood is still decadent etc.

[Tafiti]

24. What an unholy marriage it is!

Yet they (morals voters) have no idea. As my earlier post indicated, this ties into the right's ability to take discussions of class off the table. They've effectively made it taboo to even bring it up - evoking the "class card", if you will. Somehow the argument is simply illegitimate from the start.

Something I've been thinking about: the word "liberal" and its negative connotations. Most of us know that the word liberal comes from the classical definition of liberalism, which are universal ideals in this country. To the morals voters, however, the word liberal carries the connotation of "permissive", "lenient", "uninhibited", even "indulgent". To the typical fundamentalist Christian, these are no-no's, bad words. These sorts attitudes or personality traits will necessarily lead to sinful things and behaviors. These traits are to be resisted with as much force as possible - pray harder, read the Bible more, etc. And this is what the Democratic party is all about to them - LET the homosexuals get married (sinful, debauchery), LET women kill innocent babies (lack of moral responsibility), LET the government take our money and spend it (lack of discipline...discipline - very important for fundamentalists). These are images that are automatically triggered when a conservative fundamentalist hears "liberal".

As Frank points out, they lash out against the "liberal" (read permissive, above) culture because of its corrupting influence on moral society, yet in reality, it is the corrupting influence of a no-holds-barred capitalist system that creates and perpetuates the very things that threaten the moral fabric of society. They simply do not know, do not get it, do not realize it. This is what they enthusiastically voted for on November 2, 2004. The Republican party happily gave them "less government control over their lives", and are discreetly replacing it with money-lusting corporations that will rape them for all they're worth.

[fishnfla]

25. Yes that was a very good "take home" point

Wall Street has the ultimate control behind the scenes but Hollywood gets the blame for whats on the screens.

If American culture was not so shallow (why is it always defined by whats on TV?) perhaps we would have a better understanding of all things political and otherwise.

[hfojvt]

33. it is not about what is on TV

It is about things on the ground too.
It is about rap music that kids sing and play loud. Before that it was about rock and roll (and about the themes there - sex, violence, partying, and drugs.)
It is about the big jump in teen pregnancies that happened in the 1970s. It is about the ever-increasing divorce rate. It is about tatoos and piercings. It is about drugs and drive-by shootings.
I am not sure if that is so much a Wall Street thing. You might say that the movie and music industries are driven by profit, but movies like "The Passion" and "It's a Wonderful Life" are very popular.
Alot of the fundies who supported Bush are over age 60, so they remember a different world, which he evokes, and which seems better to them. They are in favor of the tunnel to the 19th century. Like Archie and Edith sang "Those were the days".

[crispini]

27. So what did you guys think of this point?

p.18 "Red America, these stories typically imply, is a mysterious place whose thoughts and values are essentially foreign to society's masters.... its vast stretches are tragically ignored by the dominiant class-- that is, the people who write the sitcoms and screenplays and the stories in glossy magazines."

This annoys the cr*p out of me. Because, in fact, these people are NOT ignored by the 'entertainment' industry. I mean, why is "Desperate Housewives" so popular? BECAUSE PEOPLE WATCH IT.

It's this huge disconnect between what people SAY and what people DO.

Yes? No?

[hfojvt]

31. how many people watch desperate?

Only 22 million according to Somerby. There were 59 million Bush voters and only 22 percent were values voters (or was that 22% of all voters?). In any case, that is only 22 million "values-voters". Who can prove that the values voters are the same ones who are watching "Desperate Housewives"?
On another note, I had a Free Methodist Pastor who talked about liking Seinfeld (Free Methodists are quite Fundy). I was shocked when I watched it (at the time I had not owned a TV for three years) and every episode I saw was blatantly about sex. Still, how many of his 45+ year old congregants were watching it?

[thehim]

48. TV

To small towns in places like Kansas, it seems like TV is oftentimes the out-of-town visitor that inspires both curiosity and fear. The closer it gets to winning over the town, the more likely it becomes that the other half of the town will chase it down the road with pitchforks.

So it's not a contradiction between what people say and do, it's more of the fact that when one half of this community starts 'doing' or 'saying' things that bother the other half, the other half begins to 'do' and 'say' the opposite.

With Desperate Housewives, it's more popular in Red States, and it's also more popular among teenagers. Why? Because for those two groups, it has the highest 'taboo' value. For the rest of us, it doesn't elicit more than a shrug and an 'Is there a basketball game on?'

[Bozita]

55. "TV is ... the out-of-town visitor that inspires both curiosity and fear"

That's good.

BTW, welcome to DU.

[thehim]

65. Thanks

I've been coming here a lot recently for election fraud updates. Good site.

[fabius]

58. "The Great Indecency Hoax"

There's a great Frank Rich article in the NYT from Nov. 28, 2004 http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/28/arts/28rich.html

in which makes a couple of points:

"Desperate Housewives... is even a bigger hit in Oklahoma city than it is in Los Angeles, bigger in Kansas City than it is in New York."

He notes that if 22 percent were voting on "moral values" in 2004, the number is DOWN from 2000 (35 percent) and 1996 (40 percent). It took the UK magazine The Economist to point this out, since apparently the US media have swallowed the moral values story line. So, Bill Clinton rode to re-election on a tidal wave of moral values much bigger than Shrub's.

On the Monday Night Football scandal, "...it was a manufactured scandal, as over-the-top as a dinner theater production of the Crucible".

I've just barely started the Frank book, but this manipulation of outrage certainly seems to fit the agenda of those who want to keep the focus on Janet Jackson's nipple while they pick our collective pockets.

Another Thomas Frank book worth reading is "One Market Under God", in which the media transformed billionaires like Bill Gates and Wall Street flimflam men into populist heroes and champions of the little people(in the '90's). Frank has a way with words but it's hard going because I get so damn p*ssed about things.

I've been through the "red-state" parts of Oregon, (or the Red Counties) and there seem to are just as many porn video rental places per capita as in the city. Maybe a lot of this "moral values" hypocrisy is that these people just wish this stuff didn't appeal to them, or they want to be better people, or something.

[hfojvt]

59. Somerby talked about Rich

in Monday or Tuesday's daily Howler
you can link to it here
http://www.liberaloasis.com/
under media analysis, or directly it is here
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh112904.shtml

As far as the hypocrisy goes, that is an unfounded accusation. I am offended by alot of porn. I think it is dissolute, degrading, and promotes violence and promiscuity. Just because there are several porn shops in my town, does not mean that I shop at them. In even the reddest of counties the numbers are probably 42-18-40 between Bush-Kerry-and non-voters, or 90-10 between religious and pagan. There is nothing to say that either the Bush voters or the religious are major customers of the porn shops. The mere presence of a few porn shops does not warrant a blanket charge of hypocrisy.

I like the point about values voters in 1996, but again - in 1996 over 40% of the population voted against Clinton. The 40% who cast their vote based on values might have all voted against Clinton. There is not enough information to say one way or the other.

[crispini]

60. The so-called 40% "value voters" is a myth.

It's a artifact of the way the question was asked. The poll that came out with "values" as so high was one in which the participant was offered a list of choices. When they asked the same question and allowed the participant to make up their own choice, "values" was much lower, like 21% I think. "Other" was the big leader in that poll.

I thought that was interesting because it indicated how 'values' is really not a precise term. When people were offered a chance to be more specific they did so.

[fabius]

61. That's a good point, about polling...

The way the questions are asked has a lot to do with the answers they get.

Nevertheless, a change from 21% to 22% doesn't indicate a groundswell of "values" voters this year. I think this issue is more constant that you would believe from watching the media. And i would tend to believe a lot of other issues are really more important in people's minds.

The one thing they righties have done effectively, and as reflected in Frank's book is to equate the "liberals" with Hollywood, trashy sitcoms, Britney and Madonna etc. despite the fact that a lot of us deplore this pop culture stuff too. We just realize it's hard to stop trash culture without stifling other kinds of free speech.

And, of course, as Frank notes, the Republicans never actually deliver on legislation to do anything about the "values" issues anyway.

[DebJ]

69. absolutely agree. Jerry Springer came to mind.....

yech!!!:puke:

[tavalon]

28. I read it a few months ago

It was a hard to get into book and it stayed that way throughout, and yet, it is an important, important book. Can't wait to start hearing others comments.

[crispini]

29. Well, give us a comment yourself

What was the #1 thing you learned from it?

[Jeff in Cincinnati]

36. If I may offer an opinion

I read it during the campaign (along with Garrsion Keillor's "Homegrown Democrat" -- also a good read).

I think one important idea I gleaned from the book is that you can't count on people to vote their own self-interest. The current Democratic approach to organizing reminds me a lot of what, on my church's Evangelism Committee, we call the "Little Bo Peep School" of spreading the Gospel:

"Leave them alone and they'll come home, wagging their tails behind them."

No wonder attendance at mainline protestant churchs has been declining, and it's no wonder that the Democratic Party has had trouble attracting working-class rural voters to our message. We have to get out there and convince these folks that politics is as much about economics as it is about morality. We have to convince them to vote for health benefits and to stop outsourcing jobs to Singapore. It sounds insane, I know, but a large swath of rural voters have simply stopping considering economic issues when they're evaluating a candidate. They vote for Moral Values, but they get policies that favor Wal-Mart over the local five-and-dime.

The genius the conservative grassroots is that they have managed to re-define populism in terms of social values only. The grassroots demonize "latte-sipping liberals," even though liberal economic values are more in line with the working-class Americans than those of the "good old boys" in the Bush Administration. In heat of the Culture Wars, a host of kitcken-table, economic issues are simply MIA. How else could a $12 an hour tool and die worker vote for an Administration that thinks sending his job overseas is good policy?

We have to convince Red State voters that there's a connection between corporate control of the media and the sleaze they see on their televisions. We have to convince them that there's a connection between their downward economic spiral and the corrupt way that corporations and their lobbyists control the political process. We need to create a sense of urgency, especially among rural voters, their their culture and heritage as farmers is under seige from the Agri-Business Lobby.

Now you might say that we Democrats have been doing this all along, but I disagree. We've been "showing" them the evidence (mostly in quadrennial presidential campaign commercials) but not forcefully connecting the dots and working one-on-one in neighborhoods to close the deal. We were great at getting the message out in October of 2004, but we were weak during February of 2003.

Evangelicals have been organizing at the grassroots level almost nonstop for twenty years and now they're reaping the benefits. Until and unless the Democrat Party rediscovers the grassroots -- really discovers it -- I think we're going to have difficulty winning national elections.

[hfojvt]

42. $12 an hour would be a raise for me

Your use of that as a working class standard, belies a bias. A $12 an hour worker is solidly middle class, and more prosperous than alot of his neighbors. I worked making satellite dishes for $5.15 an hour (okay, ten years ago). 20% of all families in this country made less than $17,190 a year (in 2001). 40% made less than $33,000. So a family with a $12 worker and an $8 worker feels pretty good about their economic circumstances.
As far as outsourcing jobs to Singapore - what is the Republican argument? What causes it - taxes and regulation? I still do not know if Frank realizes the power of their jobs card. Missurah Senator Kit Bond was all over the air waves about the jobs he saved. I do not think he mentioned values at all. Democrats like Dennis Moore (Ks) and Jean Carnahan (Mo) were advertising the fact that they voted for Bush's tax cut for the wealthy. Again, the tax cut is a non-values card which is very powerful.
In a factory where I worked, ergonomics was considered a big joke, and safety was something management pounded us with - they treated us like kids, and we knew damn well they did not give a rat's ass for our safety, but because of the regs, we all had to buy steel-toed boots and wear goofy helmets and googles (ps - the helmets save my head on more than one occasion).

[Jeff in Cincinnati]

53. Not my fault you live in a "Right to Work" State

In the Rust Belt states -- where we still have unions, thank the lord -- $12/hr would be close to an entry level wage. In the Building Trades, only apprentices and helpers make less than $10/hr.

And a two-income family making $30K pre-tax isn't being to be feeling too damned good about anything -- at least not in my neck of the woods. Remember that a family with two children will qualify for the Earned Income Credit at just under $27K per year, so $30K is just barely out of poverty -- the official poverty level notwithstanding.

[hfojvt]

63. Wisconsin is not a right to work state

and neither is Missouri. Eckerd drug by KCI, Mo was advertising for help and they said they offered "competetive wages". I applied there and heard nothing. I called to find out why, they said "your application said you wanted $10 an hour, our starting wage is $8." In Wisconsin in 1995, a factory opened up in Eau Claire offering starting wages of $6 an hour. Governor-for-life Tommy Thompson gave a speech heralding the new plant, where he said: "what is wrong with $6 an hour?" (The Legislature should have reduced his salary from $98,000 to $12,000 and he could have found out.)
I suppose you are right about the family making $40,000 not feeling rich. Nobody ever admits to having enough money in this country even if they are better off than 1/3 of their fellow Americans. Webster Hubbell wrote this: "I billed more than $750,000 for the firm, which netted me $150,000. But my expenses continued to outrun my earnings. And my stress level was, if anything, higher than ever." ("Friends in high places" Webb Hubbell 1997 p 149)
Yes, the EIC extends up to $34,692. A couple making $33,000 gets $362 in EIC. It is just one more way for me to subsidize people who make $10,000 more than I do.
In 1996, median household income was $35,492, so about half of the country is making less than $40,000 a year even in your neck of the woods.

[crispini]

43. I like this part of your post

"Evangelicals have been organizing at the grassroots level almost nonstop for twenty years and now they're reaping the benefits. Until and unless the Democrat Party rediscovers the grassroots -- really discovers it -- I think we're going to have difficulty winning national elections."

It ties in EXACTLY with what Frank says in the article above. We HAVE to all get out there and grassroots organize.

[Francesca]

104. On the contrary I found it hard to get out of

I finished it in 2 days before and after work..The one thing I found frustrating is that I felt the question of how class differences have come to be an issue of academics and not economics was not fully answered.. the closest Frank came to explaining that was the reference to the New Deal...perhaps I missed something else..
I agree with everyone that it was depressing in that it did not offer any solutions and the dilemna of dealing with people who are not at all interested in facts/experts is distressing...

[muchacho]

35. I read it

it's great and very appropriate after the election.

I've been a fan of Franks since picking up the Baffler years ago.

[Hobarticus]

37. Got it, halfway through it, and thoroughly frustrated...

The instinct to shrug and say "let them vote GOP, it's their funeral" is pretty powerful after reading this.

[Fleurs du Mal]

44. About 60 pages in...

and I definitely have had a similar notion spring to mind more than once. Perhaps further Bush tax cuts will hasten their "death." It's awfully hard to protest abortion and evolution with no food or shelter.

What I've read thus far has had a rather "Roger & Me" flavor - big corps, destitute workers, boarded up local business, etc. It's rather dry at this point and I'm hoping Frank is emphasizing the disparity early in order to start demolition work on it later.

I did however enjoy the passage on Cupcake Land....ahahahaha.

[Hobarticus]

46. I laughed out loud at Cupcake Land!!!

Imagine the developers' chagrin at that nickname!

The disparity pretty much speaks for itself. But I am anxious to get to the 'why', myself.

[Fleurs du Mal]

47. The why indeed

Even better would be some exposition on breaking the spell.

Wherefore art thou, Kansas?

[crispini]

51. That's a GREAT word for it, isn't it?

Cupcake land. I just call it "Anywhere America." The 'burbs that are completely 100% corporatized. New homes built by the corporate homebuilders, all of the identical chain restaurants... you could plop someone down in any one of them and they wouldn't be able to tell one from the other. Awful.

[Bozita]

38. Frank will visit Bob McChesney on Sun 12/5 at 2pm EST

Welcome to another edition of the WILL-AM Media Matters email
update!


THIS WEEK'S GUEST

-------------------------------

This week's guest on Media Matters is Thomas Frank. Founding
editor of The Baffler <http://www.thebaffler.com/>, Frank
received a PhD in 1994 in American history at the University
of Chicago. His dissertation later became "The Conquest of
Cool." Frank is a contributor to Harper’s, The Nation, and
The New York Times op-ed page, and has co-edited two
anthologies of essays, "The Baffler: Commodify Your Dissent"
and "Boob Jubilee." Thomas Frank is also the author of "One
Market Under God" and the recent "What’s the Matter with
Kansas? How Conservatives Won the Heart of America?"


UPCOMING GUESTS

--------------

Next week our guest will be Paul Krugman.


If you have a suggestion for a guest you'd like to see on
the show,let us know: email producer Victor Pickard at
[e-mail]


LAST WEEK'S GUEST

-----------------------------

Last week's guest on Media Matters was Stephen Hartnett,
Associate Professor of Speech Communication at the University
of Illinois. He is writing a book with Laura Stengrim
titled "Globalization & Empire: Free Markets, The U.S.
Invasion of Iraq, and The Twilight of Democracy."

Relevant links:
http://cepr.org/
http://www.warprofiteers.com/
http://www.hrw.org/


ALL OF OUR PAST SHOWS ARE AVAILABLE ON OUR WEB SITE:

http://www.will.uiuc.edu/am/mediamatters/

[thehim]

45. Great book for understanding Red State-Blue State divide

This book is one of the best I've ever read for understanding the culture of the Red State. I had some fun with it and wrote this 'review' after I read it over my vacation in September...

http://www.reload.ws/blog/2004/10/welfare-socialism-and-un-oh-my.html

[crispini]

52. Great review!

“Seattle?” asked the Wizard, “Is that in a swing state?”

LOL, funny. :)

[DebJ]

77. oohh...I loved the Rose Colored glasses and the tax refund chks

being revealed as piles of IOU's. That's really great. Thanks. I enjoyed that.

[crispini]

49. So, who's David Brooks? (p. 18)

And may I just say how annoying the "so-called-revelation" on p. 25 is? Jeez, I'm a blue voting urban resident and I CAN 1) change a tire 2) grow tomatoes 3) know where electricity comes from.

Fuckin' stereotypes.

[thehim]

50. David Brooks

He's a conservative writer for the NYT, although he's the kind of person that many Red State Bush voters would look at and say, "He's a north'rn librul". One of the many contradictions that Frank points out.

And I too am a blue state resident that can change a tire and re-wire my house, but I probably won't learn how to grow tomatoes unless the local pizza joint closes down...

[Fleurs du Mal]

57. Friday on the NewsHour

He's also on the NewHour with Jim Lehrer on Fridays, paired with Mark Shields. Often makes for some lively dialogue. As much as I want to plug my ears when he speaks he is a good source of current righty perceptions. Not to mention I like listening to Shields take him to the cleaner occasionally as well. :evilgrin:

[crispini]

54. Culture war and Capitalism

Reading the stuff around pp. 74-75 interests me. He's talking about Sam Brownbeck:

"a man of sterling public principle, he seems to take the side of corporate interests almost regardless of the issues at hand... Brownback, of course, has made a career out of denouncing the culture industry for its vulgarity... Taking the opportunity to reign it in should have been a no-brainer.... 'Vulgarity is linked to corporate control and highly concentrated, only semi-competitive markets.'"

Then, of course, Brownbeck goes on to vote FOR Big Media.

I really think this could be a wedge issue if we could figure out how to frame it right. Moral values VERSUS corporate control. We need to figure out how to wake up the people who are voting in the interests of these kajillion dollar corporations.

[Fleurs du Mal]

56. The modern Gordian Knot

And we even have quite a few people right here who are seemingly oblivious they're doing the same:

"Koch money props up such hothouses of the right as Reason magazine, the Manhattan Institute, the Heartland Institute, Citizens for a Sound Economy, and the Democratic Leadership Council" (p. 82, my bold)

The spoils of corporamerica and the "American Dream" have been so intricately intertwined that it's going to be difficult indeed to separate the two. I think we're back to the notion that everyone has the chance to break the reigns of government "interference" if only they work hard enough for it. In this regard corporate despotism is just a necessary evil for those who haven't aspired high or hard enough. This is the logical outcome of our cherished laissez faire economics.

[fabius]

62. Corporate Media as a Wedge Issue

There is one way. Congress approved legislation in 2000 for Low Power FM Radio stations, a way for the public to have an independent voice in their own communities. Corporate lobbyists (ABA) and NPR lobbyists (kind of a twist) managed to throw a wrench into things to slow down the processing of these licenses and delay the public from participating. NPR although public, is greatly influenced by their corporate sponsors to vote against this type of programming. The ironic thing is that this type of negative lobbying influences all public groups: conservative, religious, liberal, etc. from participating in public (non-commercial) radio. This is an issue that should sway conservative as well as liberal voters, if it could be presented to them as: A Free Voice Represents All of the Public, and is Not a Partisan Issue. At this date, there is a new bill coming up which McCain and Leahy have sponsored. You can read more about it at:

http://www.freepress.net/lpfm/

Senate Bill 2505 would give thousands of communities the right to broadcast on low-power FM airwaves. Congress needs to know how important it is for this bill to pass. You can sign the petition on that website to get this bill on its way.

[DebJ]

78. Hey this is great! Thanks! I will be bringing this info to a local

political group next Thursday...York County Committee of Correspondence. See if we can generate some support.

[DebJ]

70. right again! The issue is EXACTLY moral values VERSUS

corporate control. The issue is getting these people to see that.

[Fleurs du Mal]

72. I'm not convinced

that it would do much even if you got the average con to "pay attention" to the pervasiveness of corporate control. They still view economic prosperity as a validation of authority.

[Robbien]

64. The author Thomas Frank will be on talk radio in 5 minutes

He will be on Bob McChesney's show at 1pm central

link
http://www.will.uiuc.edu/main/listen.htm

If you miss it, the show will be archived, probably by tommorrow at this link:
http://www.will.uiuc.edu/am/mediamatters/

[Bozita]

76. archive is up ... ... good stuff

[Skinner]

66. I bought it last night around 8:00pm, and read the entire thing today.

I thought it was an incredibly interesting and important book; I could not put it down. I can't wait to talk about it, but first I want to go back and read this thread. Hopefully I can post some comments tomorrow (Monday).

[crispini]

68. Yaaaay! Skinner's here!

Welcome. Looking forward to hearing from you! :D

[crispini]

67. Jack Cashill

I got a "this is incredibly important" vibe off of this bit. pp.161 and following.

"Cashill's great ability, I think, is as a builder of theoretical systems. One source of conservatism's considerable power, as noted, is its airtight explanation of reality... It brings us together... in mutual outrage against a common enemy. Not only does Jack Cashill apply this framework skillfully to local circumstances, he also develops schemes for taking the offensive, plans whereby people from every walk of life can play a vital and fulfilling part in the backlash drama." p. 162.

Several useful points:
- Philophical framework that explains reality.
- Unite against a common enemy.
- Concrete plans that include everyone.

VERY USEFUL.

Maybe this needs to wait until next month when we dicuss Lakoff, but having just watched the Lakoff DVD I am very interested in OUR 'framework that explains reality.'

The unite against a common enemy thing is also something that IMO will work dramatically in our favor over the next four years. I have been to DFA, MoveOn, and Dallas for Kerry post-election meetings over the last few weeks and the impulse to UNITE is stronger than ever. I'm hopin' ....

[DebJ]

71. Masochistic martyrdom and Proud to be stupid: depressing!

Those were two major themes that I picked up in this book. People were actually openly admitting that the people they voted for hurt their economic surivival, but that it was worth it for the moral values espoused by the candidates. I think the author makes a convincing point throughout the book that these people NEED to feel like martrys. They absolute NEED it, so economic masochism works really well for them. Kamakazi pilots and Jihadists, they are. By their own economic torture, they see themselves as martyrs for Christ....so why would they give a damn about the suffering they create for everyone else? I see no compassion. Only people in need of medication.
Also, the thing that came off most for me on the liberal labelling was that intelligence, scientific study, and facts themselves are a TURN OFF for many of these voters. To amend an old expression, it's like they are shouting "I'm stupid, and I'm proud!"
I need to see some positive ideas about how to fight against this type of stuff. Right now, I'm just really depressed, because unfortunately, I think the author has very valid points for a lot of the Bush-voting population.
Crispini's point about elucidating the connection between big business controlling interests (the MEDIA) and crap culture is helpful: but how does one do this without sounding like one is quoting FACTS????
The third major factor I picked up is that these people need to whine, they NEED to feel screwed by their government. This is perhaps the most helpful bit of information. They need to be directed towards feeling screwed by the idiots they elect, as opposed to feeling screwed by 'liberals' who control everything even though, in fact, Republicans are controlling everything.
Hope someone can shed some hope. How does one fight a fight when facts are worse then irrelevant, they are viewed as the enemy?

[RhodaGrits]

73. The main point Frank is making seems to be that why are these people

voting against their economic self-interest?"

It struck me last night that I am doing the same. I am a small business person employing 16 people. I make a 6 figure income after over 20 years in successful practice of that business and investment of at least 3/4 of a million dollars over those years in the business, not counting sweat equity. I am a member of the "investment class" by definition.

Voting for BushCo is in my best economic interest (short-term at least). I'd slit my wrists before I did that. I believe there are many many things more valuable to me than my economic self-interest.

We may get further with showing how Massachusetts "kills less babies" because of its social support network than pointing out that their voting patterns are costing them their livelihoods. Many people vote with their heart not their wallets. Show them how they are being screwed out of their money and jobs by the repubs but unless you can also give them the same moral superiority they feel over us un-American soulless liberals - I am not sure that they will care.

[Fleurs du Mal]

74. Absolutely agree

Whether it's due to a need for self-deprivation or just plain ignorance, the idea that cons are, should, or will be voting their economic interests seems a shaky presumption at best.

Highlighting the moral disparity between red and blue states with respect to their most impassioned causes, e.g. anti-repro rights, heteronuklar family, etc., might have some legs. I also like Frank's "praising Jesus" while simultaneously "exalting Caesar" theme. Perhaps this type of rhetoric will resonate better with the god-fearin' folk.

[DebJ]

79. can your particular business survive without a middle class?

Cause I think that is where we are heading. Large corps like WalMart can feed off the poor. People who manufacture more expensive items like electronics could simply charge double and triple to a new very wealthy class and produce less, leaving out a middle class while still making a profit.
But how will small business owners survive without a middle class?

[RhodaGrits]

80. No, I agree. We will lose our middle class with BushCo's

policies. Which is why I said "short-term" which seems to be all that these people care about... like a management team issuing an annual report >> All they care about is the bottom line THIS year.

Even my stockbroker is urging me to get my money into foreign currencies and commodities - he figures we have 2 yrs at most before this house of cards comes down. I see real estate crashing first and taking the homes of the middle class over-extended families into foreclosure.

(Yeah, I am a little bearish these days.)

[DebJ]

81. I was thinking on the same lines just this afternoon...we are sooo

close to economic doom, it scares me. Not for myself, but because I had children, something Bush has made me regret.

[stevebreeze]

96. while I of course no nothing about your personal bussiness...

Voting Bush likly is against your economic interest (though maybe short term it is as you posted). Small business is not helped by the GOP. Since we have removed most progressively many small business's are able to exist only in the margins. For instance,I know of software developers who either do not follow a good idea if they think Microsoft is planing to get involved or try to develop their software so as to become a target for purchase. This type of think demonstrates to me how corporate think stifles creativity needed to grow as an economy.

[MountainLaurel]

75. DC area DUers: ALERT!

Thomas Frank will be discussing "What's the Matter with Kansas?" TONIGHT at Politics & Prose, at 7.

http://www.politics-prose.com/calendar.htm#d6

[crispini]

82. Does this book ever get around to offering solutions?

I'm now up to the bit about the woman activist who's proudly saying that she's submissive to her husband (or however she puts it) and I'm all, like, There is no way we are EVER getting through to these people, is there?

For those of you who have finished -- does it get less discouraging as we go on?

[RhodaGrits]

84. Remember Phyllis Schlafly who so vigorously opposed feminism

and blocked the Equal Rights Amendment back in the '70s? I wore an ERA bracelet back then - I thought I'd be taking it off when the law passed.

This from her bio:

Mrs. Schlafly is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Washington University, received her J.D. from Washington University Law School, and received her Master's in Political Science from Harvard University.

I don't care if she wants to be a submissive. She and that woman in Frank's book can be subservient and obedient to their husbands, their church or their dogs for all I care. I will NEVER understand it but it is their right. But why do these people feel compelled to force their abhorrent lifestyle on me? And I resent their reaping the benefits of strong women who took risks and challenged the status quo without whom these women would never have received a J.D. and Masters or political office. They want nothing less than to legislate away my rights. I went to my nephew's wedding this summer in Iowa and his wife to be vowed to obey and yield and bear his children willingly from God. I nearly bolted out of the pew. I kept thinking of the consciousness raising groups I held in our local library in 1973 and wondering how it all went so wrong. Why do they hate us for our freedom?

These RWingnuts screamed that we were forcing our liberal permissive lifestyles on them. How?? I just don't understand how they can claim that.

I'm about 60% through Frank's book and I'm just frustrated and discouraged. I too hope he has some suggestions for how to get through to these people or at least make them see that live and let live is not such a bad thing.

[DebJ]

86. I don't think live and let live is within the scope of people who live

to say I am holier than thou. To them, it is an all out war of good versus evil, and of course they are good, no matter how many thousands of people they hurt. And when they hurt themselves, they are martyrs and saints.

[RhodaGrits]

87. Then all I can do is hope for the Rapture to scoop all the fundies

everywhere up? :-) Can you imagine waking up one morning and *poof* gone?

[DebJ]

85. nope. He presents a problem, but not a solution. That's for us

to figure out, I guess.

[hfojvt]

88. Frank is talking a different language

and Democrats do not offer any solutions either to the problems Frank describes. Frank talks about the death of the family farm and of small towns, but do Democrats have any solutions to those problems? He writes how Kiowa County, Kansas has gotten $40 million in Federal money since 1995. From my knowledge of farm subsidies, most of that money goes to larger farmers, the people who need it least. Instead of having something like FIC (or Farm Income Credit) the government has been subsidizing the price of corn, wheat, milk for years. Does the small 40 acre family farm benefit from this? Yes, but not as much as the 500 acre corporate farm does.

Then I turn to the story of Boeing which is pushing states and cities around as it threatens to close its plants, or offers to build new ones. The only thing that is going to prevent that is a strong federal government, but that might be "liberal" and our Democrat spokesman Bill Clinton said in a SOTU - "the era of big government is over". I remember writing to him immediately asking: "then what is going to stand up to the big corporation?"

[crispini]

90. Yes! I just got to this part.

(I don't have the page number with me.) But Frank points out that the Democrat's move to the center essentially killed the Democratic party -- that the fact that the Democrats helped pass NAFTA essentially meant that they pulled the rug out from under their traditional base, the working class and the unions. No wonder they don't support us anymore.

I am really beginning to understand why a lot of people around here don't like the DLC.

[Fleurs du Mal]

91. In the Epilogue

he says something along the lines of trying to be the other pro-business party is doomed to failure. Dems will simply disappear and be assimilated into the equivalent of the Kansas Mods. His description of the Mods is precisely the direction of the DLC.

The underlying argument I got from the book was that there needs to be a shift of focus in the Democratic Party from values as cons have defined them to the economic if we are to survive as a viable party. Frank repeatedly draws attention to the "erasure of the economic" as the foundation for the back lash. As long as the corporate cons are able to play sleight-of-hand with economic issues, progressives will get at best stalemated and more likely overrun in the values debate. On the other hand, forcing focus back on the economic issues will allow our values to slip in on the wake. And focusing on economic issues certainly doesn't mean "adopting" corporacon-lite positions.

[crispini]

83. This article, IMO, offers the other half of what Frank's talking about.

Or at least some of it. In "Kansas," we're talking about the individual. This article touches on some of the institution:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/magazine/25DEMOCRATS.html?ei=5088&en=13ada638bbe542f0&ex=1248494400&partner=rssnyt&pagewanted=print&position=

"The presentation itself, a collection of about 40 slides titled ''The Conservative Message Machine's Money Matrix,'' essentially makes the case that a handful of families -- Scaife, Bradley, Olin, Coors and others -- laid the foundation for a $300 million network of policy centers, advocacy groups and media outlets that now wield great influence over the national agenda. The network, as Stein diagrams it, includes scores of powerful organizations -- most of them with bland names like the State Policy Network and the Leadership Institute -- that he says train young leaders and lawmakers and promote policy ideas on the national and local level. These groups are, in turn, linked to a massive message apparatus, into which Stein lumps everything from Fox News and the Wall Street Journal op-ed page to Pat Robertson's ''700 Club.'' And all of this, he contends, is underwritten by some 200 ''anchor donors.'' ''This is perhaps the most potent, independent institutionalized apparatus ever assembled in a democracy to promote one belief system,'' he said. "

Man, where can I get a copy of that powerpoint? Jeez.

[hfojvt]

89. Freedom to Farm

Frank talks about that on pages 64-66, and how it has helped to destroy family farms and small towns. So I did some searching on it. It was kinda interesting. I saw these senators voting against amendments - Dole, Kassebaum (R-Ks), Kennedy (D-Ma), Kerry, Frist, Lautenberg (D-NJ), Hatch, and Helms. Interesting mix there.
These Senators were voting for amendments - Pressler (R-SD), Daschle, Grassley (R-Ia), Harkin (D-Ia), Kerrey (D-Ne), Exon (D-Ne). It was then signed into law by Clinton.
Going by that logic, all those Kansas and Dakota hicks who voted against Kerry were right to do so, since he supported the FtF act that wrecked their way of life.
Frank's argument that Kansans vote for Republicans who help the corporations at the expense of the little people ignores the ways in which Democrats fail to stand up for the little people. Since neither party or candidate is going to stand up to Big Money, it stands to reason to make the choice on other considerations. According to the index, Frank does not mention the insidious Ralph Nader at all, although Ralph probably has more in common with William Jennings Bryan than Howard Dean does. Not to mention that Bryan was running at a time when people like Bellamy and Henry George made socialism and reforms seem possible, and we are living in a time when Russia has discredited socialism.

[crispini]

92. Am I the only one here who's not done yet?

Ya'll are some fast readers on this forum, I guess. :D

[indigo32]

93. LOL I just got it and won't start it till this weekend

[Fleurs du Mal]

94. Excellent

Then we have other perspectives to look forward to and discuss. It was looking like it died down rather quickly.

[stevebreeze]

97. Seems to me the "solution" is to rectify the problem

As I reed the problem is not that some people vote against their own economic interest, but that the Democratic party is not speaking to their economic interest.

[DebJ]

98. AHHH! Sweet relief in Lakoff's Don't Think of an Elephant!!! I was

depressed for two days after reading Kansas. Not that the information isn't excellent to have in store, but sheesh, need to move on and DO something positive.
Can't wait until we get into Lakoff. I'm half way through...and just picked it up last night. Read a third of it while sitting in Borders last night.

[klyon]

99. Repugs as losers

The idea that Frank brings up on p. 141 is very interesting. He talks about the Republicans feeling like they are losing all the time and the fact that is what is happening. Their position is always the losing position when you look at it in long term progress terms. In fact they are losing on every major change, events are always moving in a progressive way and conservative by its nature is not moving at all. It is the “creeping liberal tyranny”(p.161). Change is the one thing you can count on. You can see this in history clearly, from civil rights to women’s rights, blacks in the military to some day gay legal unions, they are stuck in the old mind sets that are the past. Their success with people is because they hearken back to the (imaginary) past, when men were men and good was clear. We need to remind them of other (real) times in the past like anti-trust and union labor rights and what their working heritage is all about. We must remind all people of the mistakes of the past and show them a future that is possible. This country believes it can do no wrong, when the mistakes that have been made are huge. The problem is they don’t want to know or call it “all lies” if you force it on them.

I grew up in Fairway Kansas, which is just down the street from Misson Hills, in the 60's. I have been bewldered how it turned so conservative after I moved away. I'm still unclear on how it happened.

KL

[crispini]

100. Yes, exactly.

and they have based their anger around the "backlash" which REQUIRES them to see themselves as "victims."

An interesting phrase I got from the book was something like: they keep sending Republicans to Washington and are surprised when Hollywood doesn't care.

[klyon]

101. Unstoppable

That is the curious part, the cons on the far right turnout election after election and vote the party line and their issues never get resolved. They don’t even think abortion will ever be overturned and still they press on. I do not think we can ever win them over, they are operating out of conviction but maybe if Repugs are discredited with scandal of some sort we can neutralize them. We need to look for votes else ware maybe physical conservatives interested in the economy could be persuaded on budget matters. Fundies will never believe what they don’t want to believe.

KL

[crispini]

102. Sympathy for the Devil.

One of the big takeaways I got from this was that the combination of "I want to do what's right" and "I am a victim" is EXTREMELY powerful. By embracing their own victimization the cons have cast themselves as the perpetual underdog.

The hardcore right will not be reached by political philosophies at all, only by a change in their belief set.

I have hopes for the middle of the road conservatives, short-term, but these true RWers will only be reached ultimately by a different religious philosophy which will meet their needs and fulfill them as people and allow them to reject the idea of "victimisation" which they so readily embrace.

[Tafiti]

103. Absolutely.

They're bent on being the victim, the persecuted, just like in the times of Jesus. Coming from a fundamentalist background, that notion is hammered home constantly. Everyone is trying to attack you because of your faith in Christ - it's the true believer against the secular, atheistic world, always trying to keep you down, or mock you, or ridicule you. But, as per Frank Peretti, they see their lives as shadowed by angels and demons - spiritual warfare. They don't see people, they instantly judge. "I felt a darkness, a Satanic presence," you might hear one say of a particular experience with an unbeliever.

It's really very sad, how they lack any sense of connection with other people - very isolationist. They don't realize they are fostering a worldview that is diametrically opposed to what Jesus taught. Jesus doesn't want plastic proselytization. He wants real connection, real love, real compassion. But they can't see past the evil. It's repulsive, and too much contact can corrupt them.

This sort of belief structure is something they will never shed, in my view. The key is to help rid themselves of this political marriage between the Republican Party and Christianity - the most atrocious, unholy alliance ever concocted. I do think Lakoff's reframing concepts are important in this area. Their particular religious philosophies will never go away, but we can help them see the contradictions between the accumulation of wealth, lack of compassion and opportunity for the poor, etc. and the message of Jesus. If they really took the question "What Would Jesus Do?" seriously, they must come to the conclusion that Jesus would have nothing to do with the Republican agenda, and would downright condemn it. But perhaps this is fodder for a January discussion.

[jonnyblitz]

105. the sad thing is (and was stated in this book)

the wingnut politicians that appeal with the cultural wedge issues NEVER "deliver" on these (because the issues are "undeliverable" according to the author) yet they always win be USING them in their campaigns. so it's sad in the sense that the people are fooled but NOT sad that they never get the result they want like stopping homosexuality or abortion .

This is an AWESOME book that I will have to read again because my retention for details sucks due to the fact I read so many books back to back!

[hfojvt]

106. In defense of Emporia

Yesterday I rented a car and took a six hour road-trip to Emporia, Kansas. What inspired me was this book which says on page 59: "As for the rest of the state, nobody even bothers to try papering over what's happened; it's pretty much in free fall...this is a civilization in the early stages of irreversible decay...Main Streets here are vacant, almost as a rule...The town where this feeling of dissipation struck me most powerfully was Emporia."
Surprisingly enough, Thomas Frank is not popular in Emporia, but truth is not a popularity contest. The first thing I noticed as I took the 2nd exit into Emporia is what looked to be a $400,000+ house sitting by a small lake. I could not tell if it was a residence or some kind of country club and I was not intrepid enough to investigate. The next thing I saw is an Islamic cultural center which seems like quite a bit of diversity for a town of 25,000 in the middle of "Jesusland".
I then visited a used bookstore whose owner said she had been there for 25 years. Then I walked by a gym which had at least a dozen new-looking treadmills (later I saw most of them filled). There was a coffee/chocolate shop which had just opened a few weeks ago. Then I visited the Chamber of Commerce. A woman I talked to there was upbeat as Chamber people usually are. She said they had a couple new dog food factories and that there major employers had been around for about thirty years. (I am not sure if the dog food is bagged, or if this is a type of meat-packing plant. I did see a Spanish grocery that was opening soon.)
At the independent bookstore, the clerk was friendly, although she did not endorse Frank's book and got persnickity when I mentioned Amazon. Emporia has a Wal-mart, but I saw very few vacanies in the downtown. The streets were not empty, but a driver smiled at me when my dog wandered too close to traffic.
The campus at Emporia state was very quiet at 5 o'clock, but I was happy to see a building named after my distant relative Preston B Plumb. I was also very happy to find something else Leavenworth does not have - a Godfather's Pizza (is there anyway for Coke to buy this chain so they can compete with Pepsi Hut?) The restaurant looked like a former bar, but the pizza was delectable.
I stopped at Ottowa on my way home, and found people going to an elementary school concert (which seemed non-religious from the programs I saw in spite of the season). The reference librarian was positive about her town unlike my hometown in South Dakota, where the phrase "we are really hurting for jobs" is common. In Ottowa, I saw a downtown that was lit up, and had very few vacanies.
Anyway, the small town Kansas that I saw was more like what Franks says it no longer is: "friendly folks ambling slowly down the old brick sidewalks, little kids singing in the school, average people in rambling Victorian houses listening intently to the radio broadcast of the high school football game." That is what I saw in Emporia and Ottowa. I am not sure why Franks did not see it.

[indigo32]

107. An interesting, frustrating book

What I took away from this, and would never deny it, is that we have abandoned all discussion of equality and economic support for those who need it. For Gods sake we're in the middle of dismantling Social Security. It has somehow become taboo (as it once was to discuss Social Security, remember the third rail) to deal with these things... and this has left the door open for them to step in and do this.

As tempting as it is to get furious, like Frank I don't don't really blame these people. Human being are what they are, I was simply raised differently. But geez I rankle at anti-intellecualism.

We really do need to offer these people an alternative they can sink their teeth into, not just expect them to figure it all out.

Thems my two cents :)



a favorite line....
"The power of their shared vision of martyrdom is sufficient to overcome any set of facts that are merely material, merely true." OYE!

[hfojvt]

109. all discussion of equality?

Apparently you did not get this email on Dec. 15th from the DNC.

"With their victories in November, Republicans not only extended their control over the White House, but aggressively expanded their hold over both the Senate and the House of Representatives. As a result, the Washington Republicans are now in the best position they have ever been to pursue and put in place their extremist agenda -- an agenda that will place the needs of the special interests over the desires of the average American for a government that creates opportunity, fairness, and security.

Here are a few of the ways they're planning to threaten our basic rights:

Shifting the tax burden to working families. They'll call it "reform," but they've got only one thing in mind: shifting the tax burden from the wealthiest Americans onto the backs of the lower- and middle-class taxpayers. They're already floating ideas like a national sales tax that will make average families pay more.

Undermining Social Security. The Bush administration is gearing up to reintroduce its disastrous plan to undermine the retirement security of every single American. Their plan ensures a guaranteed benefit cut for all Americans and creates a new debt of one trillion dollars for our children and grandchildren."

or this one from August 23:

"For the last four years, ordinary Americans watched as the policies of George W. Bush have made their lives harder. They've seen massive job losses. They've seen stagnant wages and skyrocketing health care costs. They've seen the administration attack civil liberties, environmental protections, and even overtime pay.

Now the administration is using smear tactics to distract Americans from what's really at stake in this election. They're hoping America will forget their failures and that they can win by distorting John Kerry's record.

Well, America can do better. And all this week, the Democratic Party is highlighting the lives of ordinary Americans who have felt the devastating effects of Bush's failed policies and talking about how John Kerry's vision for a stronger America is a better choice."

Probably very little of that discussion reaches the media because millionaires like Dan Rather and Tim Russert could give a crap about ordinary Americans, unless, like David Letterman, they are making fun of how stupid they are. I can't even blame people for being anti-intellectual when there is a huge current dissing them for their stupidity. Any intellectual or pundit who wants to poke fun of the intelligence of a mechanic, plumber, roofer, farmer or carpenter deserves a fractured shin from a steel-toed boot.

[indigo32]

110. Well thats nice of the DNC

and I probably got that e-mail (I get alot of e-mail). But I don't think we can blame it all on Dan Rather and Tim Russert. Though they have their part to play. As an example... I watched the entirety of the National Convention on C-Span. I know what they did and didn't talk about. Look I'm a Democrat. Always have been, always will be. I just think we've got to get some things back if it's not already too late.

[hfojvt]

112. C-Span is probably less relevant than CBS news

but I do not have the numbers on that. Kerry quit advertising in Missouri so I am not sure what was said there, but Move-on did some attacks on Bush's job record to apparently no avail. I did not watch the debates or much of the convention, but all I remember from the debates is Iraq, Iraq, Iraq, Tara, Tara, Tara. Somewhere is was decided that those were the issues-du-jour.
The local congressional race did not get much media coverage here, so I am not sure what issues were raised. The literature that I saw was very simplistic - pro-education, working mother, etc. More money was spent on yard signs and none on newsletters.
I just do not think it is accurate to say they never talked about them.

[ramapo]

108. Frank Insights

I found WTMWK entertaining while offering me some insight into what goes on in the midst of our country, far from the life of a metro-ized Blue-stater.

I approached the book with some trepidation as I really don't like to torture myself by reading about the successes of the Conservative movement in the United States. But the author made my journey fairly painless and even enjoyable.

Frank painted a very clear picture of what has gone on in Kansas over the past few decades. I was surprised to learn that the real tipping point was reached in the '90s with the banishment of the moderate Republicans to the fringes of the party. I had really considered the state to be a solid conservative bastion for at least the past 40 years or so. I guess that is true to a degree, but not so much as compared to today when Republicans including former Senators Dole and Kestenbaum would seem refreshingly moderate. I often think that Nixon would be considered somewhat of a "liberal" by today's standards.

The conservatives have enjoyed spectacular success by focusing the public on relatively trivial and controversial issues while pursuing an agenda counter to the economic and long-term well-being of this same public.

I call this the politics of delusion and diversion. Attention is focused on such wedge issues as abortion and religion. The Conservatives need to maintain the anger around culture issues as this is truly their base of power. Despite their control of the government and even much of the media, they are adept at remaining the underdog and railing against the perceived excesses of the "liberals". To lose this focus would likely threaten their staying power as their constituents' attention may wander to more important issues.

Frank also lays blame on the Democrats as being complicit in their own destruction. To this I must agree. Clinton was successful by moving the party to the right but in so doing he made the party all the more difficult to distinguish from the Republicans. Although this is flame-bait, I cheered the words of Ralph Nader in 2000 when he spoke of the two parties being so much one of the same with perhaps only subtle variations in degree.

Democrats did abandon the working class in favor of monied interests. Their excuse being that huge donations are needed to fund their campaign against Republican excesses. But Clinton is responsible for NAFTA, and the Telecomm deregulation, and the weakening of CAFE standards with the embracing of ever larger, less efficient vehicles. He did little for the cities, the environment, and helped make himself into a target of rage that attracted many a blue-collar and middle American.

Forget the election rhetoric and look at what the Democrats have actually done the past four years. They have continued to embrace Republican positions and accommodate their legislation. By no means can it be said that there is a loyal opposition and this failure to differentiate and articulate clear positions has had as much to do with the demise of Democratic power as has the grass-root genius of the Neo-Conservative movement.

As a baby boomer, I find it particularly stunning that my own generation, and those younger than I, have been the ones responsible for transforming the United States from a somewhat forward-looking (progressive would certainly be an overstatement) nation into what it is today. There is a very real disconnect from reality for many in my generation, a lack of maturity in thought and behavior, which is evident throughout our society from the realms of economics to entertainment.

Frank offers no solution as I don't believe that was his aim. He has provided valuable insights into what has effected the transformation of our political culture over the past forty years.

I believe that this tide can be turned only by new leaders who can refocus people on the truly important issues. Barring the emergence of new leadership that can effectively mute the conservative movement, it will be events that change the focus. Sooner or later things will change but for now I see that what the author has described in Kansas to be inexorably eating its' way across the country.

[hfojvt]

111. what I think Frank misses

"I call this the politics of delusion and diversion. Attention is focused on such wedge issues as abortion and religion."

Frank misses their economic arguments, ordinary working people do not like - taxes, government waste, or pushy bureaucrats. Republicans promise to create jobs by lowering business taxes and cutting "red tape". There are more stories out there about ridiculous regulations and waste than there are of how regulations have saved and improved lives.
I am afraid that the "tax and spend" meme is still pretty strong. Our counter-charge that they solve social problems by "throwing money at rich people" or "trickle down" do not seem to have much traction.

That is one point that Frank makes, when we run a "me too" campaign, then the wedge issues become the only difference. Republicans say "I will cut taxes and government waste" and Democrats say "so will I" instead of turning the tables and explaining who benefits from the tax cuts and who benefits from the social programs.

[crispini]

113. Very good point.

We need to reframe the debate. (Why I'm so looking forward to reading Lakoff!)

[DebJ]

114. Tax and BORROW with interest Republicans.

[DebJ]

115. Effective government investing in our shared future.

[ramapo]

116. Who is able to reframe the debate?

I don't know if the current situation is due to total ineptness on the part of Democrats, political genius methodically practiced by Republicans over the past 25 years, or a complete and utter failure of our citizenry to hold anybody responsible for anything (including ourselves) while slopping up the politician's delusional rhetoric.

Franks makes a good case that is a perfect storm of all three.

Democrats still get tagged with being irresponsible tax-and-spenders despite the Republican record of mind-boggling deficits.

Democrats have lost their identity as champion for the low and middle classes.

Democrats run a genuine war hero for President and the candidate is pumped full of rhetorical bullet holes early in the campaign and bleeds enough to perhaps fatally wound his chances for election. He never even fought back.

Conservatives have successfully used trivial, wedge issues to frame the political debate. Democrats/Progressives/whatever have been unable to counter this tactic or defuse it.

Conservatives NEED and THRIVE on abortion, gay marriage, gun control, and Janet Jackson's tit on TV. Despite having the political power, they do virtually nothing to institute the kind of changes that they espouse. Doing so would cost them their talking points. Limbaugh must be having a tough enough time without Clinton and Kerry to kick around.

The United States is running on delusion, rhetoric, and the child-like belief that nothing bad can happen because this is after all the USA and God is on OUR side.

To reframe the debate would be to divert attention from the trivial and delusional rhetoric to serious and truthful discussion. The American people DO NOT want to hear it. Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale were thrashed for their attempts to frame important issues in a truthful manner.

I'd say every politician on the national scene has done nothing but pander to the electorate. Clinton talked the best game and he did have some substance behind his talk, but as Frank pointed out, Clinton's politics of triangulation just helped entrench Republican policy.

Gore was a lame candidate. Kerry was somewhat better and sadly was the best of the bunch. After all, which of the Democratic contenders could've mounted a more credible campaign? Perhaps an experienced Wes Clark, but not the Wes Clark of Spring-Summer '04.

There is no personality to today's Democratic Party. There is no spokesman, no leader. Not a JFK or RFK in sight, Clinton is now an elder statesman. Other Democrats on the national scene are caricatures (Ted Kennedy to name just one).

It is a sad day when a man with the stature of George W. Bush is considered a "great" leader by so many.

Who can expose the emperor for having no clothes? Barack Obama?

Events may well reframe the debate before we see a leader who can do it. The danger is that a turn of events, be it economic, terror or energy/environment based, may bring rise to leadership not counter to the NeoCons but to the right of the NeoCons.

I don't know that the people of Kansas will wake up one day and realize that they've gone astray. I worry that they'll decide that they have not gone nearly far enough.

[bklyncowgirl]

117. I took away at least one thing from t his book. Merry Christmas

The ability to recognize the "backlash machine" in action. The "Merry Christmas" campeign is a good example. What it does is blow all out of proportion an issue or in this case non-issue that may have been simmering in the background for ages and turn it into a left vs right drumbeater.

One big problem is that you can't beat something with nothing. The organized right has spent years and years building up its case. Social Security is a good example. Democrats have been afraid to touch it so they've let the right wing steal the issue. While the other side is planning to dismantle the greatest achievement of the New Deal, the Democrats are nowhere to be heard with a plan of their own. Quite frankly, IMHO, they're more interested in infighting. Sad to say, saving the Democratic Party from Howard Dean is much more important to them than saving Social Security.

[hfojvt]

118. and God bless us everyone

Who decides what is a "non issue"? And who decides what the proportion should be?
Myself, I think 9/11 was a molehill that the media and politicians have turned into a mountain, but very few people agree with me. As Nixon would say "it does not play well in Peoria".
Also, as far as I can see, the only thing Social Security needs to be saved from is the Republican's plans. Talk about an issue that is blown of proportion "social security is going bankrupt!!!!!" Hurry, do something quick or it will go bankrupt in 2042 or 2052 when it will only be able to pay 71%. Somebody better call 911, my house is going to fall down in thirty years.
Also, I am not that fond of social security. As Mr. Hapgood wrote in "The Screwing of the Average Man" in the 1980s - working people would be better off if FICA taxes were eliminated and the whole thing was funded by income taxes, progressive income taxes.
Republicans are very adept at creating something out of nothing, and getting the media to advance their spin points until they become conventional wisdom.