An Honest Assessment of Rural White Resentment Is Long Overdue
An Honest Assessment of Rural White Resentment Is Long Overdue
We say very clearly that rural America is hurting. But we refuse to justify attitudes that some scholars try to underplay.
We say very clearly that rural America is hurting. But we refuse to justify attitudes that some scholars try to underplay.
Something remarkable happened among rural whites between the 2016 and 2020 elections: According to the Pew Research Center’s validated voter study, as the rest of the country moved away from Donald Trump, rural whites lurched toward him by nine points, from 62 percent to 71 percent support. And among the 100 counties where Trump performed best in 2016, almost all of them small and rural, he got a higher percentage of the vote in 91 of them in 2020. Yet Trump’s extraordinary rural white support—the most important story in rural politics in decades—is something many scholars and commentators are reluctant to explore in an honest way.
…
What isn’t said enough is that rural whites are being told to blame all the wrong people for their very real problems. As we argue in the book, Hollywood liberals didn’t destroy the family farm, college professors didn’t move manufacturing jobs overseas, immigrants didn’t pour opioids into rural communities, and critical race theory didn’t close hundreds of rural hospitals. When Republican politicians and the conservative media tell rural whites to aim their anger at those targets, it’s so they won’t ask why the people they keep electing haven’t done anything to improve life in their communities.
You're viewing a single thread.
There are tens of thousands of towns that have no reason to exist anymore. The railroads don't stop there anymore, coal isn't in demand, or the factory where everyone used to work closed long ago. It's a death spiral. Nobody who lives there can admit they need to cut bait and start over elsewhere. They cling to the past and the delusion that the world will go back to the way it used to be.
Biden already did the best thing that could be done for these people which is funding a massive expansion of rural internet. If corporations continue to be pushed into allowing remote work, these rural towns would see the new economic infusion they need to survive.
I spend dozens of hours a year driving through the rural South. So many towns as you describe. And I have no idea how they're alive at all.
A weird thing I've seen: Most small Alabama towns are quite charming and well kept. How does that work when there's no obvious economic driver?!
Cross the border into Mississippi and it's a different story. You could teleport me to a random highway or town and I could tell you whether I was in AL or MS.
The wealth gap is on full display everywhere. You'll see a stunning property and home, rambling across several acres, and then a couple of trailers so beat down the county would condemn them if they cared to look.
How do those small towns still work? Cars. Sit and talk to people living in those forgotten towns, and they generally have very veeeery long commutes to work, or one of the few poorly paying jobs in town. +90 minutes commute is not uncommon to get to the next closest printing press/slaughterhouse/steel mill/etc that hasn’t moved overseas or closed down.
I dated a girl from one of those small towns. Pretty much everyone either worked at the school, the county hospital, or the Hormel factory.
It's weird how the radicalized right wing took umbrage to the notion of retraining with their sneering use of "learn to code". Of course, not everyone can write code (and those jobs may dwindle, too) but the notion of doing anything other than mining coal just seems to really, really, really offend a certain type of person.
"Learn to code" is just the 21st century version of "pull yourself up by your bootstraps".
The idea that someone should just "learn to code" shows a huge lack of understanding of what "learning to code" entails. It also doesn't help that they'll need to earn a living while they're learning to code, and that they'll have to move from a dying town to find a job where they can code.
They weren't offended by the idea of learning to code. They were offended by the dismissive nature of the major life change that switching careers and moving to a different state entails.
And, as someone who learned how to code, I'm offended by the dismissive nature of the technology industry as just "learn to code."
Agreed, I started in electronics repair in the 90s, and began learning to code in 2004. 20 years and over a dozen languages later and I feel I am still learning to code.
People say that programming jobs are going to go away because of LLMs, but I don't see it, at least not any time soon.
They have been trying to eliminate programmers in my primary language since before I started, and I still have steady work.
The thought that a large number of people from non-tech backgrounds can just become proficient programmers in a reasonable amount of time is of course insane. I've known many very talented techs who burned out and gave up trying to learn to program.
Something has to be done, and I don't pretend for a moment I have any answers. I have traveled through many small towns all around the US, and the decline in the past 10 years or so is really depressing to see.
Digital nomads moving into these places and driving up the cost of living are a big complaint in rural areas. They've been complaining about the influx of Californians in Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana for the last few decades now, but it has really accelerated since the pandemic.
But if there’s no industry and no-one moves there, how does the town survive?
They commute to other places to work. They also don't typically make enough money to actually move and be closer to better jobs.
You’re missing my point. If there’s no industry, and they don’t allow anyone to move in, then the town will slowly die. They basically don’t want anything to change while at the same time they demand everything get better. It just doesn’t work that way.
Reminds me of the meme of a dog with a ball in its mouth: “Throw ball”
“No give, just throw ball”
Cars destroyed rural America. Take a Youtuber like Hoovie's Garage, he buys a large farm in the middle of nowhere to store cars, drives regularly a 100miles a day. You can't have compact European style towns, in such a reality. The factory closed, people drive 60 to a 100 miles a day, that means that the town is flattened and gone. Add to that oil disease in places like Kansas, Texas and W. Virginia; the government doesn't need to have sound businesses as a tax base to fund itself, just oil money.
Cars have nearly nothing to do with this. It started with the industrialization of farming.
Farm towns existed at normal intervals because it took a much larger labor pool to manage them. 200 acres was a lot to manage about 100 years ago. By the 1970's 400 acres was a normal sized family farm in the US.
Modern machinery can cover nearly 200 acres in a day. There is no reason to have thousands of people per small town anymore. It takes a tiny fraction of that manpower to achieve the same output.
1910 machinery starts to transform farming, killing small subsistence farms.
1920 factories in large towns start draw labor of off small subsistence farms
1930 cheap cars make it easier to travel great distances, small towns start to decline
1930-50s telephones, refrigerators, radios and TVs allow people to live even greater distances apart
1970s new pesticides allow for an even greater mega-farms, and fewer family farmers
1980s Free trade kills off most industrial jobs in small towns
1990s collapse of USSR means rush of cheap engineering labor, depreciates well paying technical jobs
2000s reinvestment into oil fracking and other oil extraction methods causes dutch-disease (taxes come from oil, so little interest in industry)
2010s spike in cheap synthetic drugs rolls through rural America
We've had a constant selection pressure for people who are economically and socially adaptable to move away from small towns since the start of the industrial revolution.
The issue is who is left in the towns. It's people who are socially and economically highly resistant to change.
What's interesting is why they are so resistant, studies show it's an overdeveloped sense of fear. They are terrified of moving to a new location. I know many people who refuse to visit any city because "it's too dangerous". People in small towns today live in a constant state of fear. Political and religious organizations have stoked that fear to a fever pitch.
Unsurprisingly, depression and anxiety rates are high in rural communities. Areas that also have poor mental health services. So they use drugs and alcohol at a higher as a form of self-medication.
Fear is absolutely part of it, but there's also a lot of people who just don't like cities.
Do you have a source for this? I'm not doubting you because it seems plausible, it just seems like interesting reading
Add in:
1956-1992 The interstate highway system bypassing previously established travel routes. This kills the business of diners, gas stations, and motels that previously serviced travelers.
1980s Hypermarts and supercenters. The ease of transportation of goods across the country put local small businesses into competition with larger businesses based thousands of miles away. Why go to local stores when Walmart has everything in one place? Profits that once stayed in the local economy with local business owners are now funneled far away.
1970s new pesticides allow for an even greater mega-farms, and fewer family farmers
About the time where biomass started to decline.
Farm tech covers the pre ww2 changes, but NAFTA and globalization in general really killed rural America. Car factories, coal mines, steel mills, textile factories, lumber mills and more are drastically reduced in the US, the people that used to work in those place are still alive though.
Digital nomads moving into these places and driving up the cost of living are a big complaint in rural areas. They've been complaining about the influx of Californians in Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana for the last few decades now, but it has really accelerated since the pandemic.
Speaking for Wyoming the "Digital Nomads" aren't the problem we complain about. It's the wealthy from all over the country who move here, over spend to acquire property and / or housing, causing land valuations and taxes to go up, then try and lock people out of land and / or change laws to better suit their interests.
Working class people, including Digital Nomads, are mostly fine. It's the ones wealthy enough that they don't have to work that are the problem.
If corporations continue to be pushed into allowing remote work, these rural towns would see the new economic infusion they need to survive.
Biden forced federal workers back to the office. I don't know why people keep trying to pretend we have friends in the capitol. We don't.
Biden bad
I would say work from home is incompatible with government security and privacy requirements in most situations.
Endless excuses for Biden and his pro-corporate bullshit.
Endless complaints regardless of reality. Biden could personally cure cancer and you people would complain he didn't cure AIDS too.
We'll never know though because if Biden had the choice between curing cancer and protecting corporate profits he'd choose the corporate profits.
Don't let the fact that Biden wants to raise corporate taxes, put a surcharge on stock buybacks, fight corporate tax evasion, and is the most pro-union president in generations interrupt your blind hate...
Yes Biden, like most trash procorporate Democrats regularly want to do things they have no ability to deliver. And flat out refuse to entertain alternatives they can.
put a surcharge on stock buybacks
Buybacks were illegal in the past. Make them illegal again. Do it today.
You do know that the president can't pass laws, don't you?