During the OPEC oil embargoes of the 1970s, which hit the
chilly Northeast especially hard, bumper stickers in oil-producing Texas read:
“Let the Bastards
Freeze in the Dark”
That sort of smug schadenfreude has more recently been heard
from the Tea-Party types, and now we hear them chortling over the Sequester.
This morning’s Washington Post features an article
from Kansas, reporting “a kind of defiant joy that the $85B in budget cuts had
arrived”:
GARDEN CITY, Kan. — The federal
budget cuts were still an abstraction as American Eagle Flight 3429 crossed the
snow-crusted plains into southwestern Kansas. Kevin Colvin, a construction
manager flying in for work, looked out of the window at the tiny airport below.
“They make it sound like, ‘Oh my
God! We’re going to die if we make these cuts!’ ” he said, eating a potato
chip, the cuts still two days away. “I think it’s a bunch of BS.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/at-kan-airport-fliers-back-sequester-cuts----but-wait-theyre-closing-the-control-tower/2013/03/02/6cdb93c0-82c0-11e2-8074-b26a871b165a_story.html?hpid=z1
A familiar stance.
But the article goes on:
The cuts came into clearer focus
Thursday. Garden City Regional Airport would lose its air traffic controllers,
saving the federal government $318,756 and leaving pilots to handle landings,
takeoffs and weather conditions mostly by themselves.
“Oh,” said Dave Unruh, a retired
farmer who heard the news as he waited for a flight to Dallas. “Is that part of
the deal?”
It is hard to resist a sort of meta-schadenfreude or
gegenschadenfreude, at the sniping from these I’ve-got-mine clueless
buffoons. For they are not
innocent victims of the present mess.
Tea Party territory, which rails against the government, receives more
per-capita in government handouts than do those northeasterners who pay for
those with their taxes.
Their attitude could be deemed hypocritical, except that, in many cases,
it is not even (does not rise to the level of) a conscious hypocrisy: facts have been safely walled-off from
their self-celebrating victimhood narratives.
~
This story comes just as I finally got around to reading a
very probing and observant book by Thomas Frank, called What’s the Matter
with Kansas? , from 2004.
Students of American history and letters will immediately notice that the title
recycles that of a wave-making editorial by Kansan journalist William Allen
White, from back in 1896. Frank’s
use is a cheeky détournement, since White was blasting Democrats and Populists
from the right, whereas Frank is taking down Republicans and …. Populists, this
time from the left.
Prior to the appearance of that book, I had known of Frank
only as the editor of an engaging and quirky periodical (thus called out of
courtesy; its appearance was
aperiodic) to which I once subscribed:
The Baffler. I
assumed he hailed from some upscale area of the Northeast, and that the
book-title was simply an opportunistic appropriation of a title that would ring
a bell in the heads of prospective readers (that really does help sell books),
and that he was sniping from outside.
So I never read it, until work on a current essay-project (“Depth
Psychology of the Electorate”) sent me back to Toqueville and to Thomas Frank.
It turns out the book is really and truly about Kansas: not simply as a springboard to familiar thoughts, nor as just one patch of a broader canvas. Frank himself was born there, grew up there, matriculated in college there. And in high school, he moved in the milieu that later produced the talk-radio ranters and the prairie wingnuts. Thus, as a native who returned, he combines, to advantage, the insights of the Visiting Martian (Toqueville, Dickens, Chesterton …) with those of the indigene. And in richness of description, his book recalls that never-equaled masterpiece, John Gunther’s Inside USA.
He describes, from the inside, the scene in Kansas, during his youth:
The angry men that I knew
personally were not agrieved
blue-collar folks, by any means.
They were all fairly successful people, self-made men. … And yet
something had gone so wildly wrong for them in the sixties … that life had
permanently lost its luster.
… Over the years they fashioned the never-ebbing
mad-as-hellness of a small knot of bitter self-made men into an unstoppable electoral
coalition.
-- Thomas Frank, What’s the
Matter with Kansas? (2004), p. 140
American Poujadistes, in short.
No summary of the book is necessary, since Frank himself
provides it in clear and sturdy prose.
Samples of the main points:
If Kansas is the concentrated
essence of normality, then here is where we can see the deranged gradually become normal, where we look
into that handsome, confident, reassuring, all-American face -- class
president, quarterback, Rhodes scholar, bond trader, builder of industry -- and
realize that we are staring into the eyes of a lunatic.
-- Thomas Frank, What’s the
Matter with Kansas? (2004), p. 36
The push that started Kansas
hurtling down the crevasse of reaction was provided by Operation Rescue, the
national pro-life group famous for
its aggressive tactics against abortion clinics.
-- Thomas Frank, What’s the
Matter with Kansas? (2004), p. 91
The issues the Cons emphasize seem all to have been chosen precisely because they are not capable
of being resolved by the judicious application of state power. Senator Brownback … is best known for
stands tht are purely symbolic:
against cloning, against the persecution of Christians in distant lands,
against sex slavery in the third world.
-- Thomas Frank, What’s the
Matter with Kansas? (2004), p.
101
As culture war, the backlash was
born to lose. Its goal is not to
win cultural battles but to take
offense, conspicuously, vocally, even flamboyantly.
-- Thomas Frank, What’s the
Matter with Kansas? (2004), p. 121
None of what I have described here
would make sense were it not for a
critical rhetorical move: the
systematic erasure of the economic.
-- Thomas Frank, What’s the
Matter with Kansas? (2004), p. 127
In a Comment below, a well-informed reader ascribes the
sea-change in Kansan sentiment to demographic change.
[Footnote 1] The isolated town from which the Post story is deadlined, the ironically-named Garden City, is the subject of a meaty five pages (51-55) in Frank’s book.
Many of the Readers Comments on the Post article
question why the Blue States should be giving such large subsidies to
“farmers”. But carefully
read Frank’s text. Farmers, in the sense of people who
actually farm -- those who perform the actual labor -- have not been making out
so well of late. Whereas the
agribusiness behemoths like Tyson and ConAgra, have been doing very nicely,
thank you, with your help.
[Footnote 2]
William Allen White is a more interesting character than his signature
editorial -- a rather slight thing -- would suggest. His Autobiography (posthum. 1946) is a treasure for
Americanists. Sample passages:
McKinley had been able to survive
twenty years in Ohio politics, where survival values combined the virtues of
the serpent, the shark, and the cooing dove. McKinley, for my taste, had a little too much of the cooing
dove in his cosmos. He was too
polite, too meticulous in his observation of the formalities of the political
Sanhedrin.
-- The Autobiography of William
Allen White, p. 251
(There we detect the twang of Twain.)
On the notorious political boss Mark Hanna:
A small-boned, fat leg flopped across its mate, as Hanna changed his weight from one hunker to the other. “They ought to admit a lot more of
those little sand patches and coyote ranges out West as States. We need ‘em!” he said by way of
sarcastic persiflage.
-- The Autobiography of William
Allen White, p. 277
(A little
later, however, Hanna would give White his big break, by distributing a million
copies of the feisty editorial.)
~
A forerunner of Frank’s bafflement, at how the rubes can
repeatedly allow themselves to be hornswoggled, is a treatise (set in the days
of the Roman empire) described in Arthur Koestler’s novel about Spartacus,
“On the Causes which Induce Man to act Contrary to his own Interests”.
Characterizing CP rationalizations of recalcitrant facts of
history:
If the workers are not
revolutionary, and are racialist into the bargain -- well then, this is known
as the ‘problem of consciousness’, and can be discussed with much learned
reference to Lukacs and Gramsci.
-- Ernest Gellner, Contemporary
Thought and Politics (1978), p. 82
February 25, 2005
Kansas on My Mind
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Call it "What's the Matter With Kansas - The Cartoon
Version."
The slime campaign has begun against AARP, which opposes
Social Security privatization. There's no hard evidence that the people
involved - some of them also responsible for the "Swift Boat"
election smear - are taking orders from the White House. So you're free to
believe that this is an independent venture. You're also free to believe in the
tooth fairy.
Their first foray - an ad accusing the seniors' organization
of being against the troops and for gay marriage - was notably inept. But
they'll be back, and it's important to understand what they're up to.
The answer lies in "What's the Matter With
Kansas?," Thomas Frank's meditation on how right-wingers, whose economic
policies harm working Americans, nonetheless get so many of those working
Americans to vote for them.
People like myself - members of what one scornful Bush aide
called the "reality-based community" - tend to attribute the right's
electoral victories to its success at spreading policy disinformation. And the
campaign against Social Security certainly involves a lot of disinformation,
both about how the current system works and about the consequences of
privatization.
But if that were all there is to it, Social Security should
be safe, because this particular disinformation campaign isn't going at all
well. In fact, there's a sense of wonderment among defenders of Social Security
about the other side's lack of preparation. The Cato Institute and the Heritage
Foundation have spent decades campaigning for privatization. Yet they weren't
ready to answer even the most obvious questions about how it would work - like
how benefits could be maintained for older Americans without a dangerous
increase in debt.
Privatizers are even having a hard time pretending that they
want to strengthen Social Security, not dismantle it. At one of Senator Rick
Santorum's recent town-hall meetings promoting privatization, college
Republicans began chanting, "Hey hey, ho ho, Social Security's got to
go."
But before the anti-privatization forces assume that winning
the rational arguments is enough, they need to read Mr. Frank.
The message of Mr. Frank's book is that the right has been
able to win elections, despite the fact that its economic policies hurt
workers, by portraying itself as the defender of mainstream values against a
malevolent cultural elite. The right "mobilizes voters with explosive
social issues, summoning public outrage ... which it then marries to
pro-business economic policies. Cultural anger is marshaled to achieve economic
ends."
In Mr. Frank's view, this is a confidence trick: politicians
like Mr. Santorum trumpet their defense of traditional values, but their true
loyalty is to elitist economic policies. "Vote to stop abortion; receive a
rollback in capital gains taxes. ... Vote to stand tall against terrorists;
receive Social Security privatization." But it keeps working.
And this week we saw Mr. Frank's thesis acted out so crudely
that it was as if someone had deliberately staged it. The right wants to
dismantle Social Security, a successful program that is a pillar of stability
for working Americans. AARP stands in the way. So without a moment's
hesitation, the usual suspects declared that this organization of staid seniors
is actually an anti-soldier, pro-gay-marriage leftist front.
[Update 14 June 2014] Another column by Mr Krugman, along the same lines:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/13/opinion/paul-krugman-eric-cantor-and-the-death-of-a-movement.html?src=me&ref=general
ReplyDeleteI'm not enamored with Thomas Frank's work. Having been born and raised in the state with my family having lived there since 1859, I can paint a different picture:
Kansas, since before the Civil War, had two populations - a Yankee one the settled from the northern states and constituted the state's middle class of shopkeepers, and a Southern working class.
Since WW II, the children of the Yankees went to college and never came back, but to visit. Now there is an aged remnant of this group now mostly in assisted living or nursing homes. Kansas is now a Bible-thumping Southern state, with customs from the South, like pecan pie bake-offs. I've seen my hometown's religious makeup go from mainline Protestant to now almost solely Evangelical.
That is the real reason how Kansas got to be the way it is.
Thank you, sir, for your quite substantive reply.
DeleteI have enough respect for Mr. Frank to imagine that he too would be interested in what you have said.
Yet from my outsider/kibbitzer perspective, you and Thomas Frank share more insights than disagreements.
Have you read The Baffler No. 21? It has a lot to say about how the conservative movement got to be so counterfactual.
ReplyDeleteI mention this because of your appreciation of Mr Frank; I never realized he edited that "aperiodical" until I read your bit here.
My first visit to yr site; sorry I messed it up w/ so many comments.