The great divide of US politics

[Heracles 417]

The great divide of US politics

* Linda Grant

* September 8, 2008

A PHOTOSHOPPED picture of Sarah Palin has been doing the rounds for the past few days; it shows her in a stars-and-stripes bikini toting a rifle — patriotism, hunting and cheesecake combined in one image.

Soft porn for rednecks. Expect to see it pinned to the wall in every service station in Texas and tacked to the dash of every long-haul truck.

But this cartoon-like depiction of Palin smothers what we need to understand about why she appeals to American voters and why elections have been so deadlocked for the past decade, as if there were two Americas doomed to lived on the same land mass under the same government, like hopelessly incompatible spouses.

A new novel, American Wife by Curtis Sittenfeld, published in the US last week, tells a fictionalised and thinly veiled story of Laura Bush, from small-town girl in the 1950s Midwest to school librarian to Republican bride to president's wife.

What you learn from the novel is that, like it or not, the American heartland is not so much a political ideology but an actual place with people living in it. Small-town Americans have values, and a lot of those values are good ones: neighbourliness, family life, a knowledge of the land and what grows in it. The other America they see on TV seems without ethics — crime, violence, drug addiction, pornography and prostitution — and they don't want any part of it.

So clear is the divide between big-city and small-town America that one American friend said to me: "These whitebread Republicans are like children — someone has to tell them what to do and what to think, they're incapable of independent ideas."

The conviction by the left that the right is stupid is one of the defining and least attractive characteristics of contemporary politics. Assuming that anyone who disagrees with you is too dim to get your point is not itself a particularly brainy way to win others over to the essential correctness of your views. But it is true that to small-town Republicans the world is not a complicated place, because they have seen so little of it.

I asked a sophisticated and well-travelled Republican why he voted the way he did. He described growing up "dirt poor" in a small town in northern California where joining the military was your sole ticket out; where the people in his family who depended on welfare stayed where they were and the ones who worked their fingers to the bone managed to make a better life for themselves. For him, joining the army led directly to an education. In fact, it led all the way to Princeton. But how, I asked him, could someone as intelligent as he is believe that George Bush was anything but a cretin?

Because, he explained, people in small towns don't trust intellectuals, particularly ones who appear to be sneering at them for their supposed stupidity. They admire a plain-speaking man. They always assumed Bush was a regular guy who could keep his thoughts concise.

So America is stuck. Two countries, irreconcilable, who never meet each other and don't want to. Who distrust each other at best, despise each other at worst. And who have no understanding of the other.

Reading Sittenfeld's thinly disguised account of Laura Bush and her upbringing, it was possible to see that the modest lives of her Midwestern characters both had dignity and made sense. But I only have to meet them in a novel, which I can snap shut as soon as I've finished it. Were I an east coast Democrat, which is the only kind of American I can ever imagine being, I would have no objection to small-town Republicans — to their church-going and their hunting rifles and their flag-decked porches and their meatloaf with gravy. I could admire their intimacy with the wide prairie and the vast sky.

The problem is that when they're running the whole country, they want to take away abortion rights, drill for oil in Alaska (a Palin policy), ignore climate change and start unwinnable wars. With the small-town Republican mindset in charge, the rest of America and the rest of the world is forced to live by small-town values, which aren't much help when you're trying to decide what, if anything, can be done about Iranian nuclear ambitions or, more humbly, workplace date rape.

Can America survive another photo-finish election which the Republicans win, or will it be out-and-out war between the red and the blue states? Perhaps only small-town America itself can prevent it, such as the dental nurse who asked how the mother of five kids, one with Down syndrome, could hold down a full-time job, one step from running the United States. Sarah Palin, bad mom. That might finish her.

GUARDIAN

[Heracles 417]

I find this article to be spot on and believe, from my observations, has a lot to do with the United States problems.

The one thing about Australia is the we are all united. No one living in a city sits there and looks down at anyone living in the country or in a small town. Whereas the same cannot be said for the US.

[IAMX 3,055]

Because, he explained, people in small towns don't trust intellectuals, particularly ones who appear to be sneering at them for their supposed stupidity. They admire a plain-speaking man. They always assumed Bush was a regular guy who could keep his thoughts concise.

I speak very plainly when I say, "get a brain, morans".

Seriously though, "intellectuals", or so they call them, are often humbled early on and are able to take a bit of self-criticism to be a so-called intellectual. Stupid people can't take criticism, and make easy and convenient excuses for doing so. So no choice but them to shove their stupidity back in their face because of the adverse effect it has unto the rest of the population.

Also, the irony is the Republicans they elect are semi-intellectuals. As in, they talk plainly, then smartly take advantage of these stupid people and their gullibility. Especially of voting for moral values over practical ones.

Edited September 8, 2008 by SRVT

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I do find it interesting that accusations of "elitism" come almost exclusively from the Republican side of the fence. Given that pretty much everyone in government is a cut above the guy on the street (financially at any rate) its amazing to me that they even have the gall to say it.

I certainly agree that its easier for the Republicans to appeal to people on the basis of moral stands on social issues as opposed to specific economic policies for example, and there is certainly something to be said for small town Americans not being particularly well travelled. Ignorance does play a part of that of course (it still amazes me that people could seriously have voted for Bush in the last election when the man is totally unrepresentative of the interests of most Americans) but certainly it is fair to say that there is a bit of a disconnect between local and national politics.

From what I understand its the Democrats who are most aligned with the interests of the working class - despite the large number of cigar chomping multi-millionaires in their ranks. If anything its amazing that they don't win more often.

[Jenn! 918]

It's not always the left saying that the right is stupid, is it? What about that adage saying that if you're not a Republican by 40 you have no head?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It's not always the left saying that the right is stupid, is it? What about that adage saying that if you're not a Republican by 40 you have no head?

Naturally - simplifications and distortions abound in these articles.

[Heracles 417]

Because, he explained, people in small towns don't trust intellectuals, particularly ones who appear to be sneering at them for their supposed stupidity. They admire a plain-speaking man. They always assumed Bush was a regular guy who could keep his thoughts concise.

I speak very plainly when I say, "get a brain, morans".

Seriously though, "intellectuals", or so they call them, are often humbled early on and are able to take a bit of self-criticism to be a so-called intellectual. Stupid people can't take criticism, and make easy and convenient excuses for doing so. So no choice but them to shove their stupidity back in their face because of the adverse effect it has unto the rest of the population.

Also, the irony is the Republicans they elect are semi-intellectuals. As in, they talk plainly, then smartly take advantage of these stupid people and their gullibility. Especially of voting for moral values over practical ones.

Funny you say that because from my experience most extremely liberal Americans, who are usually well educated at ivy league schools, I have spoken to behave like that.

[IAMX 3,055]

Because, he explained, people in small towns don't trust intellectuals, particularly ones who appear to be sneering at them for their supposed stupidity. They admire a plain-speaking man. They always assumed Bush was a regular guy who could keep his thoughts concise.

I speak very plainly when I say, "get a brain, morans".

Seriously though, "intellectuals", or so they call them, are often humbled early on and are able to take a bit of self-criticism to be a so-called intellectual. Stupid people can't take criticism, and make easy and convenient excuses for doing so. So no choice but them to shove their stupidity back in their face because of the adverse effect it has unto the rest of the population.

Also, the irony is the Republicans they elect are semi-intellectuals. As in, they talk plainly, then smartly take advantage of these stupid people and their gullibility. Especially of voting for moral values over practical ones.

Funny you say that because from my experience most extremely liberal Americans, who are usually well educated at ivy league schools, I have spoken to behave like that.

Being around the Bay Area, we have no "Ivy League schools".

However, George W. Bush is an Ivy League grad. Damn liberals.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Because, he explained, people in small towns don't trust intellectuals, particularly ones who appear to be sneering at them for their supposed stupidity. They admire a plain-speaking man. They always assumed Bush was a regular guy who could keep his thoughts concise.

I speak very plainly when I say, "get a brain, morans".

Seriously though, "intellectuals", or so they call them, are often humbled early on and are able to take a bit of self-criticism to be a so-called intellectual. Stupid people can't take criticism, and make easy and convenient excuses for doing so. So no choice but them to shove their stupidity back in their face because of the adverse effect it has unto the rest of the population.

Also, the irony is the Republicans they elect are semi-intellectuals. As in, they talk plainly, then smartly take advantage of these stupid people and their gullibility. Especially of voting for moral values over practical ones.

Funny you say that because from my experience most extremely liberal Americans, who are usually well educated at ivy league schools, I have spoken to behave like that.

Another one of your totally unfounded personal anecdotes?

Likely you've talked to one or two people, at most, who probably harped on about how he/she almost got into Yale/Princeton/Harvard. "Most extremely liberal Americans" - give me a break

George Bush went to Yale BTW. I guess that says something...

Edited September 8, 2008 by Paul Daniels

[Ban Hammer 14,291]

The great divide of US politics

* Linda Grant

* September 8, 2008

A PHOTOSHOPPED picture of Sarah Palin has been doing the rounds for the past few days; it shows her in a stars-and-stripes bikini toting a rifle — patriotism, hunting and cheesecake combined in one image.

GUARDIAN

there's just one small problem with that. it's not a rifle.

[MrsCat 6]

I speak very plainly when I say, "get a brain, morans".

The Moran family must be very insulted by that sign.

[HAL 9000 96]

People accusing broadly wanting to make observations about the divide that 'separates' us quite artificially. Interesting.

[alienlovechild 75]

A poorly written piece with apparently no research behind it. The Guardian knows more about the Mid-East than the American Mid-West.

The other America they see on TV seems without ethics — crime, violence, drug addiction, pornography and prostitution — and they don't want any part of it.

You mean urban liberals embrace crime, violence. . . ? All the above exists in Middle America and only the informed don't known it. The diference the smaller communities know their criminals better and are less likely to be forgiving. The writer apparently has no idea about the meth problem in America.

So clear is the divide between big-city and small-town America that one American friend said to me: "These whitebread Republicans are like children — someone has to tell them what to do and what to think, they're incapable of independent ideas."

That's the view of white liberals toward minority groups.

I asked a sophisticated and well-travelled Republican why he voted the way he did. He described growing up "dirt poor" in a small town in northern California where joining the military was your sole ticket out; where the people in his family who depended on welfare stayed where they were and the ones who worked their fingers to the bone managed to make a better life for themselves. For him, joining the army led directly to an education. In fact, it led all the way to Princeton. But how, I asked him, could someone as intelligent as he is believe that George Bush was anything but a cretin?

The writer found one educated Republican from a small town and seemed shocked. It was so rare to her that she had better chance of finding Bigfoot nearby in the bushes. The Republican party used to be seen the party of the rich but now the narrative has been reversed. By the way, historically voters with college degress voted Republican but you'd never know it from this article.

So America is stuck. Two countries, irreconcilable, who never meet each other and don't want to. Who distrust each other at best, despise each other at worst. And who have no understanding of the other.

Most the red state. blue state stuff comes form the Democrats. No Republican would refer his state as a "red" state except to avoid confusion.

Were I an east coast Democrat, which is the only kind of American I can ever imagine being, I would have no objection to small-town Republicans — to their church-going and their hunting rifles and their flag-decked porches and their meatloaf with gravy.

Dead wrong. Most coast liberals hate Middle America and Obama himself sees his opponents as people who cling to religion and guns as if that explains everything. Check out a few posts on http://www.bestplaces.net/ and you'll see most of the anger is directed toward conservatives than liberals.

The problem is that when they're running the whole country, they want to take away abortion rights, drill for oil in Alaska (a Palin policy), ignore climate change and start unwinnable wars. With the small-town Republican mindset in charge, the rest of America and the rest of the world is forced to live by small-town values, which aren't much help when you're trying to decide what, if anything, can be done about Iranian nuclear ambitions or, more humbly, workplace date rape.

Workplace date rape has never been mentioned as issue in the presidential campaign so it makes me wonder if the writer has been to America.

If the Democrats were smart they would try to really figure out what makes Middle America tick beyond the stereotypes. Assuming Republicans don't have sex or kids out of wedlock like Palin's daughter or that people are going to be shocked by that is a sign the Dems need to really do their homework but why study subhumans? Have Obama throw God into a few speeches and have a couple of flags in the crowd that will do it.

Edited September 8, 2008 by alienlovechild

[Heracles 417]

Another one of your totally unfounded personal anecdotes?

Likely you've talked to one or two people, at most, who probably harped on about how he/she almost got into Yale/Princeton/Harvard. "Most extremely liberal Americans" - give me a break

George Bush went to Yale BTW. I guess that says something...

Maybe I should have gone out and conducted a random survey, verified by an independent body, to satisfy what 'you' believe is grounds for a valid opinion. I'll get right on to that once you stop rhetorically rebutting anyone you disagree with.

Edited September 8, 2008 by Aficionado

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Another one of your totally unfounded personal anecdotes?

Likely you've talked to one or two people, at most, who probably harped on about how he/she almost got into Yale/Princeton/Harvard. "Most extremely liberal Americans" - give me a break

George Bush went to Yale BTW. I guess that says something...

Maybe I should have gone out and conducted a random survey, verified by an independent body, to satisfy what 'you' believe is grounds for a valid opinion. I'll get right on to that once you stop rhetorically rebutting anyone you disagree with.

Its more that the comment is so vague that extrapolating it to "Most" seems highly implausible (i.e. - you made it up).