12 ms·

My disagreement with the placement of "Strangers in Their Own Land" is basically that it really is well loved by Mother Jones[1], NYT[2], etc. but not at all li

My disagreement with the placement of "Strangers in Their Own Land" is basically that it really is well loved by Mother Jones[1], NYT[2], etc. but not at all liked by the people it claims to report on[3]. I guess if you hold liberal beliefs and want some reinforcement, then its a good book, but I would think you probably want to read books by people who actually are the people being talked about. 1) http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/08/trump-white-blue-collar-supporters http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/08/trump-white-blue... 2) http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/books/review/strangers-in-their-own-land-arlie-russell-hochschild.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/books/review/strangers-in-... 3) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/book-party/wp/2016/09/01/a-berkeley-sociologist-made-some-tea-party-friends-and-wrote-a-condescending-book-about-them/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/book-party/wp/2016/09/01...

crucini 10y ago
Can you recommend an alternative?
- redthrowaway 10y ago
  Hillbilly Elegy is excellent and touches on some of the points, but really just read conservatives. We're not exactly shy about what we don't like about modern liberalism. Go peruse the pages of National Review or Commentary Magazine.
  - TillE 10y ago
    Didn't both of those publications vigorously oppose Trump? The "conservative intellectual" niche may be the most politically irrelevant group in the country.
    - redthrowaway 10y ago
      >Didn't both of those publications vigorously oppose Trump? Yes. >The "conservative intellectual" niche may be the most politically irrelevant group in the country. Trump won the Presidency, not the Movement. The rest of the GOP, though shell-shocked, has not suddenly ditched conservatism and embraced Trumpism. The vast majority of the GOP members of the House and Senate, and those in state governments, are conservative, not Trumpist. Conservatives, not just Republicans, have far more power in the US right now than at any point in recent memory. And thankfully, the Founding Fathers, sharp blokes that they were, crafted a system of checks and balances. I suspect we'll hear fewer cries of "obstruction!" when Congress blocks President Trump's policies than we did for Obama's.
      - sn9 10y ago
        You're conflating politicians with voters. Most GOP voters are not conservative true believers. The fact that Trump won the GOP nomination is proof enough of that.
        redthrowaway 10y ago
        That's certainly true, and you'll see Republicans pass some legislation they don't want to. But they're not going to rubber-stamp policies they find abhorrent. I suspect the trillion-dollar infrastructure spend will happen. But the "Muslim registry", and similar illiberal proposals, will not.
        nl 10y ago
        How do you see that aligning even slightly with your earlier statement about not passing Obama agenda because it wasn't aligned with conservative beliefs? How can a trillion dollars infrastructure spend under Trump and yet a health care plan that would save money be blocked by under Obama? I applaud your constructive approach in this conversation BTW. And I hope you are right about blocking Trumps craziness.
        redthrowaway 10y ago
        I suspect Congressional Republicans will pass Trump's infrastructure plan because they're shell shocked and not quite sure what their base demands of them. It's not an ideological capitulation, but rather a defensive retreating into their shell while they figure out where they stand. Was Trump really a denunciation of the Conservative Movement, or just a well-known figure who eked out an EC victory against a detested and uninspiring opponent? >a health care plan that would save money be blocked by under Obama? Which plan was this? Obamacare was a massive expenditure. If you're talking about proposals to improve it, why would Republicans try to fix a program they thought was ill-conceived and detestable in the first place? They now have the opportunity to repeal and replace Obamacare whole cloth. Let's see what they do with it. >I applaud your constructive approach in this conversation BTW. Thanks. I'm trying to be civil, hopefully with some success. I realize SV types aren't a natural audience for conservative views, but I think HN is a pretty good forum for people to discuss opposing views rationally and civilly. >And I hope you are right about blocking Trumps craziness. You and me both. I'm more hopeful than optimistic, at least in the first year while Congressional Republicans find their legs. My appraisal is that they'll probably pass some legislation that's anathemic to conservatives, but they'll stop short of endorsing illiberalism. There's a personal, moral difference between doing things you think are wrong and doing things you think are Wrong, and the latter will remind Republicans of who they are and what they believe.
  - malz 10y ago
    The question that Strangers tries to answer is: why do working-class whites vote Republican? The National Review doesn't answer that, it tells me how conservative elites think. I'm happy to read a primary source by someone in the working class but I haven't found it.
    - redthrowaway 10y ago
      First, read Hillbilly Elegy. It's not directly about politics, but Vance is a working-class man who came from a home marked by substance abuse and every other kind of dysfunction you can imagine to become a Yale law graduate who works at an SV VC. It's at times tragic, at others hilarious, but it's always compelling and insightful. And it's hailed by conservatives, from humble backgrounds and rich, as an essential compendium when it comes to understanding the Trump phenomenon. I can't recommend a primary source that answers your question, as I've yet to find one. Vance aside, the white working class is not known for its prodigious literary output. But I found this article enlightening[1]. Granted, I'm a middle-class coastal professional, so my personal ability to discern its truth is limited. And the author injects a little too much of her own progressivism for my taste. But it passes the sniff test for me. [1]https://hbr.org/2016/11/what-so-many-people-dont-get-about-the-u-s-working-class https://hbr.org/2016/11/what-so-many-people-dont-get-about-t...
- protomyth 10y ago
  I did in an earlier thread[1], but that's the last book I read on the subject (more technical books in the last while). Its a broad set of beliefs that get classified in the same bucket and the US is a big area. I personally identify more with a writer from rural Missouri than one from New York City. I'm not a big Ann Coulter fan, but I would guess many on the left aren't big Bill Maher fans either, and I would put the two of them in the same category. 1) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12239123#12239625 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12239123#12239625
- lefstathiou 10y ago
  Free to Choose by Milton Friedman https://www.amazon.com/Free-Choose-Statement-Milton-Friedman/dp/0156334607 https://www.amazon.com/Free-Choose-Statement-Milton-Friedman... I'm not trying to be cute here btw.
anigbrowl 10y ago
not at all liked by the people it claims to report on That's rich considering the popularity of conservatives books with titles like 'Liberalism is a mental disease' and 'Liberal fascism.' How about Victoria (2014) by William S. Lind? There's a good conservative author for you. I would recommend everyone interested in politics to become familiar with his ideas.
- protomyth 10y ago
  I commenting on one book anigbrowl and not at all about the naming of others. It is a pretty common practice on political and business books of all stripes to go for the most provocative title. In fact, I am commenting on the contents, not the title. I have not read Victoria (2014) by William S. Lind, so I have no comment on that.
  - anigbrowl 10y ago
    The two books I mentioned were debated as much for their content as for the provocative title, though I might add that the use of a provocative title to maximize sales by manufacturing controversy is hardly something to be celebrated, but rather represents the decline of political discourse. Regardless, I don't think that unhappiness of a work's subject with the portrayal therein necessarily carries any weight. Demonstrable inaccuracy would be a valid critique, but portraits can be both truthful and unflattering.
    - protomyth 10y ago
      "The two books I mentioned were debated as much for their content as for the provocative title, though I might add that the use of a provocative title to maximize sales by manufacturing controversy is hardly something to be celebrated, but rather represents the decline of political discourse." I also notice that I didn't say if I agreed or disagreed with the practice, nor have I read either book. Marketing is quite a nasty subject in its own right. "Regardless, I don't think that unhappiness of a work's subject with the portrayal therein necessarily carries any weight. Demonstrable inaccuracy would be a valid critique, but portraits can be both truthful and unflattering." raisspen found a nice review that points out the flaws https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13162277 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13162277
haliax 10y ago
I'm about 25% of the way through Strangers. The negative review you've given seems to be a content-free screed: most of what the writer criticizes is fairly innocuous phrasing (e.g. "my Tea Party friends" rather than "my friends"). The only substantive point is the claim that she lumps people into overly broad categories, but honestly, I've yet to see that. Do you have any sources that dislike the book and point out flaws in her analysis?
- protomyth 10y ago
  I guess if you considered the link I provided a "content-free screed" then I'm not sure what to say. Your example was not a good characterization of the review.
  - CalChris 10y ago
    You didn't engage the content of the book. You just said you didn't like it because liberals did. That's content free. The phrase that comes to mind is epistemic closure. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemic_closure https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemic_closure You will only accept a description of your reality from inside of your reality. Contrast that with the author who actually moved to Louisiana and lived there to find out what they think. Advantage the author.
    - protomyth 10y ago
      > You didn't engage the content of the book. You just said you didn't like it because liberals did. That's content free. No, I think its a poor choice when you are trying to tell the story of a people so that you can gain an understanding of them and they don't like or agree with the book, but their opposite number does and sees it as a revelation. Living among the natives to write a book is an old ploy that has been done poorly for a long time, but since I live here full time, clocking hours isn't really part of my argument. Confirmation bias would be a nice way to put it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
      - 10y ago
raisspen 10y ago
I have to agree that it isn't the quintessential book to understanding the right. It starts off with good intentions, but she misses a few things, most likely as a result of not being able to escape her bias. I found the following review something to keep in mind if you do read the book. http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2016/09/30/book-review-strangers-in-their-own-land-anger-and-mourning-on-the-american-right/#94b9cd27096a http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2016/09/30/book-revie...
- protomyth 10y ago
  Thank you, I just couldn't find the words myself but "couldn't escape her bias" is a perfect phrasing of what happened.

crucini 10y ago

Can you recommend an alternative?

redthrowaway 10y ago
Hillbilly Elegy is excellent and touches on some of the points, but really just read conservatives. We're not exactly shy about what we don't like about modern liberalism. Go peruse the pages of National Review or Commentary Magazine.
- TillE 10y ago
  Didn't both of those publications vigorously oppose Trump? The "conservative intellectual" niche may be the most politically irrelevant group in the country.
  - redthrowaway 10y ago
    >Didn't both of those publications vigorously oppose Trump? Yes. >The "conservative intellectual" niche may be the most politically irrelevant group in the country. Trump won the Presidency, not the Movement. The rest of the GOP, though shell-shocked, has not suddenly ditched conservatism and embraced Trumpism. The vast majority of the GOP members of the House and Senate, and those in state governments, are conservative, not Trumpist. Conservatives, not just Republicans, have far more power in the US right now than at any point in recent memory. And thankfully, the Founding Fathers, sharp blokes that they were, crafted a system of checks and balances. I suspect we'll hear fewer cries of "obstruction!" when Congress blocks President Trump's policies than we did for Obama's.
    - sn9 10y ago
      You're conflating politicians with voters. Most GOP voters are not conservative true believers. The fact that Trump won the GOP nomination is proof enough of that.
      - redthrowaway 10y ago
        That's certainly true, and you'll see Republicans pass some legislation they don't want to. But they're not going to rubber-stamp policies they find abhorrent. I suspect the trillion-dollar infrastructure spend will happen. But the "Muslim registry", and similar illiberal proposals, will not.
        nl 10y ago
        How do you see that aligning even slightly with your earlier statement about not passing Obama agenda because it wasn't aligned with conservative beliefs? How can a trillion dollars infrastructure spend under Trump and yet a health care plan that would save money be blocked by under Obama? I applaud your constructive approach in this conversation BTW. And I hope you are right about blocking Trumps craziness.
        redthrowaway 10y ago
        I suspect Congressional Republicans will pass Trump's infrastructure plan because they're shell shocked and not quite sure what their base demands of them. It's not an ideological capitulation, but rather a defensive retreating into their shell while they figure out where they stand. Was Trump really a denunciation of the Conservative Movement, or just a well-known figure who eked out an EC victory against a detested and uninspiring opponent? >a health care plan that would save money be blocked by under Obama? Which plan was this? Obamacare was a massive expenditure. If you're talking about proposals to improve it, why would Republicans try to fix a program they thought was ill-conceived and detestable in the first place? They now have the opportunity to repeal and replace Obamacare whole cloth. Let's see what they do with it. >I applaud your constructive approach in this conversation BTW. Thanks. I'm trying to be civil, hopefully with some success. I realize SV types aren't a natural audience for conservative views, but I think HN is a pretty good forum for people to discuss opposing views rationally and civilly. >And I hope you are right about blocking Trumps craziness. You and me both. I'm more hopeful than optimistic, at least in the first year while Congressional Republicans find their legs. My appraisal is that they'll probably pass some legislation that's anathemic to conservatives, but they'll stop short of endorsing illiberalism. There's a personal, moral difference between doing things you think are wrong and doing things you think are Wrong, and the latter will remind Republicans of who they are and what they believe.
- malz 10y ago
  The question that Strangers tries to answer is: why do working-class whites vote Republican? The National Review doesn't answer that, it tells me how conservative elites think. I'm happy to read a primary source by someone in the working class but I haven't found it.
  - redthrowaway 10y ago
    First, read Hillbilly Elegy. It's not directly about politics, but Vance is a working-class man who came from a home marked by substance abuse and every other kind of dysfunction you can imagine to become a Yale law graduate who works at an SV VC. It's at times tragic, at others hilarious, but it's always compelling and insightful. And it's hailed by conservatives, from humble backgrounds and rich, as an essential compendium when it comes to understanding the Trump phenomenon. I can't recommend a primary source that answers your question, as I've yet to find one. Vance aside, the white working class is not known for its prodigious literary output. But I found this article enlightening[1]. Granted, I'm a middle-class coastal professional, so my personal ability to discern its truth is limited. And the author injects a little too much of her own progressivism for my taste. But it passes the sniff test for me. [1]https://hbr.org/2016/11/what-so-many-people-dont-get-about-the-u-s-working-class https://hbr.org/2016/11/what-so-many-people-dont-get-about-t...
protomyth 10y ago
I did in an earlier thread[1], but that's the last book I read on the subject (more technical books in the last while). Its a broad set of beliefs that get classified in the same bucket and the US is a big area. I personally identify more with a writer from rural Missouri than one from New York City. I'm not a big Ann Coulter fan, but I would guess many on the left aren't big Bill Maher fans either, and I would put the two of them in the same category. 1) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12239123#12239625 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12239123#12239625
lefstathiou 10y ago
Free to Choose by Milton Friedman https://www.amazon.com/Free-Choose-Statement-Milton-Friedman/dp/0156334607 https://www.amazon.com/Free-Choose-Statement-Milton-Friedman... I'm not trying to be cute here btw.

anigbrowl 10y ago

not at all liked by the people it claims to report on That's rich considering the popularity of conservatives books with titles like 'Liberalism is a mental disease' and 'Liberal fascism.' How about Victoria (2014) by William S. Lind? There's a good conservative author for you. I would recommend everyone interested in politics to become familiar with his ideas.

protomyth 10y ago
I commenting on one book anigbrowl and not at all about the naming of others. It is a pretty common practice on political and business books of all stripes to go for the most provocative title. In fact, I am commenting on the contents, not the title. I have not read Victoria (2014) by William S. Lind, so I have no comment on that.
- anigbrowl 10y ago
  The two books I mentioned were debated as much for their content as for the provocative title, though I might add that the use of a provocative title to maximize sales by manufacturing controversy is hardly something to be celebrated, but rather represents the decline of political discourse. Regardless, I don't think that unhappiness of a work's subject with the portrayal therein necessarily carries any weight. Demonstrable inaccuracy would be a valid critique, but portraits can be both truthful and unflattering.
  - protomyth 10y ago
    "The two books I mentioned were debated as much for their content as for the provocative title, though I might add that the use of a provocative title to maximize sales by manufacturing controversy is hardly something to be celebrated, but rather represents the decline of political discourse." I also notice that I didn't say if I agreed or disagreed with the practice, nor have I read either book. Marketing is quite a nasty subject in its own right. "Regardless, I don't think that unhappiness of a work's subject with the portrayal therein necessarily carries any weight. Demonstrable inaccuracy would be a valid critique, but portraits can be both truthful and unflattering." raisspen found a nice review that points out the flaws https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13162277 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13162277

haliax 10y ago

I'm about 25% of the way through Strangers. The negative review you've given seems to be a content-free screed: most of what the writer criticizes is fairly innocuous phrasing (e.g. "my Tea Party friends" rather than "my friends"). The only substantive point is the claim that she lumps people into overly broad categories, but honestly, I've yet to see that. Do you have any sources that dislike the book and point out flaws in her analysis?

protomyth 10y ago
I guess if you considered the link I provided a "content-free screed" then I'm not sure what to say. Your example was not a good characterization of the review.
- CalChris 10y ago
  You didn't engage the content of the book. You just said you didn't like it because liberals did. That's content free. The phrase that comes to mind is epistemic closure. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemic_closure https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemic_closure You will only accept a description of your reality from inside of your reality. Contrast that with the author who actually moved to Louisiana and lived there to find out what they think. Advantage the author.
  - protomyth 10y ago
    > You didn't engage the content of the book. You just said you didn't like it because liberals did. That's content free. No, I think its a poor choice when you are trying to tell the story of a people so that you can gain an understanding of them and they don't like or agree with the book, but their opposite number does and sees it as a revelation. Living among the natives to write a book is an old ploy that has been done poorly for a long time, but since I live here full time, clocking hours isn't really part of my argument. Confirmation bias would be a nice way to put it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
    - 10y ago

raisspen 10y ago

I have to agree that it isn't the quintessential book to understanding the right. It starts off with good intentions, but she misses a few things, most likely as a result of not being able to escape her bias. I found the following review something to keep in mind if you do read the book. http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2016/09/30/book-review-strangers-in-their-own-land-anger-and-mourning-on-the-american-right/#94b9cd27096a http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2016/09/30/book-revie...

protomyth 10y ago
Thank you, I just couldn't find the words myself but "couldn't escape her bias" is a perfect phrasing of what happened.