Posted on 01/31/2016 3:58:11 PM PST by Elderberry
It is by now a truism that Donald Trump poses a knotty conundrum for his competitors in the Republican Party, who can attack him and his retrograde sentiments only at the cost of alienating Trump's supporters, whose votes they need to win.
Less obvious, or at least less discussed, is the parallel conundrum Trump poses for self-styled progressives. How far can they go in decrying Trump's support among white blue-collar workers without seeming to write off what was once regarded as a core progressive constituency?
It could be argued that the writing-off has already occurred. There has long been a shift in left-liberal politics away from any broad identification with "the workers" - narrowly conceived as white, male and straight - in favor of specific social and environmental issues that pose no threat to existing economic structures. In that regard, Trump's blue-collar support might be viewed as a vindication: Workers of the world, take a hike. We never liked you much anyway.
Still, there remains the vexing question of how a billionaire demagogue can win the loyalty of the very people whose class interests he opposes. What possible sense can we make of blue-collar workers of any age, gender or race supporting a man whose very existence rests on their exploitation and, increasingly, on their obsolescence? It boggles the mind, or so we like to pretend.
The usual answers - fear of terrorism, resentment of immigrants, disgust with the Washington establishment - are sound enough, but they don't go very deep. It's as if the impossibility of depth were a given.
Imperialists and vivisectionists used to argue whether their victims had souls. The argument of the 2016 presidential campaign seems to be whether white blue-collar workers do.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Color me a cynic.
I don't believe any of them anymore.
I am a white male. I am a member of a minority where I work.
So much so, that when the time comes for OT, we’ll jokingly look around and say, “hey, they’re working the white guys today.”
25 years ago, a meat-packer could raise a family on what he made. No longer. Why?
IT workers like myself have to worry about lower-paid immigrants taking our jobs despite laws about such. Why?
Why, because the sellouts in both parties have shown they would rather screw us over rather than keep the playing field level. But duh, I'm a racist moron for applauding that.
I don't blame you: a healthy skepticism of politicians and government agencies motivated the Framers to write a Constitution.
Most people would like to see manufacturing jobs come back. A service economy is very fragile. And many of the job are low paying.
Because we want to tear the heads off of the type of people named Garret that write for the LA Times.
After all its not being followed anymore.
I sure didn't get any insight out of this article.
Doesn’t everyone except liberal pukes want security and income?
Not a hard equation to solve.
I hear you. :-)
The proletariat has always been looked upon as dull and they must be led by the party cadre, in every facet of forming and implementing the Socialist state.
what are progressives?
A progessive is so soft, they could not survive on their own with out assistance. They need the constant reassurance of accpetance.
In an odd twist, they are easily convinced of policies not in their best interest and go to the ends of the earth to convince others of the same.
Observed at 10,000 ft. they appear to have completely lost their sense of self presevation.
Progressive? Hardly. They are human betas trying to defeat alphas through indoctrination and peer pressure.
It only ends one way.
Go Trump Go
There was a time in America that rising wages and a growing economy where the USA was self sufficient was considered a good thing, it was called property. Now that situation is considered an economic crises solved only by importing millions of wage slaves and off shoring as much a possible.
Fixed.
Reagan did not write them off, neither did Nixon.
In fact a good number of unions endorsed Nixon in 1972
and the AFL-CIO did not endorse either Nixon or McGovern.
President Nixon was on the verge of realigning the political map in 1972. The blue collar union members and yes even a good number of the union leaders had an intense dislike for McGovern and his crew. I am convinced that the real reason the MSM and the Left pushed and pushed on Watergate was to end that realignment.
Only a radical Leftist would think that Trump's interests and the interests of American workers diverge. Workers need for the US to have a robust private sector economy, both to employ them, and to generate the tax revenues that keep their cities from collapsing. They understand that Trump wants the US economy to prosper.
What is Trump's personal fortune based on? Casinos, resorts, hotels, golf courses -- things that need CUSTOMERS with SPARE MONEY TO SPEND. His customers are not the super rich -- THEY go off to Davos, Monaco, and other haunts of the super rich.
Trump's customers are the middle class, small business owners, and, yes, the working class too. If they don't have spare spending money, then Trump's businesses will fail.
You can’t have a middle class if you keep kicking them in the gut. No middle class, no American dream.
Reagan left office in 1988 [Jan 89]. That was 26 years ago.
And that, in a very few words, is the sum of Trump's campaign. His supporters have no-one else to turn to. Both parties have forsaken the working classes. The vulgar lumpenproletariat. They both detest them, and are working to reduce them to right-less serfs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.