City Journal
 
 
 
Trumping the Elites
The American people said “no” to oligarchy  and ruling classes.  
_Joel Kotkin_ (http://www.city-journal.org/contributor/joel-kotkin_107) 
November 9, 2016
 
 
 
 
 
She had it all—the pliant media, the tech oligarchs, Wall Street, the  
property moguls, the academics, and the all-around “smart people.” What Hillary 
 Clinton didn’t have was flyover country, the economic “leftovers,” the 
small  towns, the unhipstered suburbs, and other unfashionable places. As 
Thomas Frank  has _noted_ 
(https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/06/republicans-and-democrats-fail-blue-collar-america)
 , Democrats have gone  “
from being the party of Decatur to the party of Martha’s Vineyard.” No  
surprise, then, that working- and middle-class voters went for Donald Trump 
and  helped him break through in states—Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa—that have 
usually  gone blue in recent presidential elections. 
Trump seized on the widespread sense that American life was destined to  
get worse from generation to generation. Americans wanted opportunity for the  
next generation, not a managed decline. Democrats—and I was one for over 40 
 years—once offered this to the working and middle classes that have now 
deserted  the party. 
More than anything, the Trump vote says “no” to oligarchies and ruling  
classes that not only hoard their wealth but also are convinced that they are  
morally superior. Trump may be as ostentatious as anyone in flaunting his 
own  wealth, but compared with his garishness, the hypocrisy of the elites is 
 infinitely worse. It’s one thing to be told that decline and future 
stagnation  are your lot by, say, selfless monks wearing hair shirts or tough 
party cadres  who live, like the pre-revolutionary Bolsheviks, with the common 
people. It’s  quite another, when the message comes from trustafarians 
writing for the New  York Times or_people_ 
(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3876534/Americans-scared-clowns-Obamacare-climate-change-new-polls-show.htm
l)  who fly their own planes and own  numerous homes. 
Concern about climate change galvanized the elites—Wall Street,  Hollywood, 
Silicon Valley—but left Main Street cold. Wall Street placed its bets  on 
Clinton and, like many blocs within the new “progressive” constituency, 
_reacted with shock_ 
(http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-wallstreet-parties-idUSKBN1332UG)
  that the American people hadn’t bought  in to their 
investment. 
The map tells all. Clinton won by large margins in the Northeast and on  
the West Coast, and in states—Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada—where Trump’s  
intemperate comments roused Latino voters. But outside of Illinois, a whole 
 swath of the country, from the hills of Appalachia to the fringes of the  
Rockies, went solidly for Trump. 
Why would that be? Start with basic economics. The economy in the  nation’s 
interior relies on producing things—an endeavor that the coasts have  
largely abandoned. Energy, manufacturing, and agriculture still define these  
economies, and employ many white-collar as well as blue-collar workers. If  you 
_live_ (http://www.wsj.com/articles/stranded-carbon-democrats-1401837682)  
in Texas and Oklahoma,  “decarbonization” is a much less attractive concept 
than it might seem in  Manhattan or San Francisco. Trump swept the areas 
that keep the lights on and  the motors turning—Ohio, Oklahoma, Louisiana, 
Texas, Wyoming, Idaho, Louisiana,  and especially West Virginia, where he won 
by a remarkable 68 to 27  margin.  
Among other things, the media missed the fact that the middle of the  
country and the South continue to gain population. The “blue” model, for the  
most part, expels people, while, in contrast, the “red” one appeals,  
particularly to middle- and working-class families. Texas and Florida are now  
our 
second and third most-populous states. Once the pacesetter, New York is a  
mere shadow of itself as a determiner of elections, and California, no longer 
 growing quicker than the rest of the country, has perched itself on the 
Left  fringe, with obvious bad ramifications—high housing and energy bills, 
depressed  blue-collar sectors—for middle-aged, middle-class families. 
In contrast, Trump’s America presents an alternative model, which honors  
small enterprise, allows housing to meet demand, and does not see the United  
States as part of a global system to be managed. That there are xenophobic, 
and  even racist, elements in the Trumpian ranks is undeniable—but for most 
 Americans, the true “deplorables” have been the self-appointed regulators 
and  financial masters who seem determined to halt their upward progress, 
and that of  their children. If our governing elites want to know how Trump 
happened, they  need only look in the mirror.

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • [RC] Th... BILROJ via Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community

Reply via email to