11-17-2016, 06:14 PM
(11-17-2016, 05:50 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: Hey Bell,
I want your perspective on something.
Someone who I speak with in another community posted this months ago along with a prediction of a Trump Victory. She said that the democrats lost touch with blue collar workers and they would pay the price this election. She takes it even further by claiming that the left doesn't really care about poor people:
While this may seem controversial, I swear it is absolutely the case that as a general rule people adhering to either party, or more generically Liberals and Conservatives, do not care about poor people. Poor people here means the economically distressed, the lower classes, and in general the victims of economic changes. When I say that they do not care for poor people I am not suggesting EVERY individual is careless, but that culturally both communities of political thought do not care about poor people outside of a very selective set of circumstances.
Tell me if this line would sound familiar:
Those people are in that position because of their lazy and repugnant values/culture, and they are just in general dumb and its hard to help people like that. What can you do for these people? They would rather be what they are than be reformed.
Now if you said that in the context of a discussion of urban poverty, you would most likely be approximating the position held by most Republicans about those people. And by those people we almost inevitably are talking about the Black Urban population. Obviously every pious Liberal would foam at the mouth at the mere suggestions of these words applying to the Urban Poor. It is pointed out as a gross, bigoted characterization, and rightly so one would be correct in assuming that this characterization exists to negate the more Republican loyal people from any perceived obligation to have solidarity with their fellow countryman in economic distress. One might also accuse the Republicans of applying a "I got mine jack!" mentality.
However, ask the general Liberal public about the Rural poor, or the Rust belt poor and you will inevitably hear a shrugging away of their plight. That population is mostly of White-European ethnic background and is often characterized as rednecks or hicks. Such a person will likely say more or less the same thing, perhaps in nicer words, maybe something more like "If people refuse to learn, refuse to go to school, and expect their jobs to remain static, they are deluded... I do not care if you think that is "arrogant" that is the truth." The equation remains the same, the fundamental perception of the more Democratically aligned is that THAT community of poor people deserve their fate, much as Republican aligned people will argue is the case for the Urban poor. References may also arise to the book Whats the Matter with Kansas even if the person making the reference has never read the book. In general the Democrat will say "They cling to the God and Guns!" or some other dispersing comment, but in the end he or she to is just saying "... Well we can't help them, their stupid and inferior and cannot be helped!"
Both political tribes will of course never acknowledge this. Both will pledge that they do care for the poor, but in terms of solidarity with those whom suffer economic distress their solidarity is largely contingent upon tribal loyalties or a transactional relationship with solidarity. As in "I will help you but only if you do." Both engage in rationalizations, the exact SAME rationalization, for why they feel no obligation to do anything about poverty. Or they selectively chose to only care about poverty in the context of tribalistic political allegiances. Democrats focus almost exclusively on the Urban poor and Republicans often try and attack any attempts to help that population. Here though Democrats get more of the label of Hypocrite since in theory the Left is supposed to be IN GENERAL in Solidarity with the poor, Conservatives get a degree of a pass because they have not made it a point to campaign on such an idea.
In this, Liberals and Lefties deserve much HARSHER criticism for their slights against poor peoples because in theory they are the ones whom claim to be looking out for the poor, yet in America the political party is not interested in general in poverty and is fairly hostile to the rural poor. As are its members and individual meat space dwelling voters and adherents. Conservatives to a degree get a pass because they have never pledged solidarity with the poor, they have not made a promise and then broken it. In conclusion, both political camps engage in a critical lack of empathy but I would say it is worse when Liberals do it because it is them not living up to their claims about themselves in general.
None of this makes any sense because I have not heard a single person from either party make suggestions that just apply to one part of the country.
I have never heard a Republican support helping the rural poor any more than the urban poor, and I have never heard a democrat say we need programs to help the poor urban poor but not the rural poor.
If I am wrong please give me some examples. Don't Republicans want to cut social programs for ALL parts of the country including the rural areas? Don't Democrats say that ALL poor people need more help?
