Very astute analysis here, Travis. I would add that "the working class" is not a monolith. It is a huge swath of the populace with varying degrees of education, lived experiences, and economic success / security. To treat it as anything less than that is a mistake. It won't fit neatly into any single analytical formula as to what, really, it is or how *it thinks*. I think I'm in a pretty good position to make that assertion, since I've been a bone-deep member of it myself my entire life.
One thing I can tell you for sure is that working class people are not stupid in any greater numbers than any other economic group. They may have less formal education; they may not all be voracious "information consumers"; they may not pay attention to politics the way you or I or any of the Bulwark members here do. But many, many do pay attention. And if there's one thing they're really good at recognizing, it's condescension. You want to turn off a working-class voter, just give 'em even the slightest whiff of "I know what's better for you than you do." They are proud people, generally seeing themselves as what makes this country "run", and they are intolerant of attitudes that call that self-perception into question. As well they should be. Because while all of us have a role to play in the life and well-being of this country regardless of what "class" we belong to, they're not wrong.
I agree with everything you've said here. That's why I focused my comments more on informational literacy and lived experience vs selective stats and narratives. Even the college educated can very easily succumb to selectivity biases when doing their "research" on issues, and the way you hear so many of them talking about the economy being "good" is a perfect example of this. It's also why you'll find plenty of post-college people diving headfirst into the "crunchy-to-conspiracy" pipeline that starts with wanting to eat healthier and ends with anti-vaxxer conspiracy theories. Just because someone is college-educated and is smart in a single field does not make them better at information literacy more broadly. Humans are *rationalizing* creatures, not a rational creature. That's why I've seen post-college folks believe insane shit just like non-college people have.
Here's a perfect example of a "narrative" at work. I'm semi-retired, working 3 days a week in a small, family-owned tool and die shop. I'm the oldest guy there, even a few years older than the oldest of the brothers who own and run the place. One of the youngest guys on the floor is a young man of about 25 who's had a couple of other jobs before taking this one a couple years ago. He's not the sharpest tool in the shop in some ways, but he sure as hell isn't stupid by any means.
Some time ago after the Fed started its anti-inflation crusade, the kid said something to me one day about hoping he wasn't going to lose his job. I asked why in the world he was worried about that; the shop had lots of work and had been working overtime since before I'd started there nearly a year before. They'd been trying to hire more people for even longer than that with no success.
Turns out the kid (sorry, at my age anyone under 35 or so is a "kid") had been reading and listening to all the "recession" talk that was pretty much saturating the news at that point, and he was convinced a recession was on the way and that he'd probably get shown the door. At his age his "perspective" and lived experience regarding such things is quite limited, so I gave him the benefit of my much longer view. I told him anything was possible, but that if I were in his shoes, I wouldn't be quite so worried, especially considering the job situation he has, which is a pretty good one. He then spoke of his concerns about interest rates and the price of homes, since he hoped to be able to buy a small starter home soon.
It's true that at that time the housing market, especially in my state, had lost its frickin' mind, and mortgage rates were on the rise. I again gave him some perspective, having at his age experienced the hyper-inflation and, by today's standards, astronomical (14% at times) mortgage interest rates of the late 70s and early 80s. He was dumbfounded when I started by telling him that when I was his age I'd have "killed" to get a mortgage at 9 or 10%. I also spoke about how at some point the housing market would start to regain some sanity.
This kid's "smart" in most ways, but like all of us, his outlook on things is a result of the totality of his lived experiences, both educationally, "informationally" and "in the real world". And with his relatively short "experience" he was particularly vulnerable to the recession narrative then being promulgated in the mainstream media and the feelings of insecurity that comes from something like that.
We are all walking bundles of various biases, all influenced by the totality of our lived experiences. The insecurity this working-class kid felt was absolutely real, even if the underlying cause was a bit less than that. And that's where the "feelings don't matter, only the facts do" crowd gets it so wrong sometimes.
"We are all walking bundles of various biases, all influenced by the totality of our lived experiences. The insecurity this working-class kid felt was absolutely real, even if the underlying cause was a bit less than that. And that's where the 'feelings don't matter, only the facts do' crowd gets it so wrong sometimes."
I remember back in college just after 9/11, some of the most conspiratorially-minded people I met were hardcore left/liberal. This one guy in my International Conflict and Security class, who was as "crunchy" as one could imagine, was insistent that 9/11 was an inside job. A lot of his evidence was based on "common sense." One example was how slowly we were to scramble fighter jets to take out the planes. He didn't like the idea that perhaps the government wasn't prepared or was otherwise incompetent. He had a narrative in his mind that the government was super capable and competent with contingency plans galore, and that such a conspiracy could actually be kept a secret. Right, left, center, conservative, liberal... we're all just people and are capable of all of the same things, for better and for worse.
I had the same experience. The first *modern* conspiracy theories I came into contact with were the "9/11 Truthers" that came from the left. Then they became "the party of science" while being full to the brim with people who thought that "Big Pharma" secretly had the cure for cancer and that vaccines caused autism. I once told some of them (friends of mine) that there are whole meta studies out there that show that eating organic food does little to no difference for health, and that growing organic food leads to more deforestation because organic yields on farms need more acreage to be equivalent to synthetic farm acre-outputs by weight--even showing them these studies--and oh boy did I ever get pushback from "the party of science" lol.
I showed them the 9/11-Truther debunking stuff, I told them that the larger a conspiracy is the harder it is to contain the truth and that the 9/11 and "Big Pharma" and "chem trails" conspiracies would involve the cooperation of hundreds to thousands of people to contain the secrets, and that having worked for the government personally I knew how inefficient it was at even simple projects to prevent it from maintaining conspiracies the size of the ones they believed in. Did it matter? Not one bit. These people had their narratives in hand and weren't going to be moved by facts, logic, or evidence that countered their claims. Conspiracism is akin to religious zealotry. Even if you show people who take the bible literally that the sun came into existance before the earth did, they're still believe that a supernatural being created the earth before the sun (and all the other stars) because of narratives and zealotry.
Very astute analysis here, Travis. I would add that "the working class" is not a monolith. It is a huge swath of the populace with varying degrees of education, lived experiences, and economic success / security. To treat it as anything less than that is a mistake. It won't fit neatly into any single analytical formula as to what, really, it is or how *it thinks*. I think I'm in a pretty good position to make that assertion, since I've been a bone-deep member of it myself my entire life.
One thing I can tell you for sure is that working class people are not stupid in any greater numbers than any other economic group. They may have less formal education; they may not all be voracious "information consumers"; they may not pay attention to politics the way you or I or any of the Bulwark members here do. But many, many do pay attention. And if there's one thing they're really good at recognizing, it's condescension. You want to turn off a working-class voter, just give 'em even the slightest whiff of "I know what's better for you than you do." They are proud people, generally seeing themselves as what makes this country "run", and they are intolerant of attitudes that call that self-perception into question. As well they should be. Because while all of us have a role to play in the life and well-being of this country regardless of what "class" we belong to, they're not wrong.
To emphasize your point: the working class do more to make this country run than tbe managerial class.
I agree with everything you've said here. That's why I focused my comments more on informational literacy and lived experience vs selective stats and narratives. Even the college educated can very easily succumb to selectivity biases when doing their "research" on issues, and the way you hear so many of them talking about the economy being "good" is a perfect example of this. It's also why you'll find plenty of post-college people diving headfirst into the "crunchy-to-conspiracy" pipeline that starts with wanting to eat healthier and ends with anti-vaxxer conspiracy theories. Just because someone is college-educated and is smart in a single field does not make them better at information literacy more broadly. Humans are *rationalizing* creatures, not a rational creature. That's why I've seen post-college folks believe insane shit just like non-college people have.
RE: "selective stats and narratives"
Here's a perfect example of a "narrative" at work. I'm semi-retired, working 3 days a week in a small, family-owned tool and die shop. I'm the oldest guy there, even a few years older than the oldest of the brothers who own and run the place. One of the youngest guys on the floor is a young man of about 25 who's had a couple of other jobs before taking this one a couple years ago. He's not the sharpest tool in the shop in some ways, but he sure as hell isn't stupid by any means.
Some time ago after the Fed started its anti-inflation crusade, the kid said something to me one day about hoping he wasn't going to lose his job. I asked why in the world he was worried about that; the shop had lots of work and had been working overtime since before I'd started there nearly a year before. They'd been trying to hire more people for even longer than that with no success.
Turns out the kid (sorry, at my age anyone under 35 or so is a "kid") had been reading and listening to all the "recession" talk that was pretty much saturating the news at that point, and he was convinced a recession was on the way and that he'd probably get shown the door. At his age his "perspective" and lived experience regarding such things is quite limited, so I gave him the benefit of my much longer view. I told him anything was possible, but that if I were in his shoes, I wouldn't be quite so worried, especially considering the job situation he has, which is a pretty good one. He then spoke of his concerns about interest rates and the price of homes, since he hoped to be able to buy a small starter home soon.
It's true that at that time the housing market, especially in my state, had lost its frickin' mind, and mortgage rates were on the rise. I again gave him some perspective, having at his age experienced the hyper-inflation and, by today's standards, astronomical (14% at times) mortgage interest rates of the late 70s and early 80s. He was dumbfounded when I started by telling him that when I was his age I'd have "killed" to get a mortgage at 9 or 10%. I also spoke about how at some point the housing market would start to regain some sanity.
This kid's "smart" in most ways, but like all of us, his outlook on things is a result of the totality of his lived experiences, both educationally, "informationally" and "in the real world". And with his relatively short "experience" he was particularly vulnerable to the recession narrative then being promulgated in the mainstream media and the feelings of insecurity that comes from something like that.
We are all walking bundles of various biases, all influenced by the totality of our lived experiences. The insecurity this working-class kid felt was absolutely real, even if the underlying cause was a bit less than that. And that's where the "feelings don't matter, only the facts do" crowd gets it so wrong sometimes.
"We are all walking bundles of various biases, all influenced by the totality of our lived experiences. The insecurity this working-class kid felt was absolutely real, even if the underlying cause was a bit less than that. And that's where the 'feelings don't matter, only the facts do' crowd gets it so wrong sometimes."
Well said.
"the 'crunchy-to-conspiracy' pipeline"
Awesome.
I remember back in college just after 9/11, some of the most conspiratorially-minded people I met were hardcore left/liberal. This one guy in my International Conflict and Security class, who was as "crunchy" as one could imagine, was insistent that 9/11 was an inside job. A lot of his evidence was based on "common sense." One example was how slowly we were to scramble fighter jets to take out the planes. He didn't like the idea that perhaps the government wasn't prepared or was otherwise incompetent. He had a narrative in his mind that the government was super capable and competent with contingency plans galore, and that such a conspiracy could actually be kept a secret. Right, left, center, conservative, liberal... we're all just people and are capable of all of the same things, for better and for worse.
I had the same experience. The first *modern* conspiracy theories I came into contact with were the "9/11 Truthers" that came from the left. Then they became "the party of science" while being full to the brim with people who thought that "Big Pharma" secretly had the cure for cancer and that vaccines caused autism. I once told some of them (friends of mine) that there are whole meta studies out there that show that eating organic food does little to no difference for health, and that growing organic food leads to more deforestation because organic yields on farms need more acreage to be equivalent to synthetic farm acre-outputs by weight--even showing them these studies--and oh boy did I ever get pushback from "the party of science" lol.
I showed them the 9/11-Truther debunking stuff, I told them that the larger a conspiracy is the harder it is to contain the truth and that the 9/11 and "Big Pharma" and "chem trails" conspiracies would involve the cooperation of hundreds to thousands of people to contain the secrets, and that having worked for the government personally I knew how inefficient it was at even simple projects to prevent it from maintaining conspiracies the size of the ones they believed in. Did it matter? Not one bit. These people had their narratives in hand and weren't going to be moved by facts, logic, or evidence that countered their claims. Conspiracism is akin to religious zealotry. Even if you show people who take the bible literally that the sun came into existance before the earth did, they're still believe that a supernatural being created the earth before the sun (and all the other stars) because of narratives and zealotry.