Post by onelasttime on Jul 10, 2021 15:32:57 GMT
I woke up at the crack of dawn this morning and rather then get up I turned on the radio where they were playing an “in depth” interview with George Packer who has written a book called “Last Best Hope”.
This guy believes this country is divided into 4 separate tribes that are listed below.
The Guardian…. link
From the Washington Post…. link
“As the industrial era waned, the New Deal party alignment gave way to four Americas:
●Free America, economic conservatives and religious traditionalists whose organizing principle is a leave-us-alone, “Don’t Tread on Me” conception of liberty.
●Real America, an assemblage of white Christian nationalists for whom the principle of moral equality has curdled into resentment against experts and bureaucrats.
●Smart America, the winners of the new economy’s meritocratic competition for wealth and status.
●Just America, the home of identity politics with race at its core.”
&
”Packer’s sharp portraits of these new tribes are the heart of this book, and his critique of them reveal his central concerns. Free Americans’ individualistic, leave-me-alone conception of freedom is fundamentally flawed, he insists; freedom rightly understood is “the ability to participate fully in social and political life.” Real Americans’ legitimate economic complaints take the unproductive form of resentment that can level others down but cannot elevate themselves. Smart Americans have decoupled themselves from their less fortunate fellow citizens, so much so that the lives of the working class have become unknown territory and their beliefs, objects of disdain.”
&
”Packer’s account of America’s decline into destructive tribalism is always illuminating and often dazzling, even though it leaves out tens of millions of Americans who belong to none of the four tribes and see them for what they are. His account is distorted, however, by its core premise that economic inequality is driving all our other pathologies (including, apparently, Just America) and that increased equality can cure them. The consequence is tunnel vision; place, culture, religion, demography, even immigration go largely unseen and are treated as effects rather than causes when they make cameo appearances.
Packer occasionally reveals some ambivalence about his emphasis on economics. “Culture usually beats class in American politics,” he acknowledges at one point. But he fails to integrate this insight into his narrative. Despite his strictures against Just America, he ends up telling today’s Democratic coalition what it wants to hear: you can succeed by focusing on economic equality and political reform without revisiting the positions on issues such as crime and religious liberty that have driven much of the opposition to the left since the 1960s.”
&
”This tension sounds abstract, a philosophical construct. It isn’t. For example, locally controlled public education is one of the principal remaining sites of self-government. Packer is concerned — rightly — about unequal and inadequate funding for schools that serve minorities and immigrants. His proposal is to shift the base of school revenue from local property taxes toward resources from the federal government and the states. But these nonlocal funds come with mandates and restrictions with which local authorities must comply. More equality can mean less self- government.
Despite our passionate divisions, Packer rightly insists, separation is a fantasy, and so is the permanent victory of any side. We have no choice but to live together — with our disagreements intact — far into the future. To make this work, accepting pluralism must be the rule, imposing national uniformity the exception. This means recovering the virtues of federalism, local self-rule and judicial restraint.
For nearly a century, liberals and progressives have believed that we can only solve our problems by nationalizing them, and there was much evidence to support this view. But we have reached a point of internal division at which the impulse to nationalize has become part of the problem.
Rather than imposing a uniform view from the center, we must focus on persuasion and relearn the art of compromise, which Packer calls “empty.” He is dead wrong. In all but the rarest moments of national unity, honorable compromise is what makes liberal democracy possible.”
This guy believes this country is divided into 4 separate tribes that are listed below.
The Guardian…. link
From the Washington Post…. link
“As the industrial era waned, the New Deal party alignment gave way to four Americas:
●Free America, economic conservatives and religious traditionalists whose organizing principle is a leave-us-alone, “Don’t Tread on Me” conception of liberty.
●Real America, an assemblage of white Christian nationalists for whom the principle of moral equality has curdled into resentment against experts and bureaucrats.
●Smart America, the winners of the new economy’s meritocratic competition for wealth and status.
●Just America, the home of identity politics with race at its core.”
&
”Packer’s sharp portraits of these new tribes are the heart of this book, and his critique of them reveal his central concerns. Free Americans’ individualistic, leave-me-alone conception of freedom is fundamentally flawed, he insists; freedom rightly understood is “the ability to participate fully in social and political life.” Real Americans’ legitimate economic complaints take the unproductive form of resentment that can level others down but cannot elevate themselves. Smart Americans have decoupled themselves from their less fortunate fellow citizens, so much so that the lives of the working class have become unknown territory and their beliefs, objects of disdain.”
&
”Packer’s account of America’s decline into destructive tribalism is always illuminating and often dazzling, even though it leaves out tens of millions of Americans who belong to none of the four tribes and see them for what they are. His account is distorted, however, by its core premise that economic inequality is driving all our other pathologies (including, apparently, Just America) and that increased equality can cure them. The consequence is tunnel vision; place, culture, religion, demography, even immigration go largely unseen and are treated as effects rather than causes when they make cameo appearances.
Packer occasionally reveals some ambivalence about his emphasis on economics. “Culture usually beats class in American politics,” he acknowledges at one point. But he fails to integrate this insight into his narrative. Despite his strictures against Just America, he ends up telling today’s Democratic coalition what it wants to hear: you can succeed by focusing on economic equality and political reform without revisiting the positions on issues such as crime and religious liberty that have driven much of the opposition to the left since the 1960s.”
&
”This tension sounds abstract, a philosophical construct. It isn’t. For example, locally controlled public education is one of the principal remaining sites of self-government. Packer is concerned — rightly — about unequal and inadequate funding for schools that serve minorities and immigrants. His proposal is to shift the base of school revenue from local property taxes toward resources from the federal government and the states. But these nonlocal funds come with mandates and restrictions with which local authorities must comply. More equality can mean less self- government.
Despite our passionate divisions, Packer rightly insists, separation is a fantasy, and so is the permanent victory of any side. We have no choice but to live together — with our disagreements intact — far into the future. To make this work, accepting pluralism must be the rule, imposing national uniformity the exception. This means recovering the virtues of federalism, local self-rule and judicial restraint.
For nearly a century, liberals and progressives have believed that we can only solve our problems by nationalizing them, and there was much evidence to support this view. But we have reached a point of internal division at which the impulse to nationalize has become part of the problem.
Rather than imposing a uniform view from the center, we must focus on persuasion and relearn the art of compromise, which Packer calls “empty.” He is dead wrong. In all but the rarest moments of national unity, honorable compromise is what makes liberal democracy possible.”
