Tuesday, November 27, 2018

Responding to rural whites, in the context of Mississippi politics

Cindy Hyde-Smith is running against Mike Epsy for a seat in the United States Senate for the conservative state of Mississippi where a democrat has not held office for more than 35 years. At a recent campaign rally, Hyde-Smith ran into a significant backlash for a controversial comment made on camera. The Republican appointee to the Senate in a runoff election set for today, said that she would be in the front row if a supporter invited her to a public hanging.

This morning, the Los Angeles Times ran an article by Jenny Jarvie regarding candidate Hyde-Smith and her words regarding a public hanging. Many critics jumped on this comment and accused her of being unsympathetic to the dark history of slavery. They labeled her as too extreme to represent the people of the state of Mississippi. Ms. Jarvie's posits that voters may not feel the same way, illustrated by the title "Voters may ignore 'hanging' remark." Jarvie suggests that Mississippians may not all feel the same way as many journalists who are commenting from other parts of the country. In Ms. Jarvie's analysis, she quotes several conservatives from the state of Mississippi:
I think she is a good person, said Joe Vaught, a 70-year-old retired nurse from Brandon, a town 15 miles east of Jackson, the capital. We all make stupid mistakes.
The Democrats are just trying to slander her, said Kim Bolding, 51, a marketing officer for a faith-based rehabilitation center who lives in Flowood.
It’s being blown out of proportion, said Robert Norwood, 68, a retired accounting manager from Crystal Springs. I watch a lot of cowboy shows. They used to hang a lot of people. Why does everything have to be about race?
Mississippi has a long history of hanging that began in the 1700's and remained the state's procedure of capital punishment until the 1940's. The backlash stems from those in and outside the state who say that hanging goes beyond capital punishment in the history of Mississippi. Charlene Thompson, a director at the Smith Robertson Museum, says in an interview, that hangings and lynching or lynch mobs went beyond the scope of law in the history of Mississippi:
We also have to remember that in many of these public lynchings, people would dress up. Not necessarily the person who is being lynched, but the crowd itself, and they would sell refreshments. It was like a big outing.
The NAACP reports that from 1882-1968 Mississippi conducted 581 lynchings, the highest number of any state. Similar figures of hanging data can be found here and here. It would seem the residents of Mississippi who are not white and are not the age of 50 (as are the conservative commenters above) have good reason to be outraged. Candidate Hyde-Smith did not even submit in haste an apology for her comments, but rather dropped off of her campaign trail for a few weeks in silence. She than made a short apology and went on the offensive last week when she said:
For anyone that was offended by my comments, I certainly apologize, she said, reading from a script. There was no ill will, no intent whatsoever, in my statements.
This comment was twisted, was turned into a weapon to be used against me, a political weapon used for nothing but personal and political gain by my opponent, she said. That’s the type of politics that Mississippians are sick and tired of.
Her opponent, Mike Epsy, an African American Democrat, politely responded to her statement:
Well, no one twisted your comments because your comments were live, he said. You know, they came out of your mouth.
Ms. Jarvie rounds out her article with the notion that regardless of the mistakes Hyde-Smith has made on the campaign trail (see her comments about possibly suppressing liberal educated voters here) she will likely win the Senate seat. The state is still largely conservative, and voters tend to stick with their political party affiliation, regardless of the policies the candidate advocates. There may also be other factors influencing voters in Mississippi, like resident and independent voter Joe Vaught. Mrs. Vaught said she did not approve of Hyde-Smith's remarks but would still vote for her because of the importance of having a woman representative in the Senate.

The public needs to hold those holding high office accountable for their words and actions. Hyde-Smith saying "I apologize to anyone offended", after refusing to apologize for weeks is a slap in the face to many scarred by this state's past. Hyde-Smith's apology is not one that takes any responsibility for the words spoken or connotations there of. It is dismissive in nature. This means that if you are offended, you are the problem. It was not a big deal, and you should not be offended so easily. Those elected into office should be held accountable for their actions, and the public who they represent should hold them to the highest standard of civility.

Furthermore, her campaign staff has repeatedly reported to media that her statement was "a joke" and has been blown out of proportion.  The fact that our President rushed down to Mississippi on Monday to hold two rally's in defense of Hyde-Smith and her comments is a mark against the United States in common decency and understanding of all our citizens. More than 100 Republican operatives and field staff flocked to the state for this final stretch. Why is the Republican party not ready to denounce racial slurs and racially suggestive actions? Is maintaining the highest level of power really that much more important to our politicians than dignity and integrity of all African Americans? It is time as a nation of smart, descent citizens to condemn politics that lack all civility and respectability. Regardless of the outcome of this election, the citizens of every state must demand more from those who represent us, or if we don't, all civility may be lost before we have a chance to save ourselves from a deep and dark future of racial divides and class wars.

(Don't miss a related blog post here!)

Is there anything we can learn from professional wrestling? (Part 3 of 3)


This is the final part of a three-part series about sports and the white working class, with an emphasis on professional wrestling. This part discusses elite cultural superiority in their criticisms of Trump and professional wrestling, and what liberal elites can learn about communicating with the white working class from professional wrestling.

Are there any lessons to be learned from professional wrestling? Maybe not. Despite changes to the blood, sex, and violence that characterized pro wrestling during the 1990s and 2000s, the sport remains an oft-maligned curiosity to elites that many would say carries little to no cultural value. According to Common Sense Media, an organization that recommends media for children, WWE Friday Night SmackDown! (a leading pro wrestling show) is “crass, outlandish, and not recommended.” The organization further writes that, “parents need to know that this sporting event-meets-soap opera is brimming with non-stop physical violence, including body slams, headlocks, knees to the groin, smacks, punches, and kicks.”


It’s also quite tempting to dismiss any possible value in pro wrestling not only because of the violence inherent to the sport, but also because until relatively recently matches were replete with extreme racism and sexism. For example, the Mexicools were a group of unmasked luchadores who wore stereotypical Mexican attire like cowboy hats and bandanas and carried leaf blowers and rode in on lawnmowers in their first appearance. Women were also frequently confined to marginalized roles and hyper-masculinized if they dared to deviate at all from the oversexualized, feminine norm. Women in the ring existed solely for the male gaze, as either hyper-masculinized comic relief or arm-candy for male wrestlers.

Since Trump’s election, elites have written many negative comparisons between Trump’s presidency and professional wrestling in the opinion pages. To many elites, pro wrestling is the perfect analogy for Trump: low-brow, racist, sexist, violent, and possessing a shaky relationship with the truth.

To be fair to these commentators, over the years Trump has done much to earn this comparison: at first by sponsoring the wrestling contests, then by throwing thousands of dollars from the rafters in a dramatic stunt, and later by being a physical participant in Wrestlemania 23. All this involvement with pro wrestling earned Trump a place in the WWE Hall of Fame, making his election the “first time in history a WWE Hall of Famer would ever hold the distinguished title of U.S. Commander-in-Chief.”

Indeed, there are many reasons why comparisons between Trump and pro wrestling are likely deserved. For example, who can blame commentators for drawing comparisons when the biggest donor to the fraudulent Donald J. Trump Foundation was the WWE? Or when Trump posts GIFs of him bodyslamming the CNN logo on Twitter?

However, it’s pretty clear when one scratches the surface of these criticisms even a little that the real target of many of these opinion pieces are the white working class. Dripping with condescension, these critical pieces often bear the same hallmarks of arguments for cultural superiority that are frequently levied by elites at the white working class. Fans of pro wrestling are reduced to caricatures of racism, sexism, violence, and yes, white trash. Some commentators have even tried to equate fandom of wrestling or other violent sports with support for Trump, as if by consuming this low-brow, culturally inferior sports entertainment it causes you a more gullible victim for Trump’s lies.

Professional wrestling is the perfect example of a sport that has acquired distributional significance, because it is strongly classed, both internally and externally. Externally, pro wrestling embodies the virtues of the lower classes in open displays of strength and violence. Internally, as discussed in the prior part in this series, wrestlers purposefully work to class the sport by playing on class conflict in their backstories.  What elites seek by putting down pro wrestling are the social profits they obtain by outwardly differentiating their own choices in consumption from the working class.

However, while the elites may continue to thumb their noses at the nation’s first pro wrestling president, they should probably take note that the animosity between wrestling fans and elites is mutual. Like the white-working class heroes that dominated pro wrestling storylines in past decades, white working class wrestling fans don’t very much like being told what to think or how to act.

Outside of the opinion pages, a different type of class conflict is happening in the ring. One Appalachian wrestler from Kentucky has capitalized on tension between elites and the working class by dubbing himself the Progressive Liberal. This uniquely Trump-era wrestler wears shirts emblazoned with Hillary Clinton’s face and trunks that bear Obama's face or say "Blue Wave". He berates the Appalachian crowd with airs of cultural superiority, calling them “Fox News maggots” and riffing on country music saying, “it’s simple and it’s boring, just like each and every one of you.” The wrestler also throws out nasty political one-liners like, “You know what, I think Bernie Sanders would make a great secretary of state” or “I want to exchange your bullets for bullet points. Bullet points of knowledge.”

The Progressive Liberal acts out what white working-class fans fear from coastal elites: cultural superiority weaponized into a threat against their existence. The Progressive Liberal's patronizing espousal of elite liberal values makes him the perfect “heel” (i.e. the villain in a wrestling contest) for the Appalachian white working class because he threatens and denigrates their way of life.

So perhaps, instead of adding fuel to the fire and sneering at the “the lowbrow guilty pleasure” of professional wrestling, liberal elites should instead look to pro wrestling for clues on how they can recapture the white working class. It’s impossible to ignore how the average WWE viewer is exactly the sort-of person that Democrats failed to reach in this last election – white, male, low-income, and possessing less than a college degree. Quite simply, pro wrestling offers a unique insight into the white working class in America, primarily because they are its biggest fans.

A good start for elites would be accepting a more nuanced view on the white working class and learning to communicate with them on equal terms. While Trump represents the worst of pro wrestling, it is helpful to instead look at the best. The Dusty Rhodes or the Stone Colds of the sport were clearly able to communicate with the white working class, and it wasn’t because they were overtly racist or misogynist. What these white working class heroes did instead was authentically communicate that being working class was not an inferior way of life and that fans or even athletes didn’t need to change their culture or conform with the values of elites.

Tandem attacks on Trump and pro wrestling may give elites a nice frame for arguments for cultural superiority over the white working class, but ultimately, it’s not productive to moving the conversation forward. Democrats who won in deep red areas often did not directly attack Trump and instead avoided the extremes. They also directly appealed to working class voters by highlighting their working class backgrounds and sticking with non-partisan messaging around education and healthcare instead of divisive social issues.

Understanding the distinction between the worst of group and the best is completely lost on many elites because it is easier to be reductive about sports or classes of people than it is to have a nuanced perspective. (It’s probably also fair to say the same is true of the attitudes of many working class whites towards Blacks and Latinos.) However, if liberals want to be able to recapture the white working class and turn Trump from hero to heel, it may make sense to slack off of criticisms that espouse cultural superiority and instead turn to communications that will reassure working people that their way of life is safe.

The white working class hero trope in pro wrestling (Part 2 of 3)


 This is part two of a three-part series about sports and the white working class, with an emphasis on professional wrestling. This part discusses the trope of the white working class hero in professional wrestling.

More than perhaps any other sport, professional wrestling embodies the virtues of the white working class by uplifting heroes with backstories rooted in the trope of the white working class hero. Stone Cold Steve Austin was one of the biggest stars of the late 1990’s and early 2000’s. He was known for wearing a black leather vest and jeans, and had proclivities for shotgunning cans of beer, giving the finger on live TV, and overall sticking it to the man.

One of Steve Austin's most infamous rivalries was against Vince McMahon, the CEO of the World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. (WWE), who constantly pressed working-class Steve Austin to clean up and go corporate. In one memorable encounter, Austin at first pretends to cede to McMahon’s demands by wearing a well-tailored suit and tie and agreeing to change his ways. To thundering boos, Stone Cold tells the crowd that he realized that “little old Steve Austin . . . a redneck from South Texas”, could never defeat Vince McMahon, “a man born with a silver spoon in his mouth, a man with a multi-million dollar company, an entrepreneur, a leader.”

However, at the last moment Austin changes his tone and rips off the layers of his suit to reveal a black t-shirt, with cut-off sleeves, featuring his signature phrase “HELL YEAH” and a skull. Stone Cold addressed the stunned McMahon, saying:

You gotta remember son, what you see is what you get with Stone Cold Steve Austin. I ain’t fancy. Am I a redneck from South Texas? You’re damn right. And I ain’t gonna change for nobody.

Although Steve Austin knows his corporate overlord wants him to sell out, he turns down all the privileges that would have come with being in the managerial class because to do so would be to abandon his working class values and instead adopt the values and respectability of the elite in the ways he speaks, dresses, and acts. Because of his working class roots in South Texas, Steve Austin may not talk right, dress right, or act right; but dammit, he is who he is and no businessman from Connecticut can take that away from him.


This is far from the first time that a white working class hero has been involved in staged class conflict under the guise of professional wrestling. Take for example this verbal takedown by the white working class hero of the 1980s, Dusty Rhodes, against his arch nemesis, the Rolex wearin’, diamong ring wearin’, limousine ridin’, and jet flyin’ Ric Flair:
You don’t know what hard times are, daddy. Hard times are when the textile workers around this country are out of work, they got four or five kids and can’t pay their wages, can’t buy their food. Hard times are when the autoworkers are out of work and they tell ‘em to go home. And hard times are when a man has worked at a job for thirty years—THIRTY YEARS—and they give him a watch, kick him in the butt and say “hey a computer took your place daddy,” that’s hard times! That’s hard times! And Ric Flair you put hard times on this country by takin’ Dusty Rhodes out, that’s hard times. And we all had hard times together, and I admit, I don’t look like the athlete of the day supposed to look. My belly’s just a lil’ big, my heinie’s a lil’ big, but brother, I am bad. And they know I’m bad.
It’s hard to avoid the allure of Rhodes’ words. Is this an impassioned speech from a Bernie Sanders-style populist with a Texas twang? Or a professional wrestler ready to chokehold his opponent in staged combat? It doesn’t really matter. The point is that Rhodes was a star at the top of his profession, but like Steve Austin he never forgot who he was or where he came from.


The lower-class virtues born from the struggles that stars like Austin and Rhodes had growing up white, rural, and working class are the same ones that gave them popularity on the wrestling circuit or give white working class politicians today a boost at the polls. There is something inherently appealing about a person who reaches the highest levels of their profession, but never forgets about the little guy along the way.

This is the total opposite of what is normally expected in the sports world. Where cultural and economic elites love a bootstraps story, they hate when a sports star acts in conformance with what the upper echelons fear from the working class: violence, outward class expression, and a lack of decorum and respectability.

To elites, becoming a sports star is supposed to improve you, because wealth is supposed to instill the values and virtues of the elite. Athletes who know “hard times” are supposed to forget those and stand for the national anthem even when they feel they were left behind and have no affinity for it.

Pro wrestling may therefore be an anomaly in the sports world because it rewards athletes who proudly reflect working-class values. The normal assignment of cultural capital is entirely reversed because it doesn’t help stars to be respectable or espouse the values of elites in their conduct. Indeed doing so may actually hurt them. While other sports stars are expected to adhere to the conventions of the elites, pro wrestlers eschew them.

Elites may continue to turn their noses up at pro wrestling, but the sport is still a place where working class whites can find affinity with certain wrestlers. Every time Steve Austin or Dusty Rhodes went to the mat, they were there to do staged violence against the elites, the enemies of the working class.

Examining these white working class heroes gives elites insight on how the white working class responds to criticism. They doesn’t like being judged by cultural and economic elites for how they look, act, or talk. They don’t like it when their “hard times” are diminished because they refuse to leave behind their rural and working class roots – spiritually or physically – even though they may know their jobs and communities will eventually be the victims of the steady onslaught of technology and globalization. Though these white working class heroes may not espouse elite respectability, they instead exude a working-class definition of respectability which means never turning your back on where you came from or changing who you are because of wealth or success.