Religion and Guns in small-town America

[DinoDoc]

Actually the part that irked me about Obama's comments isn't that he said that small town America is bitter, it's that he said that is why "cling" to religion and the acusations of racism that irked me. The anti-trade sentiment also seemed slightly hypocritical in light of the tone of both Dem campaigns.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Well voters by and large tend to prefer that you talk to them rather than about them.

Irony

[DinoDoc]

Kinda but not really.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Actually the part that irked me about Obama's comments isn't that he said that small town America is bitter, it's that he said that is why "cling" to religion and the acusations of racism that irked me. The anti-trade sentiment also seemed slightly hypocritical in light of the tone of both Dem campaigns.

But you weren't going to vote for him anyway, right?

[Imran Siddiqui]

An interesting Op-ed on why Obama's comments rub the wrong way. Now, I fully admit that Bill Kristol is in no way unbiased, but its a very interesting article (and yes, I can fully predict the objections to comparing a statement by Marx to Obama's):

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/14/opinion/14kristol.html?hp

April 14, 2008
Op-Ed Columnist

The Mask Slips

By WILLIAM KRISTOL

I haven’t read much Karl Marx since the early 1980s, when I taught political philosophy at the University of Pennsylvania. Still, it didn’t take me long this weekend to find my copy of “The Marx-Engels Reader,” edited by Robert C. Tucker — a book that was assigned in thousands of college courses in the 1970s and 80s, and that now must lie, unopened and un-remarked upon, on an awful lot of rec-room bookshelves.

My occasion for spending a little time once again with the old Communist was Barack Obama’s now-famous comment at an April 6 San Francisco fund-raiser. Obama was explaining his trouble winning over small-town, working-class voters: “It’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

This sent me to Marx’s famous statement about religion in the introduction to his “Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right”:

“Religious suffering is at the same time an expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the sentiment of a heartless world, and the soul of a soulless condition. It is the opium of the people.”

Or, more succinctly, and in the original German in which Marx somehow always sounds better: “Die Religion ... ist das Opium des Volkes.”

Now, this is a point of view with a long intellectual pedigree prior to Marx, and many vocal adherents continuing into the 21st century. I don’t believe the claim is true, but it’s certainly worth considering, in college classrooms and beyond.

But it’s one thing for a German thinker to assert that “religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature.” It’s another thing for an American presidential candidate to claim that we “cling to ... religion” out of economic frustration.

And it’s a particularly odd claim for Barack Obama to make. After all, in his speech at the 2004 Democratic convention, he emphasized with pride that blue-state Americans, too, “worship an awesome God.”

What’s more, he’s written eloquently in his memoir, “Dreams From My Father,” of his own religious awakening upon hearing the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s “Audacity of Hope” sermon, and of the complexity of his religious commitment. You’d think he’d do other believers the courtesy of assuming they’ve also thought about their religious beliefs.

But Obama in San Francisco does no courtesy to his fellow Americans. Look at the other claims he makes about those small-town voters.

Obama ascribes their anti-trade sentiment to economic frustration — as if there are no respectable arguments against more free-trade agreements. This is particularly cynical, since he himself has been making those arguments, exploiting and fanning this sentiment that he decries. Aren’t we then entitled to assume Obama’s opposition to Nafta and the Colombian trade pact is merely cynical pandering to frustrated Americans?

Then there’s what Obama calls “anti-immigrant sentiment.” Has Obama done anything to address it? It was John McCain, not Obama, who took political risks to try to resolve the issue of illegal immigration by putting his weight behind an attempt at immigration reform.

Furthermore, some concerns about unchecked and unmonitored illegal immigration are surely legitimate. Obama voted in 2006 (to take just one example) for the Secure Fence Act, which was intended to control the Mexican border through various means, including hundreds of miles of border fence. Was Obama then just accommodating bigotry?

As for small-town Americans’ alleged “antipathy to people who aren’t like them”: During what Obama considers the terrible Clinton-Bush years of economic frustration, by any measurement of public opinion polling or observed behavior, Americans have become far more tolerant and respectful of minorities who are not “like them.” Surely Obama knows this. Was he simply flattering his wealthy San Francisco donors by casting aspersions on the idiocy of small-town life?

That leaves us with guns. Gun ownership has been around for an awfully long time. And people may have good reasons to, and in any case have a constitutional right to, own guns — as Obama himself has been acknowledging on the campaign trail, when he presents himself as more sympathetic to gun owners than a typical Democrat.

What does this mean for Obama’s presidential prospects? He’s disdainful of small-town America — one might say, of bourgeois America. He’s usually good at disguising this. But in San Francisco the mask slipped. And it’s not so easy to get elected by a citizenry you patronize.

And what are the grounds for his supercilious disdain? If he were a war hero, if he had a career of remarkable civic achievement or public service — then he could perhaps be excused an unattractive but in a sense understandable hauteur. But what has Barack Obama accomplished that entitles him to look down on his fellow Americans?

[KrazyHorse]

And what are the grounds for his supercilious disdain? If he were a war hero, if he had a career of remarkable civic achievement or public service — then he could perhaps be excused an unattractive but in a sense understandable hauteur. But what has Barack Obama accomplished that entitles him to look down on his fellow Americans?

More than William Kristol has.

[KrazyHorse]

Barack was probably wrong about the "God and guns" part of his comment.

On the other hand, the "anti-immigrant and anti-trade" part was right on the money.

And yes, a lot of rust belt America is backwards looking, and in a sense bitter.

[KrazyHorse]

I wish Barack was running as an ardent free-trader (which is what he obviously is).

Hillary probably is more anti-trade than him (though less so than she lets on) but that's simply an indication of her stupidity.

[Ramo]

Then there’s what Obama calls “anti-immigrant sentiment.” Has Obama done anything to address it? It was John McCain, not Obama, who took political risks to try to resolve the issue of illegal immigration by putting his weight behind an attempt at immigration reform.

Then he ran away from the same legislation. Has Kristol been in a coma for the past year?

[Ramo]

About the guns and god part of the comment, I think it was right on its merits, but just terribly stated. The standard Thomas Frank thesis goes that in the absence of real economic gains, and a political class shying away from addressing this stagnation, people turn their cultural traditions into a political identity.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Barack was probably wrong about the "God and guns" part of his comment.

I think his comment about God is on the money since a lot of these people think he's a muslim no matter what he says. And a lot of them think owning guns is the solution to a lot of the problems we have.

[KrazyHorse]

Small town America has alwys been religious and arms-bearing. It's not a recent (past 30 years, say) development. I don't know that you can say that they've gotten more religious and more arms-bearing.

I certainly think they've gotten more anti-trade and more nativist, however.

[Kidlicious]

He was explaining why he thought he didn't have much support with rednecks though. I mean really, what is he suppose to say to that anyway?

[Ramo]

As a political identity, it's fairly recent. The Christian Coalition and the NRA aren't ancient organizations.

Edit: The NRA is fairly old, but it hasn't been politically active until recently.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Small town America has alwys been religious and arms-bearing. It's not a recent (past 30 years, say) development. I don't know that you can say that they've gotten more religious and more arms-bearing.

I certainly think they've gotten more anti-trade and more nativist, however.

I completely agree with this, which is why Obama's statements are rubbing a lot of folks the wrong way. The implication is that they were frustrated and thus turned to religion and guns for comfort. Maybe that's not what he meant to say, but that is sure how it comes across and IMO that's an unfair characterization.

The anti-trade and anti-immigrant philosophies though definitely are the result of economic frustrations. No doubt.

Then he ran away from the same legislation. Has Kristol been in a coma for the past year?

Um... McCain said his support base would rather have him first secure the border before "amnesty" and that's what he said he would do. He never stated that he'd give up moving illegals to legal status. Just that he'd put a border fence up first, due to the wishes of the people.

I know you hate McCain, but really, stop straying into Oerdin territory.