Doug and I were involved in this same debate with a bunch of other folks on the old Marxism list and nothing much has changed. What Doug is referring to when he uses the word "understanding" is not what goes on a Hallmark Card, but what Lenin tried to do when he wrote about changes in the Russian countryside in 1890. Virtually nobody, Cockburn or militia-hater Adolf Reed, has done a serious political-economy study of the Wyoming and Montana hinterlands. There is much evidence that there are serious economic dislocations taking place which are radicalizing petty-producers such as ranchers and farmers. This radicalization does not express itself through increased subscription rates to the Nation or Mother Jones.
My big beef with radical and Marxists alike is that they base their political judgement on what they read in the NY Times. I complained long and loud about all the bullshit being posted on the Net about the Shining Path in Peru, which was mostly thumb-sucking based on what the NY Times wrote. Finally, I rolled up my sleeves and studied the question in some kind of depth, including reading a book in Spanish written by one of the more interesting and subtle thinkers of Peruvian Maoism.
What it would take to speak and write intelligently about backwoods populism is some time spent in the library, interviews with the people, etc. Sarah Diamond, James Ridgeway, and all the other people who write about the rural right-wing are only scratching the surface.
Louis Proyect (http://www.panix.com/~lnp3/marxism.html)