No, they are practical liberals and ideological conservatives, like Free and Cantrill said.
>
> > U-M students tend to be better off than the general population,
>
>Yep. But it's supposed to be one of the nation's most liberal campuses.
>
And it is. But that tells you something about campuses. You want real liberal campuses, check out the tiny liberal arts schools, I don't mean Hillsdale, but Kalamazoo, Oberlin, Swarthmore. Fact is, there is a strong crrection between more higher ed and greater (practical) conservatism.
> > and maybe your HS was too--where'd you go to HS, Luke?
>
>Michigan's Upper Peninsula,
OK, I guessed wrong, sure, that counyts for real roots working class.
which isn't renowned for its affluence. Like
>many rural locales, there are plenty of conservative dems but few liberals
>and even fewer leftists.
Bet Free and Cantrill's hypothesis holds of them, though.
>
>I'm sure it's true in some sense, but I doubt it's the most important one.
>There was no public outcry over the "reform" of AFDC.
Public outcray calls for organization and leadership, and there is no
effective mass organization that speaks for the practical liberalism or
progressivsim of American workers. Not the unions,w hich represent only
about 10% overall and are sleepy, cautious, and in bed with management, not
the Dems, despite what Nathan says, not the single issue groups, which
aren't for the most part of the working class, and not the left,w hich
doesn't exist anymore.
>
> > Practically speaking the problem is
> > that the political beliefs on the concrete level don't find organized
> > support in, for example, the Democratic Party,
>
>Why not?
>
Ferguson has a very good book called The Golden Rule which gives the obvious and true answer in great detail with a lot of empirical support. The golden rule is: Who has the gold, makes the rules.
jks
_________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx