[lbo-talk] Mark Ames: The Tea Party as a front group for oil flacks

Wojtek S wsoko52 at gmail.com
Tue Jun 15 12:57:13 PDT 2010


[WS:] My point was to counter the concept of "false consciousness" i.e. the idea that people are bamboozled into voting against their economic interests - rather than providing a complete enumeration of "uses and gratifications" that different groups derive from voting. Examples that I used are only illustrative. In reality, there might be different gratifications, some of them quite uncommon or even bizarre. One woman I knew was a Repug voter claiming that this would maximize her "investments" - except that she did not have much investments and she was into BD and the "dominating" tenor of the Repug rhetoric somehow appealed to her, while she remained oblivious to the "family value" crap.

The uses and gratifications theory can travel quite far in explaining voting behavior, imho, much further than any of the rat-choice models, of which "economic self interest" is one variety. I really do not have time now to do any data analysis to find support, but some of those days I may.

Wojtek

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Alan Rudy <alan.rudy at gmail.com> wrote:


> There's much to like here but one major flow.
> You argue that the "hoi polloi" pursuing dignity and self-respect - defined
> by the macho toughness and hard-nosed ways of doing business they value -
> vote for Repugs because they project that image of macho self-respect and
> hard-nosed dignity.
> First things first, are you saying that such a perspective is organic to
> the
> hoi polloi, somehow? That it is distinct from an anti-feminist
> reinscription of "traditional masculinity" wrought by the economic AND
> cultural sides of neoliberalism in the US intended to deepen incipient
> sexism and racism tied to historical prejudices, fears exacerbated by
> economic stagnation and reinforced by the intended political economic
> restructuring planned by neoliberals and their neoconservative allies?
> Second, what was the role of "its the economy, stupid" and "I feel your
> pain" in 1992 or of hope-y changy-ness in the context of negative reactions
> to warmongering and economic implosion in 2008?
> Third, is your position validated by polling data focused on women's voting
> or did you just completely masculinize the hoi polloi?
> Fourth, aren't there two central myths in the US - one about macho,
> hard-nosed, cowboy/entrepreneurial competitive individualism and one about
> affective, familial, religious/communtarian mutualist populism? The
> confusion all around, it seems to me, lies with the contradictory
> manipulation of these myths by any number of elites and the wildly uneven
> and highly contingent permutations and combinations of their up-take,
> socialized mediation and public expression by the hoi polloi.
> Yours in sociology,
> Alan
>
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Wojtek S <wsoko52 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > RE: " hoi polloi are taking positions against their own interest because
> > they are being fed false information and being denied accurate
> information
> > -- and would think and act in their own interest if they had access to
> the
> > actual facts"
> >
> > [WS:] It is quite naive, if not arrogant, to think that the masses act
> > against their own interests due to misinformation. It assumes a model of
> > rationality in which people ought to maximize material self-interest, the
> > very same model that Milton Friedman used to equate capitalism with
> > freedom.
> >
> > For most people, the main motive is to project and defend their dignity -
> > not to maximize their material self-interests. They will sacrifice their
> > material possessions and their own well being to gain respect of their
> > peers. What looks like irrational violence of street thugs, irrational
> > discrimination against unpopular minorities, irrational spending and
> > consumption, or irrational voting pattern of 'hoi polloi' is often a very
> > rational i.e. purpose-oriented behavior to project a desirable social
> image
> > associated with dignity - honor, respect, independence, machismo,
> > prosperity, "coolness" etc.
> >
> > People vote for a political party not because they expect that party to
> > line
> > up their pockets. Only business schmucks seeking political protection do
> > that. People vote for a political party because they perceive that party
> > as
> > a reflection and embodiment of the values that make up their own dignity.
> > The 'hoi polloi' tend to value macho toughness and hard-nosed was of
> doing
> > business. Since the Repug party's image embodies macho toughness and
> > hard-nosed way of doing business, they tend to get the 'hoi polloi' vote,
> > even though their policies are detrimental to the 'hoi polloi' wallets.
> >
> > Likewise, those who value compassion, cooperation, and conciliation tend
> to
> > vote for Democrats, because these values are an integral part of the Dem
> > public image. They do so even if Dem policies are detrimental to their
> > material self-interests.
> >
> > People are quite rational in their public/political behavior, and they
> know
> > what they are doing. It just that thier goal and means of achieving them
> > are different from what many Leftists think they should be.
> >
> > Wojtek
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 8:52 AM, John Gulick <john_gulick at hotmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Chip Berlet says:
> > >
> > > "Astroturf is not the same as manipulated groups of people numbering in
> > > the millions that would be what Chomsky calls the Propoganda Model."
> > >
> > > JG asks:
> > >
> > > Incidentally, Chip, doesn't Chomsky's "Propaganda Model" assume that
> the
> > > hoi polloi are taking positions against their own interest because they
> > are
> > > being fed false information and being denied accurate information --
> and
> > > would think and act in their own interest if they had access to the
> > actual
> > > facts? If so, this model doesn't seem to apply to the vast majority of
> > Tea
> > > Partiers, either...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your
> > inbox.
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_3
> > > ___________________________________
> > > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> > >
> > ___________________________________
> > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *********************************************************
> Alan P. Rudy
> Dept. Sociology, Anthropology and Social Work
> Central Michigan University
> 124 Anspach Hall
> Mt Pleasant, MI 48858
> 517-881-6319
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list