Zack Beauchamp runs through the recent scholarship on Democratic strength in the suburbs. Basically, there is a class of neo-Marxists (Beauchamp doesn't use that term) who see economic policy entirely through an industrial era, Marxist lens. In order to be a progressive party, Democrats must rely on working class votes.
Except what we have seen is Trump make serious inroads with working class whites and whites without college degrees, as Democrats have made as big or bigger gains with suburban voters.
First of, as the article notes, people assume the positions of the parties they belong to. Heterodox positions exist, but they are increasingly rare.
Second, one of the critics of Democrats winning the suburbs is that it will lead to a "new Gilded Age." Except we are already IN a new Gilded Age. The Progressive Era that ended the Gilded Age was largely centered on - wait for it - the college educated middle class. Where class-based Populism and unionism failed, middle class reforms remade American society.
Finally, while the idea of "post-material materialism" is... ok, I think the piece misses what's true about the suburban college educated voter. They DO care about BLM and global warming, but they also know how skewed the system is towards billionaires. If the system is broken, it's not killing them, but they also know what the very top looks like.
Being college educated means you DO think ideologically, and as the GOP becomes the GQP, they will sink deeper and deeper into left wing positions.
Oh, and they vote.
No comments:
Post a Comment