Ta-Nehisi Coates Rules, The Thread

Every struggling adjunct prof with a PhD would be in the top 1% by this criterion. I'm sure they'll be happy to learn it.

at what point does this definition of 'class' just end up being anti-intellectualism anywa

And it's surely possible to have a college degree and still feel culturally marginalized?

definitely they can. and feeling culturally marginalized doesn't mean they are. there is a whole giant industry of right wing media that is devoted to making these people feel pleasurable bursts of anger toward the liberal elites.

but anyway, you're right. education is a major dividing line in this country but it doesn't correlate to "class" as it would be understood in a marxist sense

right now should be an amazing time for class solidarity because most of us are "working class" wage earners and precarious employees.

Guys! You're talking about the petit bourgeoisie (college, but not top tier, family business/managerial/not in a trade union, susceptible to bootstraps, 'welfare queens' and blue lives matter talk) vs. the higher bourgeoisie (and on the right, anyone who is in any way not from the pb is characterised as haughty and elitist if they can write a half-decent sentence).

"The focus on one subsector of Trump voters—the white working class—is puzzling, given the breadth of his white coalition. Indeed, there is a kind of theater at work in which Trump’s presidency is pawned off as a product of the white working class as opposed to a product of an entire whiteness that includes the very authors doing the pawning. The motive is clear: escapism. To accept that the bloody heirloom remains potent even now, some five decades after Martin Luther King Jr. was gunned down on a Memphis balcony—even after a black president; indeed, strengthened by the fact of that black president—is to accept that racism remains, as it has since 1776, at the heart of this country’s political life. The idea of acceptance frustrates the left. The left would much rather have a discussion about class struggles, which might entice the white working masses, instead of about the racist struggles that those same masses have historically been the agents and beneficiaries of. Moreover, to accept that whiteness brought us Donald Trump is to accept whiteness as an existential danger to the country and the world. But if the broad and remarkable white support for Donald Trump can be reduced to the righteous anger of a noble class of smallville firefighters and evangelicals, mocked by Brooklyn hipsters and womanist professors into voting against their interests, then the threat of racism and whiteness, the threat of the heirloom, can be dismissed. Consciences can be eased; no deeper existential reckoning is required."

i actually consciously tried to avoid using the word "class" as much as possible for this exact reason, and even used the term "educational attainment" once. i'm aware of the distinction and if i used "working class" it was out of habit.

the fact remains that there is a very real and widening gap between voters with college degrees and those without, and that this is most pronounced in white voters (due to, you guessed it, racism). nate silver went into this a little in the days after the election: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/education-not-income-predicted-who-would-vote-for-trump/

In short, it appears as though educational levels are the critical factor in predicting shifts in the vote between 2012 and 2016. You can come to that conclusion with a relatively simple analysis, like the one I’ve conducted above, or by using fancier methods. In a regression analysis at the county level, for instance, lower-income counties were no more likely to shift to Trump once you control for education levels.11 And although there’s more work to be done, these conclusions also appear to hold if you examine the data at a more granular level, like by precinct or among individual voters in panel surveys.

But although this finding is clear in a statistical sense, that doesn’t mean the interpretation of it is straightforward. It seems to me that there a number of competing hypotheses that are compatible with this evidence, some of which will be favored by conservatives and some by liberals:

- Education levels may be a proxy for cultural hegemony. Academia, the news media and the arts and entertainment sectors are increasingly dominated by people with a liberal, multicultural worldview, and jobs in these sectors also almost always require college degrees. Trump’s campaign may have represented a backlash against these cultural elites.
- Educational attainment may be a better indicator of long-term economic well-being than household incomes. Unionized jobs in the auto industry often pay reasonably well even if they don’t require college degrees, for instance, but they’re also potentially at risk of being shipped overseas or automated.
- Education levels probably have some relationship with racial resentment, although the causality isn’t clear. The act of having attended college itself may be important, insofar as colleges and universities are often more diverse places than students’ hometowns. There’s more research to be done on how exposure to racial minorities affected white voters. For instance, did white voters who live in counties with large Hispanic populations shift toward Clinton or toward Trump?
- Education levels have strong relationships with media-consumption habits, which may have been instrumental in deciding people’s votes, especially given the overall decline in trust in the news media.
- Trump’s approach to the campaign — relying on emotional appeals while glossing over policy details — may have resonated more among people with lower education levels as compared with Clinton’s wonkier and more cerebral approach.

So data like this is really just a starting point for further research into the campaign. Nonetheless, the education gap is carving up the American electorate and toppling political coalitions that had been in place for many years.

part of the danger in a writer of coates' caliber and influence writing in such a way eschews nuance is that lesser readers (no offense fred and deej) are going to see the word "class" and instantly discredit the analysis. race matters a whole lot; it is the defining lens through which american society should be viewed. but it is not the only significant factor that explains our society's ills. hewing strictly to a race-based analysis without consideration of other factors is not only intellectually lazy, but jeopardizes our ability to come up with solutions

the fact remains that there is a very real and widening gap between voters with college degrees and those without, and that this is most pronounced in white voters (due to, you guessed it, racism).

i meant to add: and this gap partially explains the changing political landscape. which is why it matters

so your argument is that rather than race, america is defined by ... an education gap? lol. could you not maybe see how those might be *related*

its almost as if education might be linked to people's awareness of racism!

can you even read

(searches D-40's post for the word "intersection")

(doesn't find it)

but it is not the only significant factor that explains our society's ills. hewing strictly to a race-based analysis without consideration of other factors is not only intellectually lazy, but jeopardizes our ability to come up with solutions

if you think this is what anyone here is arguing you're clearly the one having trouble reading

part of the danger in a writer of coates' caliber and influence writing in such a way eschews nuance is that lesser readers (no offense fred and deej) are going to see the word "class" and instantly discredit the analysis. race matters a whole lot; it is the defining lens through which american society should be viewed.

coates' piece is making this argument & you're spending hours arguing against it.

but it is not the only significant factor that explains our society's ills

no shit sherlock, no one is arguing that it is

I'd say ye are very close to solving it now

lol

I think this discussion is at an impasse

idk it seems like kev has lost track of what he was arguing once he agreed that 'it is the defining lens through which american society should be viewed'

hewing strictly to a race-based analysis without consideration of other factors is not only intellectually lazy, but jeopardizes our ability to come up with solutions

― k3vin k., 17. september 2017 23:13 (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

This is such a bullshit argument. Coates choose to write about race, and that is his right. Being a brilliant writer about race is not 'intellectually lazy' just as being a brilliant writer about basically anything else isn't lazy. And it's not Coates' job to come up with solutions.

I feel like everyone is just arguing their own bias and not reading what anyone else is saying, or if they are bothering to read, it's only through the lens of said bias. There's no empathy or perspective being applied. Just points. Everyone gets to be right in the end.

nah. i think i'm arguing w/ a pretty specific ideological stance k3v is (was?) taking, this is of a piece with the wider argument coates' essay is making in the world right now.

like, this is a real ideological point of contention w/in "the left" right now, i dont think its some sort of issue of personal biases out of control or something

I don't care anymore. You and Fred B are ganging up on K3v K. Up is right, south is left, I believe what I believe and so does everyone else.

Funnily enough, kev have offered no proof of why the education gap matters. You just say that it's there and therefore it's mightily important that everyone acknowledges it. Which Coates does, he presents the numbers. Then he points out that the significance of the gap is enormously overplayed, offers examples, offers a brilliant historical thesis for why that would be - probably my favorite part of the essay - and points to the dangers in overplaying this gap. He has done his job.

If you want to argue against him, you have to do the work. You just say that college educated and non college educated whites have different interests, but you give no examples of what that might be. While Coates is very explicit on why their interests in the power of whiteness would be a motivating factor. He has an actual, worked over, thesis, with empirical data, historical quotes, and he presents it brilliantly and thought-provokingly. You have a single finding from an exit poll, no thoughts on what it means, why it matters, and how it helps us. And still you say he is the lazy writer.

here's the hayes clip

http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/coates-in-100-years-people-will-say-we-lost-our-minds-1047922755852

we went to a bar and the 2 american dudes in my program argue about this shit literally until last call lol

this should help move things forward

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/whitesplaining-ta-nehisi-coates_us_59bd669be4b0390a1564de21

el tomboto otm here

Can't believe d40 agrees with d40 this is a gamechanger

love when ilx dudes decide what side they're on based no what side i'm on rather than the actual merits of the conversation

Did u just attribute ilx gender

el tomboto otm here

― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Sunday, September 17, 2017 5:37 PM (two minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

what does his post even mean? I'm arguing from my biases?? lol

Seriously, that second part, the historical analysis. Reread it, got chills again. So good. In general, it's weird how nobody ever actually critiques Coates' history writing, seeing as he is not really a historian, and everyone always accuses him of being too historically focuses. Like with Packer: It flattens out history into a single fixed truth, so that an event in 2016 is the same as an event in 1805, the most recent election erases the one before, the Obama years turn into an illusion. It brushes aside policy proposals as distractions, and politics itself as an immoral bargain. Of course, if he did go into the historical part, he would see that Coates writes about the active work being done to turn the US into a racist society in the 18th century, writes that Clinton acknowledged systemic racism in a way that earlier candidates didn't, and that the left gives up on battling white supremacy because it's too hard. Meaning, presumably, that fighting it would actually be possible - and again, Coates has written over and over about Reparations. Coates never says racism can't be defeated, but he is pessimistic because 'Dreamers' as he called them in BTWAM, refuse to acknowledge the problem. Packer just wants it to be easier, less of a problem. Something that would go away without too much hard work.

"This notion—raceless antiracism—marks the modern left, from the New Democrat Bill Clinton to the socialist Bernie Sanders. Few national liberal politicians have shown any recognition that there is something systemic and particular in the relationship between black people and their country that might require specific policy solutions."

again...frederik otm

Ta-nehisi Coates is probably the most misread writer in the world at the moment for some weird reason. It probably has to do with education.

to 'form a more perfect union' this country could use massive $$$ reparations for all african-americans (whether direct and/or in the form of targeted community funding) because we sure have been racist pieces of shit for centuries. isn't that obvious? make the rich pay for it through serious taxes, too, because fuck them

I feel like everyone is just arguing their own bias and not reading what anyone else is saying, or if they are bothering to read, it's only through the lens of said bias. There's no empathy or perspective being applied. Just points. Everyone gets to be right in the end.

― El Tomboto, Sunday, September 17, 2017 6:26 PM (fifty-nine minutes ago)

this is generally what happens, but i have made a pretty concerted effort to make it very clear that i broadly agree with coates' major points while outlining what i feel the shortcomings of his writing are, both in terms of the internal validity as a scholar and the external validity as a crucial part of the larger discussion about the direction our country is headed in. unfortunately there are some people who are unable to grasp this and see any criticism leveled at coates, no matter how mild or technical, as a total repudiation of his central point and everything he stands for. as i said before, it is unfortunate that this sort of splitting -- the need to take sides before actually thinking -- tends to dominate our discourse, but it is what it is.

kev's post is what white privilege looks like.

dan unlike deej and fred i actually have a modicum of respect for you so it's unfortunate that the best you can manage is a drive-by.

i honestly wonder what would happen if the environment were like this in the other disciplines. the fact is coates is too good for most who read him. my only worry is that he's starting to realize that

I mean, I get why Deej and Fred are popular punching bags on here. They are often their own worst enemies. But in this case they are both correct.

lol djp and i just disagree about some rap music mainly but i respect him...speak 4 yourself

xp

to 'form a more perfect union' this country could use massive $$$ reparations for all african-americans (whether direct and/or in the form of targeted community funding) because we sure have been racist pieces of shit for centuries. isn't that obvious? make the rich pay for it through serious taxes, too, because fuck them

― reggie (qualmsley), Sunday, September 17, 2017 7:13 PM (thirty-seven minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

So many cities with desiccated neighborhoods and defacto segregation. Even from a practical perspective - centrists will love this - you have more money and more businesses and more taxpayers. The moral imperative for reparations is obvious. Targeted community funding imo is an excellent way to go about it, at least in one aspect.

That's not what he was saying

Xp deej

lol

oh he doesnt have respect for me. .. . . lol whatever

"The problem with this piece by an African-American author written specifically from an African-American perspective is that it doesn't center my concerns as a white person. I mean, he didn't say anything wrong per se but there is something about this that is invalid because I can't turn this into an argument that celebrates me, a white man."

XP:
"Now my feelings are doubly hurt because did not write a thesis explaining how I can mold this argument into something that makes my perspective primary. I really thought we had you trained better, boy, I mean dear friend who I respect."