Introduction
In "Strangers in Their Own Land," sociologist Arlie Russell Hochschild takes us on a journey to Louisiana, one of the poorest states in America. Her mission? To understand a puzzling paradox: why do people in such a disadvantaged state consistently vote for politicians who seem to make their lives even harder?
Hochschild spent five years immersing herself in the lives of Louisiana's residents, particularly those who align with the Tea Party movement. Through her experiences and conversations, she uncovers the complex emotions, beliefs, and experiences that shape their political views. This book isn't just about politics; it's about understanding the human stories behind the voting patterns that have baffled many observers.
As we dive into Hochschild's findings, we'll explore the key ideas that help explain this paradox and shed light on the deeper divisions in American society.
The Tea Party Paradox in Louisiana
Louisiana presents a perplexing situation. As one of the poorest states in the country, you might expect its residents to support policies that provide government assistance. However, the reality is quite different. Many Louisianans, particularly those who support the Tea Party movement, actively oppose such aid.
The Tea Party, a conservative faction within the Republican Party, advocates for free-market policies, supports big businesses, and desires a smaller government with less regulation. These ideas have found fertile ground in Louisiana, as evidenced by the election of Bobby Jindal as governor in both 2007 and 2011.
Jindal's governorship exemplified the Tea Party's ideals in action. He reduced regulations on chemical and oil companies operating in the state, even lowering pollution standards below the national average to accommodate these businesses. Furthermore, he offered billions of dollars in cash incentives to oil companies, encouraging them to set up shop in Louisiana.
This approach stems from a deeply held belief among many Louisianans that the government is too powerful and misuses their tax dollars. They see welfare programs as a way of supporting people who choose not to work, rather than those genuinely struggling with unemployment. The prevailing sentiment is that a smaller government would prevent this perceived misuse of funds.
Ironically, these policies have contributed to Louisiana's poor standing among U.S. states. In 2008, a year after Jindal's first election, Louisiana ranked 49th out of 50 states in The Measure of America, which assessed factors like life expectancy, education levels, and median personal income.
Despite these poor outcomes, many Louisiana residents continue to believe that the remaining regulations are the source of their problems. This leads to a cycle where they consistently vote for conservative politicians who promise to further reduce government intervention.
The Myth of Big Oil's Benefits
One of the central narratives pushed by Louisiana's politicians is the supposed economic boon provided by the oil industry. However, Hochschild's research reveals that this narrative is largely a myth, and the reality is far more complex and often detrimental to the state's residents.
When oil companies plan to open new plants, they often promise local residents steady employment opportunities. However, these promises rarely materialize as expected. Most of the high-paying jobs go to professionals who relocate from outside the region. Additionally, many companies recruit workers from poorer countries who are willing to accept much lower wages than American citizens, further limiting job opportunities for locals.
The environmental impact of these oil plants is another significant issue that's often overlooked in the pro-oil narrative. The pollution produced by these facilities has had devastating effects on Louisiana's ecosystem. Many waterways have been poisoned by industrial effluent, leading to the collapse of local fishing industries and putting many fishermen out of work.
Perhaps most troubling is the economic arrangement between the state and the oil companies. Under Governor Jindal's administration, companies that relocated to Louisiana were offered ten years of tax-free operation. Even more egregiously, after this period, these businesses were allowed to simply change their names and receive another decade of tax exemptions. This policy cost the state a staggering $1.6 billion in lost tax revenue – money that could have been used to address Louisiana's many pressing needs.
The oil companies' choice of Louisiana as a prime location isn't just about the state's natural resources. An investigation by one oil company revealed that certain towns in Louisiana possess qualities that make them ideal targets for exploitation. These towns typically have long-term residents with limited education beyond high school, devout Christians working in farming or mining industries. Louisiana, unfortunately, has many such communities, making it an attractive destination for oil companies looking to maximize profits with minimal resistance.
This situation highlights a stark disconnect between the rhetoric of economic prosperity pushed by politicians and oil companies and the reality experienced by many Louisiana residents. The promised benefits of the oil industry have largely failed to materialize for the average citizen, while the costs – both environmental and economic – continue to mount.
The Forgotten People: Tea Party Supporters' Perspective
At the heart of the Tea Party movement is a deep-seated feeling of being overlooked and undervalued. Many supporters, particularly white, blue-collar men, believe they are the unsung heroes of America – the hardworking individuals who built the country but are now being left behind.
This sentiment is closely tied to issues of race, class, and gender. Tea Party supporters often feel that while they struggle to achieve the "American Dream," minorities are given unfair advantages through programs like affirmative action. This perception has been fueled by media outlets like Fox News, which has consistently portrayed such programs as unfair and detrimental to hardworking Americans.
The election of Barack Obama as president became a flashpoint for these feelings. Many Tea Party supporters saw Obama's rise not as a sign of progress but as further evidence of a system that favors minorities over what they consider to be the true backbone of America – the white working class.
This sense of being a forgotten minority has led to a curious phenomenon: older, white, lower-middle-class men increasingly see themselves as a disadvantaged group in need of special attention. They feel that while every other segment of society receives support and recognition, they are left to fend for themselves.
The Tea Party itself serves as a validation of these feelings. It provides a community where these men can find others who share their frustrations and concerns. This sense of solidarity has been further amplified by political figures like Donald Trump, who often speaks in ways that resonate with this group's feelings of being silenced or ignored by mainstream society.
Trump's promise to "Make America Great Again" strikes a chord with Tea Party supporters who yearn for a return to a time when they felt their contributions were more valued and their place in society more secure. His willingness to speak bluntly, often disregarding political correctness, is seen as a refreshing change from a political culture they feel has marginalized their voices.
This perspective helps explain why many Tea Party supporters continue to vote for policies that might seem contrary to their economic interests. They're not just voting on economic issues but on a broader sense of cultural and social recognition. They're seeking leaders who they believe will restore their status and importance in American society.
The Weight of Disrespect
A significant factor driving the attitudes of Tea Party members is a pervasive feeling of being disrespected by the rest of the nation, particularly by liberal media and coastal elites. This sense of disrespect goes beyond mere disagreement on political issues; it touches on fundamental aspects of their identity and way of life.
Many Southerners, including those in Louisiana, feel that they've been forced to change their ways repeatedly since the Civil War in the 1860s. They see a pattern of outsiders, particularly Northerners, coming to the South and demanding changes to their lifestyle and values. This sentiment extends from the aftermath of the Civil War through the Civil Rights Movement and into the current political climate.
The issue of racism is particularly contentious. While many Northerners view Louisiana as having a problem with racism, the white inhabitants often don't see themselves as racist in the sense of actively hating black people. However, there's often an underlying resentment towards people of color who seem to be closer to achieving the "American Dream" than they are.
Religion is another area where Tea Party members feel judged and misunderstood. For many Louisianans, the concept of "being churched" – having religion as an integral part of one's identity – is crucial. The church provides not just spiritual guidance but also a sense of community and a framework for helping those in need.
However, Tea Party followers often bristle at being told how to express their generosity, especially by those they perceive as liberal elites. They feel that their efforts to help within their communities, such as volunteering for support groups for American soldiers, are undervalued compared to more globally-focused charitable efforts promoted by liberals.
Education and social issues are also flashpoints. Many Tea Party members feel that their Bible-based education is mocked by liberals. For instance, their belief in traditional marriage as defined by the Bible is often labeled as homophobic by those with more progressive views.
This constant feeling of being attacked for their beliefs and way of life leads many Tea Party members to adopt a defensive posture. They see themselves as protectors of a traditional American lifestyle that's under siege from liberal influences.
The cumulative effect of these perceived attacks is a deep-seated resentment towards those they see as looking down on them. This resentment, in turn, reinforces their political beliefs and voting patterns, as they seek leaders who they believe will defend their values and restore respect for their way of life.
The Environmental and Human Cost of Small Government
While the Tea Party's small-government policies have found favor among many Louisiana voters, the environmental and human costs of these approaches are becoming increasingly apparent and severe.
One of the most dramatic examples of the environmental damage caused by lax regulations is the Bayou Corne Sinkhole disaster of 2012. When an oil drill struck a salt dome under the canal's floor, it triggered a catastrophic chain of events. Oil trapped within the dome spilled into the water, and as the crack widened, it created a massive sinkhole that swallowed trees, boats, and even homes. The incident left an entire ecosystem poisoned and destroyed, serving as a stark reminder of the potential consequences of insufficient environmental protections.
Perhaps even more alarming is the apparent link between the pollution created by oil companies and a significant rise in cancer cases in Louisiana. A 2015 study by the American Cancer Society ranked Louisiana as having the second-highest rate of male cancer patients per capita in the United States. Anecdotal evidence supports this trend, with many families reporting multiple cancer cases among their members, often in areas with no previous history of the disease before the arrival of oil companies.
Despite these clear and present dangers, there seems to be a concerted effort to distract Louisiana residents from the devastation occurring around them. Fox News, a popular news source among many Tea Party supporters, plays a significant role in this distraction. Instead of reporting on the environmental and health crises facing Louisiana, the network often focuses on sensationalist stories that stoke fear about the federal government and other perceived threats.
Fox News has been particularly critical of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), portraying it as a negative force controlled by an overreaching federal government. Some commentators on the network have gone so far as to compare the EPA's efforts to raise air quality standards to an attack on America by enemy forces.
This narrative creates a troubling cycle. Influenced by media coverage that downplays local environmental issues while demonizing regulatory agencies, many Louisiana residents continue to support policies that exacerbate the very problems affecting their health and environment. They're effectively trapped in a cycle of misinformation that prevents them from addressing the issues slowly but surely impacting their lives.
The situation in Louisiana serves as a stark example of how political ideologies and media narratives can lead people to support policies that are ultimately detrimental to their own wellbeing. It highlights the urgent need for better information, more transparent reporting, and a willingness to look beyond partisan narratives to address real and pressing environmental and health concerns.
The Importance of Empathy in Political Understanding
One of the key insights Hochschild offers in her book is the critical importance of empathy in bridging the political divide. She argues that to truly understand someone's political stance, it's necessary to delve into their personal history, experiences, and the practical realities that have shaped their beliefs.
This empathetic approach is particularly crucial in the current political climate, where the left and right often seem to be speaking entirely different languages. While both sides agree that there are significant societal problems, they fundamentally disagree on the causes of these issues.
Those on the left tend to blame big businesses, arguing that the wealthiest 1% of the population holds the other 99% hostage. In contrast, people on the right often point fingers at the government, the poor, and minorities, feeling that these groups unfairly take resources from honest, hardworking citizens.
Hochschild emphasizes that these differing perspectives are deeply rooted in historical and cultural contexts. For instance, she points out how the social structure of the antebellum South continues to influence modern attitudes. In the pre-Civil War era, there was a clear hierarchy with plantation owners at the top, slaves at the bottom, and poor white farmers in the middle. These white farmers, terrified of slipping to the bottom of the social ladder, did everything they could to differentiate themselves from slaves.
Today, a similar dynamic persists. Impoverished white people, aware of their proximity to the bottom rung of society, are eager to maintain whatever status they have. This attitude often translates into support for big business over government assistance, as accepting aid would be seen as an admission that they are no different from the poor people they've tried so hard to distinguish themselves from.
Both sides of the political spectrum are struggling with a sense of displacement and loss. Those on the right feel mocked for upholding values they see as fundamentally American, such as the importance of religion in public life. Meanwhile, those on the left feel that their public services are being eroded and that Tea Party members are encouraging this dismantling of the social safety net.
Ultimately, Hochschild argues, the core issue is the same on both sides – Americans no longer recognize the country they once knew and loved. The solution, she suggests, lies in making a concerted effort to empathize with those on the other side of the political divide. By truly listening to and trying to understand each other's perspectives, Americans might find a way to make their country feel like home again for everyone.
This call for empathy is not just about being nice or politically correct. Rather, it's a practical approach to finding common ground and working towards mutually acceptable political compromises. Without this understanding, the political divide is likely to continue widening, making it increasingly difficult to address the real issues facing the country.
Conclusion: Bridging the Divide
As we reach the end of our journey through "Strangers in Their Own Land," it's clear that the political landscape in Louisiana is a microcosm of broader national trends. The deep divisions and seemingly paradoxical voting patterns we've explored are not unique to this state but reflect wider currents in American society.
Hochschild's work underscores the complexity of political beliefs and the deeply personal nature of how people form their worldviews. It's not simply a matter of economic self-interest or rational policy preferences. Instead, political affiliations are often rooted in a complex web of cultural identity, personal history, and emotional responses to perceived threats and opportunities.
The book challenges us to look beyond simplistic explanations for political behavior. It's easy to dismiss those who vote against their apparent economic interests as misguided or misinformed. However, Hochschild's research reveals a more nuanced reality. The Tea Party supporters she encountered are not ignorant of their circumstances; rather, they have a different set of priorities and a unique perspective on what constitutes their best interests.
One of the most valuable takeaways from this book is the importance of empathy in political discourse. Hochschild demonstrates that by truly listening to people's stories and trying to understand their "deep story" – the narrative they use to make sense of their lives and the world around them – we can begin to bridge the divide that seems so insurmountable.
This doesn't mean we have to agree with every viewpoint we encounter. However, by approaching political differences with curiosity and compassion rather than judgment and derision, we open up the possibility of finding common ground and working towards solutions that address the real issues facing communities.
The environmental and health crises facing Louisiana serve as a stark reminder of the real-world consequences of political decisions. They highlight the urgent need for a political discourse that can move beyond partisan rhetoric to address pressing issues that affect people's lives in tangible ways.
As we reflect on the insights gained from "Strangers in Their Own Land," we're left with both challenges and opportunities. The challenge lies in overcoming deeply entrenched divisions and finding ways to communicate across the political divide. The opportunity is the potential for a more nuanced, empathetic approach to politics that could lead to more effective solutions for the problems facing our communities and our nation.
Ultimately, Hochschild's work is a call to action. It challenges us to step out of our comfort zones, to listen to those we disagree with, and to seek understanding even when it's difficult. By doing so, we might just find a way to make America feel like home again for all its citizens, regardless of their political affiliations.
In a time of increasing polarization, "Strangers in Their Own Land" offers a roadmap for how we might begin to heal the divisions in our society. It reminds us that behind every political opinion is a human story, and that by understanding these stories, we can work towards a more inclusive and compassionate political discourse. This is not just a task for politicians or pundits, but for all of us as citizens and members of our communities.
As we close this exploration of Hochschild's insightful work, we're left with a renewed appreciation for the complexity of American politics and a hopeful vision for how we might move forward. By embracing empathy, seeking to understand diverse perspectives, and focusing on our shared hopes for a better future, we can begin to bridge the divides that currently define our political landscape. It's a challenging task, but one that's essential for the health of our democracy and the wellbeing of all Americans.