MAGA: Beyond Economic Anxiety
In contemporary political discourse, the “Trump base” often conjures images of a monolithic group comprising white, working-class individuals residing in rural and Rust Belt America. The prevailing narrative among many is still that the MAGA movement is driven by economic anxiety and a few bad apples on the far right capitalizing on this. However, such a portrayal fails to capture the complexity and diversity within Trump’s support base and the real reasons behind their support of Donald Trump. A more nuanced understanding of Trump’s base emerges by delving into its various facets.
The notion of economic anxiety as a driving force behind the support for Donald Trump’s presidency is a narrative that has been widely circulated, dissected, and debated. While this assertion has a grain of truth, it is essential to recognize its limitations and complexities. Economic anxiety is a factor, but it is only half of the story. To truly understand the dynamics at play, one must delve deeper into the structural issues that plague the communities where Trump found significant support.
In numerous mainly rural areas across the United States, the economic landscape is characterized by dependency on one or two major employers. These communities effectively function as company towns or counties, where the fortunes of the populace are intricately tied to the success or failure of these dominant entities. This dependency creates a vulnerability that amplifies the impact of decisions made by these employers on the residents.
Short-term profit-seeking by corporations exacerbates the challenges faced by rural communities. The pursuit of immediate gains often comes at the expense of long-term stability and community well-being. Actions such as relocating factories abroad, shutting down rural hospitals to consolidate operations, and favoring immigrant labor over local workers are all manifestations of this profit-driven mindset. These decisions not only erode the economic foundation of these communities but also contribute to a sense of betrayal and disillusionment among the residents.
The economic anxiety narrative conveniently fits into the broader story told by Donald Trump, which is why it remains a compelling explanation for his support base. It offers a straightforward answer for complex socio-economic phenomena, providing a convenient scapegoat in the form of immigrants and rich folks in big coastal cities like New York and Los Angeles taking their jobs.
While it is undeniable that economic competition from immigrant labor can sometimes exacerbate existing financial challenges, it is crucial to recognize that immigrants are not the root cause. Instead, they serve as convenient targets for redirecting frustrations away from the true culprits: greedy millionaires and billionaires, many of whom also support Donald Trump.
In the period from 2016 to 2022, we witnessed an acceleration in support for Republicans among rural communities. This trend can be partly attributed to the exacerbation of existing economic vulnerabilities and the failure of mainstream (mainly Democratic) politicians to address these issues effectively. Trump’s populist rhetoric undeniably resonated with many in these communities, just as Bernie Sanders’ rhetoric resonated with rural Democratic voters in 2020 and 2016. They promised economic revitalization and protection from perceived threats, both real and imagined. For Trump, this strategy worked excellently.
However, it is essential to acknowledge the limitations of the economic anxiety narrative. While it captures a significant aspect of the challenges faced by rural America, it fails to account for the complex interplay of factors that contribute to Trump’s support. Issues such as cultural resentment, racial animus, and identity politics also play significant roles in shaping political preferences in these communities as can be seen by the sudden lurch in support of Republicans from 2008 to 2010. Even in a blowout election for Democrats, some counties in states like Kentucky flipped to the GOP from 2004 to 2008, highlighting race and culture’s importance in this political shift.
This cultural shift can best be seen in the exurbs. These areas, characterized by their unique demographic, economic, and cultural traits, have emerged as strongholds of MAGA. Exurbs, a portmanteau of “suburb” and “rural,” refer to areas situated beyond the suburbs but not quite rural. They are characterized by low population densities, expansive residential developments, and a blend of suburban and rural lifestyles. While exurbs vary in their specific characteristics, they typically share certain attributes that make them fertile ground for Trump’s brand of populism.
One defining feature of exurbs is the socioeconomic profile of their residents. Despite boasting average to high household incomes, exurban populations often exhibit lower levels of educational attainment compared to urban and suburban areas. This demographic makeup aligns with Trump’s appeal to working-class voters who feel economically marginalized and disenfranchised by globalization and technological advancements. Moreover, exurbs are often home to industries reliant on natural resource extraction, such as coal, oil, natural gas, and forestry, or manufacturing sectors closely tied to these industries.
Trump’s promises to revive these industries and protect them from perceived threats like automation, outsourcing, and environmental regulations resonate strongly with exurban residents whose livelihoods depend on them. In addition to blue-collar workers, exurbs also attract many small to medium-sized business owners who often share Trump’s skepticism towards government regulations and support his pro-business/anti-foreign economic competition agenda, viewing him as a champion of their economic interests.
Ethnically, exurbs have traditionally been homogeneous, predominantly white communities. However, rapid demographic shifts driven by urban sprawl, economic opportunity in exurbia, and the growing prosperity of minority communities have led to increasing diversity in many exurban areas. This demographic change has sparked bigotry and anxieties among residents, fueling sentiments of cultural displacement on top of preexisting resistance to progressive social changes. Perhaps most notably, individuals from exurban backgrounds were disproportionately represented among the insurrectionists, reflecting the deep-seated social grievances and radicalization in these communities. Furthermore, it highlights just how important they are to the Trump base.
Visualizing what I’m talking about here is a map of the majority white voting precincts in Greater Detroit. The first map shows which precincts have at least a bachelor’s degree (Red being lowest, Green being highest). The second map is how those same precincts voted in 2020.
(Credit: Jack Sobel | Made using Redistricter)
You can clearly see that the more exurban towns like Macomb and Sterling Heights voted significantly to the right compared to the rest of Greater Detroit.
To fully understand the depth of the problem here, one must first acknowledge the historical context to comprehend the significance of this cultural resentment to the GOP. Working-class whites held significant sway over cultural narratives in the post-World War II era, their values and norms permeating societal discourse. However, this hegemony has waned over the decades, eroded by the tides of globalization, multiculturalism, and technological advancement.
What was once a bastion of cultural influence for the working class has now become a battleground dominated by urban elites and progressive voices. The Reagan revolution was in part a response to this progress since the 1950s, and it’s arguable that the MAGA movement is a response to the social progress and upheaval of the post-Reagan era.
The white working class’s perceived immunity to the repercussions for expressions of their past bigotry adds fuel to the fire of resentment. In the past, societal norms often turned a blind eye to expressions of prejudice, shielding people from the consequences of their biases. However, as society progresses towards greater inclusivity and tolerance, such attitudes and previously unknown bigoted statements are increasingly challenged and condemned as seen in the many “cancellations” of celebrities over the last decade. This shift is perceived as an affront to so-called “traditional values” by some, and it amplifies feelings of marginalization and alienation among certain members of the working class. It is only further exacerbated by the fact that when working-class whites are called out for their previous bad behavior or even fired for it, they don’t have the same money or connections to fall back on as these celebrities do. Even though “cancellation” is rare, the perceived idea of it is very much alive and well in the fears of white boomers and gen-x exurbanites.
Crucially, the rallying cry of cultural resentment is not merely a smokescreen for economic grievances. While the GOP’s economic policies may offer some solace to the rural and exurbanite working class, it is the perceived loss of cultural primacy that primarily galvanizes their support. The traditional pillars of their identity have crumbled under the weight of progress, now many working-class individuals seek refuge in the promises of politicians who promise to restore their cultural relevance.
Republican strategists understand this sentiment all too well and exploit it to their advantage. Through a calculated pandering to cultural anxieties, they craft policies and rhetoric designed to resonate with the disaffected working class. Whether it’s bans on certain medical procedures like gender reassignment surgeries, IVF, or abortion to the propagation of conspiracy theories like the Great Replacement, and championing of Christian nationalist and white nationalist agendas, the GOP capitalizes on cultural grievances to consolidate their political base.
The landscape of contemporary political strategy suggests that campaigning on economically beneficial policies are sufficient to sway these voters. While the brain drain phenomenon, job shortages, and other economic challenges may exacerbate feelings of resentment, they do not fully encapsulate the motivations behind the rightward shift of working-class voters. At its core, the realignment is driven by a sense of cultural insignificance in the face of a landscape increasingly dominated by the educated “elite”.
Its why this change isn’t unique to the United States. We have seen a global realignment of working-class voters into populist, primarily right-wing politics and it is driven by highly educated people supplanting the working class as the arbiters of pop culture.
The movement of cultural resentment, while potent in shaping the working-class shift towards the right wing, is far from universally embraced. In fact, it stands as a divisive force within both global and American society, often eliciting strong opposition and condemnation. Democrats in particular are keenly aware of the unpopularity of this cultural resentment and have skillfully capitalized on it to great success. By positioning themselves as champions of things like abortion access and inclusivity, they have galvanized support among the diverse constituencies disillusioned by the politics of resentment, with particular success amongst highly educated suburbanites.
Yet, even within the ranks of the left, echoes of cultural resentment reverberate. There is a vocal faction on the left, particularly online, that views politics and electoral outcomes through the lens of cultural retaliation. They advocate not voting or even voting for candidates like Trump as a means of “getting back” at Democrats or Biden for perceived failings on issues such as student debt or foreign policy, notably regarding Palestine. Here, this retaliation takes on a different hue, fueled not by a sense of cultural displacement but by disillusionment with the status quo and a desire for radical change.
This duality underscores the complexity of cultural resentment in American politics. While it may currently be wielded as a potent weapon by the GOP, it simultaneously simmers beneath the surface of the Democratic Party, manifesting in politicians like Cori Bush and Rashida Talib. As American politics grapples with the rise of populism and the specter of fascism, maintaining vigilance against the allure of cultural resentment should become paramount. Only through a nuanced understanding and concerted effort to address these underlying grievances can the nation hope to bridge its deepening divides and forge a path toward unity and progress.
