What's the Matter With Pennsylvania?

For the last few years the most influential book among Democrats, Liberals, and Progressives has been Thomas Frank's What's the Matter With Kansas?

Here's part of Amazon's abstract:

The largely blue collar citizens of Kansas can be counted upon to be a "red" state in any election, voting solidly Republican and possessing a deep animosity toward the left. This, according to author Thomas Frank, is a pretty self-defeating phenomenon, given that the policies of the Republican Party benefit the wealthy and powerful at the great expense of the average worker. According to Frank, the conservative establishment has tricked Kansans, playing up the emotional touchstones of conservatism and perpetuating a sense of a vast liberal empire out to crush traditional values while barely ever discussing the Republicans' actual economic policies and what they mean to the working class. Thus the pro-life Kansas factory worker who listens to Rush Limbaugh will repeatedly vote for the party that is less likely to protect his safety, less likely to protect his job, and less likely to benefit him economically.

This book was very comforting after the 2004 election when Blue America woke up to find that it was outnumbered. This along with Eric Alterman's Why We're Liberals assures the left that they are not out of touch with America. They just need to work harder to convince regular Americans that they have been fooled into voting for the wrong party. I won't even start with Alterman's book except to suggest that he look at his own history of liberals and try to match that to the current crop.

Frank's influence can be seen all over the place. Here's something that Arianna Huffington just wrote today:

It has been an article of faith in the Democratic Party over the last twenty years that when small town, working class whites vote for Republicans they're voting against their economic self-interest. And why do they do that? Because every four years the Republican Party comes into those small towns and, to distract folks from the worsening economic situation, trots out a bunch of divisive, hot button social issues: "Let's not talk about why you don't have a job, can't afford health care, or can't send your kids to college; let's talk about gay marriage, school prayer, illegal immigration, and flag burning amendments." And Hillary is following the blueprint.

In trying to defuse "Bittergate" Obama made similar statements. In fact, this is what he was trying to say in his original speech but he mangled it beyond recognition. If you assume that he was trying to say that the factory jobs left 25 years ago and people have stopped believing economic promises and now vote on the basis of religion, guns, etc. then his speech doesn't sound so outragious.

So should Obama get a pass? No. He's had three chances at explaining himself and it still has not come out right. He may have internalized Frank's message but he added in some of his own beliefs. He's not only explaining why Pennsylvanians vote wrong, he is explaining why they believe the wrong things.

Frank has problems of his own. The whole assumption of the book is that a) People would vote on economic matters if they only believed that the candidates would follow through, and b) Republicans are evil.

Frank is taking an almost Marxist class-based approach to politics. Class identity and economics should be the main determination in party loyalty. The Democrats are the party of the working-class and the Republicans are the party of the factory-owners. The Democrats will bring prosperity to the workers by taking their rightful share from the rich. You can hear that thinking in most of Obama's speeches. He talks about "the rich" a lot.

One cognitive dissonance is that the Republicans also sincerely believe that they are the party of prosperity. They believe (and can point to specific examples) that excessive government regulation and redistribution of wealth costs jobs and that Democrats are slaves to many anti-industry special-interest groups. Frank and his followers do not recognize any of this. They confuse being pro-union with being pro-worker. They don't even notice that shutting down eastern coal mines over exaggerated dangers from sulfur dioxide or shutting down logging because of spotted owls might hurt the working-class that they claim to represent.

They also fail to notice that other things matter to people besides economics. Democrats are the party of gun control. Many of them are defending DC's strict gun laws while trying to convince hunters that they are safe. Public expressions of Christianity, especially Christmas, have been all but outlawed by Democrats and groups associated with them. Religious people notice these things.

Obama and Frank offer a simple bargain - follow me and I'll take care of your material needs but you will have to change everything that you believe in. To quote his wife:

Barack Obama is going to demand that you shed your cynicism, that you put down your divisions, that you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones, that you push yourself to be better and that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved and uninformed.

How ungrateful are those who do not accept the rule of Doctor Doom! Do I not give them shelter--provide them food? And all I ask is total, blind obedience!

Update - I'm embarrassed to admit that I had to see someone else point this out but the group of poor, bitter Pennsylvanians that Obama was talking about vote Democratic. Pennsylvania is a blue state and the poorer sections are some of the bluest. Maybe they are voting against their best interests, after all.