Brian Holmes on Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:14:09 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: <nettime> Obama and the dawn of the Fourth Republic |
Discussing Michael Lind's thesis of technologically driven change, Ted Byfield wrote: > The introductions of these > technologies benefited some regions or demographics at the expense of > others, and one could generally argue that those who lost out tended to > remain fixated *to varying degrees* on nostalgic images of ther pre- > technologized pasts. Put simply, different areas and populations of > the US inhabit different periods to different degrees and in different > ways: technically, econonomically, culturally, socially, etc. And this > phenomenon isn't only or entirely "imaginary." In some cases it is, > for example, poor whites in the Appalachian and Ozark regions who see > elections through the lens of Reconstruction, or underemployed Rust > Belt workers who are clinging to a long-lost post-WW2 "prosperity." > Those are the easy examples, and especially relevant in this election > because of race issues; but in other cases -- say, Sun Belt retiree > enclaves, waning independent farmers, second- and third-generation > "immigrant" populations, and so on -- it's much messier. These dynamics > are unbelievably complicated, which is why polling tied to political > analysis has become such a crucial part of US electoral politics. That's absolutely fascinating commentary, Ted, I would be interested to hear more about how you read the changing regional picture of US public opinion. What you are looking at is a fully social "imaginary" which, as a writer like Halbwachs described it, is inseparable from the material culture that forms its outward dimension. (Halbwachs is, by the way, the great theorist of nostalgia, check it out.) In France, for example, the desire from one part of the population to cling to the post-WWII social order is really impressive, only it is not so much about sheer prosperity as about social security and a sense of working-class entitlement; it's as much about political agency and participation as it is about guaranteed salaries, health care, retirement benefits, etc. Historical experiences like the Depression, the 36 Popular Front and the construction of a social state after the war do not necessarily disappear from people's minds, even when the material constructions that accompanied them are slowly torn down or repurposed. Having a sensitivity to such collective orientations generally doesn't cut any mustard with people in a hurry to proclaim their latest universal economic theory, but actually, it can tell you quite a lot about why the person you happen to be talking with, or even fighting with, holds beliefs that appear illogical to you, but that clearly anchor him or her in some kind of language and sensibility shared by many others, and also expressed politically. I would be curious to hear more about that in US terms, in my (slight) experience, it is almost never discussed. Maybe there is an American Halbwachs? Maybe there is good writing on this kind of subject? Certainly the election maps are eloquent in themselves: there are deep geographical divides in US mentalities, you can see them written in red and blue. But the election maps show only two colors. The picture you paint, in just a short paragraph, seems to involve a wider spectrum. best, Brian # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org