White Working Class

Book Review : White Working Class

Author : Joan C. Williams

My Rating : 3 out of 5

The complete title of the book is “White Working Class : Overcoming Class Cluelessness in America”.

After the financial crisis of 2008, there was a slew of books explaining what happened, why it happened and how a repeat can be prevented. It was exhausting to even look at the number of books on the same topic. A similar thing is happening after the 2016 election. Everyone is trying to explain the Trump victory which has been a crisis for most progressives. I was shocked myself, and wrote a blog post expressing my dismay.

Honestly I am getting tired of these explanations. They are getting very repetitive. It’s always the same theme - “how the liberal elitist globalists smugly ignored the middle class Americans devastated by changing economics who voted with their middle finger”. Not that it is wrong, it isn’t. But that’s not the complete picture, more about that in a minute.

So why did I pick up this book? The appeal was in the organization. One short chapter each for every important question. Author Williams does not shy away from asking direct questions. After explaining why we should talk about class, she first defines who is WWC (white working class). Then there are chapters on “Is the working class just racist”, “Why doesn’t the working class go to college” and so on. 

All the chapters are short. The author comes to the point quickly, directly and bluntly. It’s a very refreshing approach, irrespective of how much you agree with. These are tricky, controversial and often emotional issues. A complete agreement is nearly impossible. I agreed with most of the analysis, and I think most readers will. 

In spite of the agreements, I still have major objections to the approach. I know the author is trying to simplify, but dividing entire population in two groups, elites v/s working class, is completely lacking in nuances of the real world. Yes, a lot of people do fall in those two sets, but I don’t fall in either category, and I suspect many won’t. 

Another problem is putting all the blame on liberal elites. Of course there is blame, but this working class has made mistakes too. Many areas are deep red Republican, and have been for a very long time. Voting for the same candidate or the same party over and over again and getting angry about economic problems, indicates emotional voting patterns. The issue of police brutality is real. Not properly sympathizing with the angst represented by “Black Lives Matter” is unfair and results in more divide. We can disagree about the solution, but the refusal to admit Global Warming is laughable. So don’t blame the divide just on liberals.

At the same time, some real mistakes by liberals are simply ignored. The extreme liberal stance on immigration, which includes “sanctuary cities” is simply unpalatable to most Americans, myself included, and even to some liberals. The liberal hypocrisy, which routinely criticizes Christianity but fails to criticize far darker sides of Islam, is visible to everyone except the far left. Finally, the topic of guns gets no mention at all. Such omissions make an otherwise excellent explanation, incomplete.  

Relating this to 2016 election should have been done with other observations as well. Apart from the class divide there was another problem - namely Hillary Clinton - a candidate with a lot of baggage. It’s all speculation, but it’s possible to imagine Bernie Sanders winning against Trump, or even Governor Kasich winning against Hillary. I would have voted for Kasich. So not mentioning Hillary’s failure to stay out of suspicion is a flaw. Then praising Bill Clinton as someone who connected with the WWC, but not mentioning the role his legacy played in the election is a serious omission. Of course the class divide is real, but that wasn’t the only factor.

That’s what I meant above. Most such explanations focus only on the class divide, and fail to appreciate the chronic irrationality on both sides and severity of the flaws of the Democratic candidate. 

In the final chapters the author offers her thoughts on how the gap can be bridged. It’s all well intentioned, sometimes accurate but honestly, very weak in places. She is correct in pointing out that “higher minimum wage” is not what will solve economic plight of WWC. But saying that changing the slogan from “Pro-choice” to “Pro-child, pro-choice and pro-family” will have any impact, is just naive. 

It’s still a readable book. Don’t think of it as a complete analysis. Whatever has been analyzed, is insightful. That should be enough, as it’s small, feels just like a very long editorial and can be finished in one seating.