The revolt of the Rust Belt: place and politics in the age of anger

Abstract

This paper argues that the election of Donald Trump is the product of a confluence of historical factors rather than the distinctive appeal of the victor himself. By paying particular attention to the geography of unusual voting behaviour the analytical question comes into view: why did so much uncharacteristic voting occur in the Rust Belt states of the upper Midwest? It is impossible to answer this question adequately using conventional categorical attributes. The usual hypotheses of ‘economic anxiety’ and white revanchism are unable to account for sudden shifts in the voting behaviour of both white and black voters in post‐industrial territories. Instead, it is necessary to turn to the history of the region and the institutional apparatus that connected voters there to the federal government and the Democratic Party. From this perspective we can see that the active dismantling of the Fordist social order set the region on a divergent path from the rest of the country. But this path had no political outlet due to the reorientation of the Democratic Party around a new class and geographic base. Due to this, the party pursued policies that would magnify the region's difficulties rather than alleviate its circumstances. Moreover, the elaborate institutional ties that connected the region's voters to the Democratic Party and the federal government meant that the political implications of regional decline would be muted. However, as these institutions frayed, Rust Belt voters were made available to candidates that challenged the policy consensus that had done so much damage to the region. The election was decided by a Rust Belt revolt that unified black and white working‐class voters against Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party.

Right-wing Populism in a Global Perspective: The Necessity for an Integrative Theory

“…The second base of support consists of those who assume that a right-wing populist party and its leaders are more capable of representing their concerns and resolving their problems. They are disenfranchised with any existing mainstream political and economic institution (the so-called "establishment") since they may (rightfully or wrongfully) feel neglected or left behind as a result of the economic policy reforms adopted by many countries to promote corporate globalization (Kurer, 2020;McQuarrie, 2017). This base includes Lipset's (1960, p. 170) "declining 'liberal' classes living in declining areas."…”

“…7. The spatial, regional, or geographical imbalances of capitalist development and ethnic compositions (McQuarrie, 2017;van Wijk et al, 2020). 8.…”

“…Since then, members of the middle class find themselves unable to fulfill their dreams. Interestingly, however, it is largely the middle-class white men (in the global North), with lower educational levels and employed in weakened manufacturing sectors, who are most attracted to populist movements (McQuarrie, 2017;Rydgren, 2013). While younger generations in metropolitan areas, immigrant workers, and women of color have suffered more severely from economic globalization, they are less attracted to RWP.…”

Reconsidering Bellwether Locations in U.S. Presidential Elections

“…Others have commonly identified the geography of swing voting with the Rust Belt more generally, including politically indecisive locations (even if not bellwethers in the strictest sense) running from Pennsylvania across the Upper Midwest to Minnesota and Iowa (Damore, Lang, and Danielsen 2020; Farley 2019; Rozell 2018). These are places said to be associated with economic anxiety and revanchism, and their location is not an accident (Carnes and Lupu 2021; Farley 2019; Galston and Kamarck 2022; Goetz, Partridge, and Stephens 2018; Guest 2018; McQuarrie 2017; Morgan and Lee 2019; Muravchik and Shields 2020; Thaler and Grossmann 2018). They are sometimes described as having been “left behind”—the extent to which modern economic trends have passed them by, inclining them to be suspicious of free trade policies, and restrictionist on immigration (Essig et al 2021; Goetz, Partridge, and Stephens 2018; McKay 2019).…”

Amerykańskie plemiona – wpływ koncepcji neotrybalizmu na funkcjonowanie współczesnego systemu politycznego USA

“…Wydaje się jednak, że nie nałożył na to zupełnie podstawowych podziałów społecznych, jak płeć czy wiek 59 , czy też kombinacji wyróżnionych czynników 60 . Zatem amerykańskie neoplemiona nie powinny się sprowadzać do prostego podziału na zwolenników Republikanów oraz Demokratów, choć w amerykańskiej rzeczywistości wyborczej to rozróżnienie faktycznie sprowadza się do takiego pozornie czytelnego rozbicia 61 . Szczególnie interesująca badawczo treść wynika z drugiej części cytowanej wypowiedzi: w obrębie amerykańskiej wspólnoty wciąż wzrasta polaryzacja polityczna, prowadząc do wyodrębnienia odseparowanych segmentów społeczeństwa.…”