How resentment in rural America has led to President Trump.

Populism has arguably been the most relevant term in politics over the last few years. We’ve witnessed a dramatic shift in the political order around the world, from the rise of new, radical parties on the continent, like the 5 Star Movement in Italy and Golden Dawn in Greece, to Brexit at home, and perhaps most shockingly Donald Trump’s rise from Republican Party nominee to President of the USA. 

Whilst each rise of populism has resulted from different specific circumstances, there are major themes that run through every occurrence of this current phenomenon. These are identified by Kathy Cramer in her book The Politics of Resentment: Rural Consciousness in Wisconsin and the Rise of Scott Walker: the role of identity politics in making divides in the voting population sharper, a growth in inequality fuelling a disconnect between those in power and the economically poor, as well as the idea of ‘rural consciousness' and an us vs them mentality (especially amongst rural Americans).

Guvna. Scott Walker

Cramer begins with the story of Wisconsin governor Scott Walker. After being elected in 2010 Walker proposed the Budget Repair Bill, which attempted to end collective bargaining rights for most public employees as well as increasing their contributions towards healthcare, essentially a pay cut. This caused protests of up to 100,000 and the fleeing of Democrat State senators to prevent Waker having a quorum for the passing of the bill. This was followed by a recall election, which despite the public anger at his policies, Walker survived, and then went on to win again in 2014. Cramer uses this example to show the increasing divide and partisanship in American politics. She then argues that the emergence of a stronger feeling of identity and individuality in politics is one of the factors in this new type of politics, recounting when her Prius (with anti-walker stickers) friend attempted to chat at a petrol station, he was met with ‘I dont talk to people like you’. This widening gap between left and right is manifesting in a refusal to compromise or debate, sowing the seeds for a populist leader: the populist needs only to speak the wishes of one side and is guaranteed 50% of the voters, as the other half of the electorate could never bring themselves to vote for him/her, due to their strong racial, regional, religious or class identity.

The same pattern emerges when observing the election of Trump, which saw an almost 50/50 split in the population between very polarised ideologies. Politicians such as Trump or Walker garner support by appealing to this distinct group, one of the key criteria of a populist.

Cramer also identifies a detachment between rich and poor, with poorer, often rural Americans feeling a resentment towards what they see as elites. This is often based on reality; Cramer quotes studies from 1981 to 2002 which found when there are divides in opinion, policy ‘did not reflect the wishes of the low- or middle-income people. They reflected opinions of the wealthy’. This view of ‘us vs them’ between the people and the elites again creates fertile ground for populism. As was seen with Trump’s attack of the Washington elite and his promise to ‘drain the swamp’, populist leader’s prey on a genuine emerging divide, with the income inequality between middle/low income backgrounds and the wealthy on the up since the 1970s. 

'Rural' Americans 

The ‘us vs them’ mentality of voters is also fomented by populist leaders who use geographic divides to attract more support. This is manifested through physical borders, ie the fear of immigration, obvious in Trump’s campaign against Mexicans or in the undertones of hostility towards eastern European immigrants during the Brexit campaign. Kramer also talks about a ‘rural consciousness’ that has structured rural people’s view of political events such at the Great Recession, thus blaming the ‘other’ for these crises, instead of the decision makers.

Whether immigrant workers or an international metropolitan elite, these supposed outsiders are ‘eating their (the rural people’s) share of the pie’, and these feeling of resentment fit perfectly into a populists vote winning strategy.