作者:
Arlie Russell Hochschild 出版社: The New Press 副标题: Anger and Mourning on the American Right 出版年: 2016-9-6 页数: 288 定价: USD 27.95 装帧: Hardcover ISBN: 9781620972250
Arlie Hochschild is best known for her contributions to the domestic division of labor (The Second Shift), emotional labor (The Managed Heart), the rationalization of the home (Time Bind), the commodification of private life (The Commercialization of Intimate Life, The Outsourced Self). In her latest book, Strangers in Their Own Land, Hochschild takes her notion of “feeling ru...
Arlie Hochschild is best known for her contributions to the domestic division of labor (The Second Shift), emotional labor (The Managed Heart), the rationalization of the home (Time Bind), the commodification of private life (The Commercialization of Intimate Life, The Outsourced Self). In her latest book, Strangers in Their Own Land, Hochschild takes her notion of “feeling rules” to Louisiana, exploring the emotional foundations of right wing politics (The Tea Party and support for Donald Trump) by studying divergent responses to one of the most pressing issues facing the region – environmental pollution. On the basis of her fieldwork, conducted between 2011 and 2016, Hochschild advances the “deep story” of supporters of the American right: “…the shifting moral qualifications for the American Dream had turned them into strangers in their own land, afraid, resentful, displaced, and dismissed by the very people who were, they felt, cutting in line.”
作者简介
· · · · · ·
Arlie Russell Hochschild is one of the most influential sociologists of her generation. She is the author of nine books, including The Second Shift, The Time Bind, The Managed Heart, and The Outsourced Self. Three of her books have been named as New York Times Notable Books of the Year and her work appears in sixteen languages. The winner of the Ulysses Medal as well as Guggenh...
Arlie Russell Hochschild is one of the most influential sociologists of her generation. She is the author of nine books, including The Second Shift, The Time Bind, The Managed Heart, and The Outsourced Self. Three of her books have been named as New York Times Notable Books of the Year and her work appears in sixteen languages. The winner of the Ulysses Medal as well as Guggenheim and Mellon grants, she lives in Berkeley, California.
All this was part of the “deep story.” In that story, strangers step ahead of you in line, making you anxious, resentful, and afraid. A president allies with the line cutters, making you feel distrustful, betrayed. A person ahead of you in line insults you as an ignorant redneck, making you feel humiliated and mad. Economically, culturally, demographically, politically, you are suddenly a stranger in your own land. (查看原文)
我视1960s为我的黄金年代: 社会运动，嬉皮精神，个人主义，you name it。可50年好一个轮回，当年liberals的booming of various kinds 到今天只剩身份政治下的左与右的史前分裂。16年特朗普诞生，是这场身份游戏里"沉默的大多数"红州白人的代言人，他在台上说"we'll be noisy majority"，台下大呼。红州人说你们liberals不允许我用N ...我视1960s为我的黄金年代: 社会运动，嬉皮精神，个人主义，you name it。可50年好一个轮回，当年liberals的booming of various kinds 到今天只剩身份政治下的左与右的史前分裂。16年特朗普诞生，是这场身份游戏里"沉默的大多数"红州白人的代言人，他在台上说"we'll be noisy majority"，台下大呼。红州人说你们liberals不允许我用N word，但又凭什么一口一个R word来对我趾高气昂。他们深信两本圣经，Bible和市场经济。石油替代棉花，几经重大泄露家园早已不再，能富的人是富起来了，可大部分穷人不还是没钱搬家？剩下什么? church，honor，loyalty，endurance.
我一边寻求理解一边不禁感叹共情墙之高。(展开)
茶党信仰者的三项共通点：宗教信仰、憎恶税收、荣誉缺失。认为路易斯安那的石油带来了工作、金钱、更好的生活、美国梦。认为华盛顿和联邦政府的民主党政客无非是腐败无能的。左翼媒体孤立右倾人群和文化，右翼媒体在制造焦虑（日后要多读读Fox）。宗教社群变成了道德世界的核心。Stoicism主义者。因看到少数群体“插队”(cut in line)而感到背叛，被catcalls称作crazy redneck/wh...茶党信仰者的三项共通点：宗教信仰、憎恶税收、荣誉缺失。认为路易斯安那的石油带来了工作、金钱、更好的生活、美国梦。认为华盛顿和联邦政府的民主党政客无非是腐败无能的。左翼媒体孤立右倾人群和文化，右翼媒体在制造焦虑（日后要多读读Fox）。宗教社群变成了道德世界的核心。Stoicism主义者。因看到少数群体“插队”(cut in line)而感到背叛，被catcalls称作crazy redneck/white trash而愤怒。经济、文化、情感、政治、人口构成等方面，认为自己成为了这片土地的陌生人。KY是对的，作者太居高临下了，并没有走出所谓的政治泡沫。Trump is an emotional figure, a sign of collective effervescence. Chris(展开)
I still found it really hard to see the other side of the empathy wall. But I guess this is the precious thing about sociology/anthropology: TO OBSERVE.
看完这本书就想给它起个副标题：Louisiana, Where Theories of Class Conflicts failed to Explain the Econo-environmental Victims 觉得自己有责任去投票的人，都有一种对good society的vision，有的甚至是Vision。在社会理论方面，欧洲长期关注于阶级，而北美方面则关注于种...
(展开)
2016年美國社會學者亞莉．霍希爾德（Arlie Hochschild）出版的Strangers in Their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the American Right，近日推出繁體中文版《家鄉裡的異鄉人：美國右派的憤怒與哀愁》。這本書以美國路易斯安那州的白人為研究對象，試圖深入了解這些人的社會處...
(展开)
All this was part of the “deep story.” In that story, strangers step ahead of you in line, making you anxious, resentful, and afraid. A president allies with the line cutters, making you feel distrustful, betrayed. A person ahead of you in line insults you as an ignorant redneck, making you feel humiliated and mad. Economically, culturally, demographically, politically, you are suddenly a str...
2017-05-12 01:082人喜欢
All this was part of the “deep story.” In that story, strangers step ahead of you in line, making you anxious, resentful, and afraid. A president allies with the line cutters, making you feel distrustful, betrayed. A person ahead of you in line insults you as an ignorant redneck, making you feel humiliated and mad. Economically, culturally, demographically, politically, you are suddenly a stranger in your own land.引自 15 strangers no longer
Yet over the course of his lifetime, Lee Sherman had moved from the left to the right. When he lived as a young man in Washington State, he said proudly, “I ran the campaign of the first woman to run for Congress in the state.” But when Lee moved from Seattle to Dallas for work in the 1950s, he shifted from conservative Democrat to Republican, and after 2009, to the Tea Party. So while his ce...
2020-06-22 09:39
Yet over the course of his lifetime, Lee Sherman had moved from the left to the right. When he lived as a young man in Washington State, he said proudly, “I ran the campaign of the first woman to run for Congress in the state.” But when Lee moved from Seattle to Dallas for work in the 1950s, he shifted from conservative Democrat to Republican, and after 2009, to the Tea Party. So while his central life experience had been betrayal at the hands of industry, he now felt—as his politics reflected—most betrayed by the federal government. He believed that PPG and many other local petrochemical companies at the time had done wrong, and that cleaning the mess up was right. He thought industry wouldn’t “do the right thing” by itself. But in the role of counterweight, he rejected the federal government. Indeed, Lee embraced candidates who wanted to remove nearly all the guardrails on industry and cut the EPA.
———————
Indeed, Tea Party adherents seemed to arrive at their dislike of the federal government via three routes—through their religious faith (the government curtailed the church, they felt), through hatred of taxes (which they saw as too high and too progressive), and through its impact on their loss of honor, as we shall see. Lee’s biggest beef was taxes. They went to the wrong people—especially welfare beneficiaries who “lazed around days and partied at night” and government workers in cushy jobs. He knew liberal Democrats wanted him to care more about welfare recipients, but he didn’t want their PC rules telling him who to feel sorry for. He had his own more local—and personal—way of showing sympathy for the poor. Every Christmas, through Beau-Care, a Beauregard Parish nonprofit community agency, he and his wife, “Miss Bobby,” chose seven envelopes off a Christmas tree and provided a present for the child named on the enclosed card. (“The card tells you a child’s shoe size. If the size is too big, we know the shoe is actually going to an adult and we don’t give. But my wife spends money we don’t have on the kids.”)
This split has widened because the right has moved right, not because the left has moved left. Republican presidents Eisenhower, Nixon, and Ford all supported the Equal Rights Amendment. In 1960, the GOP platform embraced “free collective bargaining” between management and labor. Republicans boasted of “extending the minimum wage to several million more workers” and “strengthening the unem...
2017-01-17 02:34
This split has widened because the right has moved right, not because the left has moved left. Republican presidents Eisenhower, Nixon, and Ford all supported the Equal Rights Amendment. In 1960, the GOP platform embraced “free collective bargaining” between management and labor. Republicans boasted of “extending the minimum wage to several million more workers” and “strengthening the unemployment insurance system and extension of its benefits.” Under Dwight Eisenhower, top earners were taxed at 91 percent; in 2015, it was 40 percent. Planned Parenthood has come under serious attack from nearly all Republican presidential candidates running in 2016. Yet a founder of the organization was Peggy Goldwater, wife of the 1968 conservative Republican candidate for president Barry Goldwater. General Eisenhower called for massive investment in infrastructure, and now nearly all congressional Republicans see such a thing as frightening government overreach. Ronald Reagan raised the national debt and favored gun control, and now the Republican state legislature of Texas authorizes citizens to “open carry” loaded guns into churches and banks. Conservatives of yesterday seem moderate or liberal today. The far right now calls for cuts in entire segments of the federal government—the Departments of Education, Energy, Commerce, and Interior, for example. In January 2015, fifty-eight House Republicans voted to abolish the Internal Revenue Service. Some Republican congressional candidates call for abolishing all public schools. In March 2015, the Republican-dominated U.S. Senate voted 51 to 49 in support of an amendment to a budget resolution to sell or give away all non-military federal lands other than national monuments and national parks. This would include forests, wildlife refuges, and wilderness areas. In 1970, not a single U.S. senator opposed the Clean Air Act. Joined by ninety-five Republican congressmen, Senator David Vitter of Louisiana, one of the most polluted states in the union, has called for the end of the Environmental Protection Agency. And the Tea Party’s turn away from government may signal a broader trend. During the depression of the 1930s, Americans turned to the federal government for aid in their economic recovery. But in response to the Great Recession of 2008, a majority of Americans turned away from it. As the political divide widens and opinions harden, the stakes have grown vastly higher. Neither ordinary citizens nor leaders are talking much “across the aisle,” damaging the surprisingly delicate process of governance itself. The United States has been divided before, of course. During the Civil War, a difference in belief led to some 750,000 deaths. During the stormy 1960s, too, clashes arose over the war in Vietnam, civil rights, and women’s rights. But in the end, a healthy democracy depends on a collective capacity to hash things out. And to get there, we need to figure out what’s going on—especially on the more rapidly shifting and ever stronger right.引自 The Great Paradox
All this was part of the “deep story.” In that story, strangers step ahead of you in line, making you anxious, resentful, and afraid. A president allies with the line cutters, making you feel distrustful, betrayed. A person ahead of you in line insults you as an ignorant redneck, making you feel humiliated and mad. Economically, culturally, demographically, politically, you are suddenly a str...
2017-05-12 01:082人喜欢
All this was part of the “deep story.” In that story, strangers step ahead of you in line, making you anxious, resentful, and afraid. A president allies with the line cutters, making you feel distrustful, betrayed. A person ahead of you in line insults you as an ignorant redneck, making you feel humiliated and mad. Economically, culturally, demographically, politically, you are suddenly a stranger in your own land.引自 15 strangers no longer
Yet over the course of his lifetime, Lee Sherman had moved from the left to the right. When he lived as a young man in Washington State, he said proudly, “I ran the campaign of the first woman to run for Congress in the state.” But when Lee moved from Seattle to Dallas for work in the 1950s, he shifted from conservative Democrat to Republican, and after 2009, to the Tea Party. So while his ce...
2020-06-22 09:39
Yet over the course of his lifetime, Lee Sherman had moved from the left to the right. When he lived as a young man in Washington State, he said proudly, “I ran the campaign of the first woman to run for Congress in the state.” But when Lee moved from Seattle to Dallas for work in the 1950s, he shifted from conservative Democrat to Republican, and after 2009, to the Tea Party. So while his central life experience had been betrayal at the hands of industry, he now felt—as his politics reflected—most betrayed by the federal government. He believed that PPG and many other local petrochemical companies at the time had done wrong, and that cleaning the mess up was right. He thought industry wouldn’t “do the right thing” by itself. But in the role of counterweight, he rejected the federal government. Indeed, Lee embraced candidates who wanted to remove nearly all the guardrails on industry and cut the EPA.
———————
Indeed, Tea Party adherents seemed to arrive at their dislike of the federal government via three routes—through their religious faith (the government curtailed the church, they felt), through hatred of taxes (which they saw as too high and too progressive), and through its impact on their loss of honor, as we shall see. Lee’s biggest beef was taxes. They went to the wrong people—especially welfare beneficiaries who “lazed around days and partied at night” and government workers in cushy jobs. He knew liberal Democrats wanted him to care more about welfare recipients, but he didn’t want their PC rules telling him who to feel sorry for. He had his own more local—and personal—way of showing sympathy for the poor. Every Christmas, through Beau-Care, a Beauregard Parish nonprofit community agency, he and his wife, “Miss Bobby,” chose seven envelopes off a Christmas tree and provided a present for the child named on the enclosed card. (“The card tells you a child’s shoe size. If the size is too big, we know the shoe is actually going to an adult and we don’t give. But my wife spends money we don’t have on the kids.”)
This split has widened because the right has moved right, not because the left has moved left. Republican presidents Eisenhower, Nixon, and Ford all supported the Equal Rights Amendment. In 1960, the GOP platform embraced “free collective bargaining” between management and labor. Republicans boasted of “extending the minimum wage to several million more workers” and “strengthening the unem...
2017-01-17 02:34
This split has widened because the right has moved right, not because the left has moved left. Republican presidents Eisenhower, Nixon, and Ford all supported the Equal Rights Amendment. In 1960, the GOP platform embraced “free collective bargaining” between management and labor. Republicans boasted of “extending the minimum wage to several million more workers” and “strengthening the unemployment insurance system and extension of its benefits.” Under Dwight Eisenhower, top earners were taxed at 91 percent; in 2015, it was 40 percent. Planned Parenthood has come under serious attack from nearly all Republican presidential candidates running in 2016. Yet a founder of the organization was Peggy Goldwater, wife of the 1968 conservative Republican candidate for president Barry Goldwater. General Eisenhower called for massive investment in infrastructure, and now nearly all congressional Republicans see such a thing as frightening government overreach. Ronald Reagan raised the national debt and favored gun control, and now the Republican state legislature of Texas authorizes citizens to “open carry” loaded guns into churches and banks. Conservatives of yesterday seem moderate or liberal today. The far right now calls for cuts in entire segments of the federal government—the Departments of Education, Energy, Commerce, and Interior, for example. In January 2015, fifty-eight House Republicans voted to abolish the Internal Revenue Service. Some Republican congressional candidates call for abolishing all public schools. In March 2015, the Republican-dominated U.S. Senate voted 51 to 49 in support of an amendment to a budget resolution to sell or give away all non-military federal lands other than national monuments and national parks. This would include forests, wildlife refuges, and wilderness areas. In 1970, not a single U.S. senator opposed the Clean Air Act. Joined by ninety-five Republican congressmen, Senator David Vitter of Louisiana, one of the most polluted states in the union, has called for the end of the Environmental Protection Agency. And the Tea Party’s turn away from government may signal a broader trend. During the depression of the 1930s, Americans turned to the federal government for aid in their economic recovery. But in response to the Great Recession of 2008, a majority of Americans turned away from it. As the political divide widens and opinions harden, the stakes have grown vastly higher. Neither ordinary citizens nor leaders are talking much “across the aisle,” damaging the surprisingly delicate process of governance itself. The United States has been divided before, of course. During the Civil War, a difference in belief led to some 750,000 deaths. During the stormy 1960s, too, clashes arose over the war in Vietnam, civil rights, and women’s rights. But in the end, a healthy democracy depends on a collective capacity to hash things out. And to get there, we need to figure out what’s going on—especially on the more rapidly shifting and ever stronger right.引自 The Great Paradox
Yet over the course of his lifetime, Lee Sherman had moved from the left to the right. When he lived as a young man in Washington State, he said proudly, “I ran the campaign of the first woman to run for Congress in the state.” But when Lee moved from Seattle to Dallas for work in the 1950s, he shifted from conservative Democrat to Republican, and after 2009, to the Tea Party. So while his ce...
2020-06-22 09:39
Yet over the course of his lifetime, Lee Sherman had moved from the left to the right. When he lived as a young man in Washington State, he said proudly, “I ran the campaign of the first woman to run for Congress in the state.” But when Lee moved from Seattle to Dallas for work in the 1950s, he shifted from conservative Democrat to Republican, and after 2009, to the Tea Party. So while his central life experience had been betrayal at the hands of industry, he now felt—as his politics reflected—most betrayed by the federal government. He believed that PPG and many other local petrochemical companies at the time had done wrong, and that cleaning the mess up was right. He thought industry wouldn’t “do the right thing” by itself. But in the role of counterweight, he rejected the federal government. Indeed, Lee embraced candidates who wanted to remove nearly all the guardrails on industry and cut the EPA.
———————
Indeed, Tea Party adherents seemed to arrive at their dislike of the federal government via three routes—through their religious faith (the government curtailed the church, they felt), through hatred of taxes (which they saw as too high and too progressive), and through its impact on their loss of honor, as we shall see. Lee’s biggest beef was taxes. They went to the wrong people—especially welfare beneficiaries who “lazed around days and partied at night” and government workers in cushy jobs. He knew liberal Democrats wanted him to care more about welfare recipients, but he didn’t want their PC rules telling him who to feel sorry for. He had his own more local—and personal—way of showing sympathy for the poor. Every Christmas, through Beau-Care, a Beauregard Parish nonprofit community agency, he and his wife, “Miss Bobby,” chose seven envelopes off a Christmas tree and provided a present for the child named on the enclosed card. (“The card tells you a child’s shoe size. If the size is too big, we know the shoe is actually going to an adult and we don’t give. But my wife spends money we don’t have on the kids.”)
All this was part of the “deep story.” In that story, strangers step ahead of you in line, making you anxious, resentful, and afraid. A president allies with the line cutters, making you feel distrustful, betrayed. A person ahead of you in line insults you as an ignorant redneck, making you feel humiliated and mad. Economically, culturally, demographically, politically, you are suddenly a str...
2017-05-12 01:082人喜欢
All this was part of the “deep story.” In that story, strangers step ahead of you in line, making you anxious, resentful, and afraid. A president allies with the line cutters, making you feel distrustful, betrayed. A person ahead of you in line insults you as an ignorant redneck, making you feel humiliated and mad. Economically, culturally, demographically, politically, you are suddenly a stranger in your own land.引自 15 strangers no longer
This split has widened because the right has moved right, not because the left has moved left. Republican presidents Eisenhower, Nixon, and Ford all supported the Equal Rights Amendment. In 1960, the GOP platform embraced “free collective bargaining” between management and labor. Republicans boasted of “extending the minimum wage to several million more workers” and “strengthening the unem...
2017-01-17 02:34
This split has widened because the right has moved right, not because the left has moved left. Republican presidents Eisenhower, Nixon, and Ford all supported the Equal Rights Amendment. In 1960, the GOP platform embraced “free collective bargaining” between management and labor. Republicans boasted of “extending the minimum wage to several million more workers” and “strengthening the unemployment insurance system and extension of its benefits.” Under Dwight Eisenhower, top earners were taxed at 91 percent; in 2015, it was 40 percent. Planned Parenthood has come under serious attack from nearly all Republican presidential candidates running in 2016. Yet a founder of the organization was Peggy Goldwater, wife of the 1968 conservative Republican candidate for president Barry Goldwater. General Eisenhower called for massive investment in infrastructure, and now nearly all congressional Republicans see such a thing as frightening government overreach. Ronald Reagan raised the national debt and favored gun control, and now the Republican state legislature of Texas authorizes citizens to “open carry” loaded guns into churches and banks. Conservatives of yesterday seem moderate or liberal today. The far right now calls for cuts in entire segments of the federal government—the Departments of Education, Energy, Commerce, and Interior, for example. In January 2015, fifty-eight House Republicans voted to abolish the Internal Revenue Service. Some Republican congressional candidates call for abolishing all public schools. In March 2015, the Republican-dominated U.S. Senate voted 51 to 49 in support of an amendment to a budget resolution to sell or give away all non-military federal lands other than national monuments and national parks. This would include forests, wildlife refuges, and wilderness areas. In 1970, not a single U.S. senator opposed the Clean Air Act. Joined by ninety-five Republican congressmen, Senator David Vitter of Louisiana, one of the most polluted states in the union, has called for the end of the Environmental Protection Agency. And the Tea Party’s turn away from government may signal a broader trend. During the depression of the 1930s, Americans turned to the federal government for aid in their economic recovery. But in response to the Great Recession of 2008, a majority of Americans turned away from it. As the political divide widens and opinions harden, the stakes have grown vastly higher. Neither ordinary citizens nor leaders are talking much “across the aisle,” damaging the surprisingly delicate process of governance itself. The United States has been divided before, of course. During the Civil War, a difference in belief led to some 750,000 deaths. During the stormy 1960s, too, clashes arose over the war in Vietnam, civil rights, and women’s rights. But in the end, a healthy democracy depends on a collective capacity to hash things out. And to get there, we need to figure out what’s going on—especially on the more rapidly shifting and ever stronger right.引自 The Great Paradox
星空
社会科学文献出版社2020版
一块红布
社会科学文献出版社2020版
班斯特人
社会科学文献出版社2020版
枭少
社会科学文献出版社2020版
All this was part of the “deep story.” In that story, strangers step ahead of you in line, making you anxious, resentful, and afraid. A president allies with the line cutters, making you feel distrustful, betrayed. A person ahead of you in line insults you as an ignorant redneck, making you feel humiliated and mad. Economically, culturally, demographically, politically, you are suddenly a str...
Yet over the course of his lifetime, Lee Sherman had moved from the left to the right. When he lived as a young man in Washington State, he said proudly, “I ran the campaign of the first woman to run for Congress in the state.” But when Lee moved from Seattle to Dallas for work in the 1950s, he shifted from conservative Democrat to Republican, and after 2009, to the Tea Party. So while his ce...
这段写得很不错啊！排队的比喻用得很好，被插队后不公平的感觉大概人人都有过，很容易代入。其实，两派都纠结于这个社会不公平，自由派纠结于上层到中层的不公平，保守派是中层跟上层的不公平？很有趣的观点。
0 有用 Kreuzberg 2016-11-28
故事的另一面
0 有用 RDX 2020-11-30
这本书真的不行，是不是因此最后发在New Press。。简单来说，样本数太少，沉浸深度很浅，观察者自己的视角也太深 -- 居然常常夹叙夹议，而且对他者的描述居然是为了从左派视角合理化。反正各种没法说。下次推荐一本我觉得不错的吧。
1 有用 奥博洛莫夫 2020-12-31
为啥叫empathy wall, 作者本人看deep south就是在“othering”, wall本身可能折射出作者脑子里面存有的割裂。 我不晓得为啥选环保做keyhole question，可能调研当地环境问题？不是讨厌环保是为了工作，这个不是人人都懂的吗，作者搞了半天才说是为了工作和美国梦。这本书好处就是展现给茶党成员的多样性吧，还有背后deep story。明明是被遗忘放弃的一部分，别被... 为啥叫empathy wall, 作者本人看deep south就是在“othering”, wall本身可能折射出作者脑子里面存有的割裂。 我不晓得为啥选环保做keyhole question，可能调研当地环境问题？不是讨厌环保是为了工作，这个不是人人都懂的吗，作者搞了半天才说是为了工作和美国梦。这本书好处就是展现给茶党成员的多样性吧，还有背后deep story。明明是被遗忘放弃的一部分，别被污名化比如红脖子，白垃圾。真的讽刺，和民粹一样，明明上层拿走了他们利益，结果还是给他们当枪使。鼓吹free market也是没办法，因为不管上层，对下层啥啥都要管的政府实在是讨厌。这本书还是解释了一些puzzle的。还是那句话身份政治，红蓝对立都是在掩盖99%和1%的对立 (展开)
1 有用 shero 2020-06-17
我视1960s为我的黄金年代: 社会运动，嬉皮精神，个人主义，you name it。可50年好一个轮回，当年liberals的booming of various kinds 到今天只剩身份政治下的左与右的史前分裂。16年特朗普诞生，是这场身份游戏里"沉默的大多数"红州白人的代言人，他在台上说"we'll be noisy majority"，台下大呼。红州人说你们liberals不允许我用N ... 我视1960s为我的黄金年代: 社会运动，嬉皮精神，个人主义，you name it。可50年好一个轮回，当年liberals的booming of various kinds 到今天只剩身份政治下的左与右的史前分裂。16年特朗普诞生，是这场身份游戏里"沉默的大多数"红州白人的代言人，他在台上说"we'll be noisy majority"，台下大呼。红州人说你们liberals不允许我用N word，但又凭什么一口一个R word来对我趾高气昂。他们深信两本圣经，Bible和市场经济。石油替代棉花，几经重大泄露家园早已不再，能富的人是富起来了，可大部分穷人不还是没钱搬家？剩下什么? church，honor，loyalty，endurance. 我一边寻求理解一边不禁感叹共情墙之高。 (展开)
3 有用 Soo Yung 2019-01-06
茶党信仰者的三项共通点：宗教信仰、憎恶税收、荣誉缺失。认为路易斯安那的石油带来了工作、金钱、更好的生活、美国梦。认为华盛顿和联邦政府的民主党政客无非是腐败无能的。左翼媒体孤立右倾人群和文化，右翼媒体在制造焦虑（日后要多读读Fox）。宗教社群变成了道德世界的核心。Stoicism主义者。因看到少数群体“插队”(cut in line)而感到背叛，被catcalls称作crazy redneck/wh... 茶党信仰者的三项共通点：宗教信仰、憎恶税收、荣誉缺失。认为路易斯安那的石油带来了工作、金钱、更好的生活、美国梦。认为华盛顿和联邦政府的民主党政客无非是腐败无能的。左翼媒体孤立右倾人群和文化，右翼媒体在制造焦虑（日后要多读读Fox）。宗教社群变成了道德世界的核心。Stoicism主义者。因看到少数群体“插队”(cut in line)而感到背叛，被catcalls称作crazy redneck/white trash而愤怒。经济、文化、情感、政治、人口构成等方面，认为自己成为了这片土地的陌生人。KY是对的，作者太居高临下了，并没有走出所谓的政治泡沫。Trump is an emotional figure, a sign of collective effervescence. Chris (展开)
0 有用 真的是江湖骗子 2021-04-06
很久没看英文书了，断断续续许久终于看完，对美国政治特别是右翼政治底层逻辑理解助益很大。
0 有用 FakeFake 2021-03-27
叹息。走进理解的尝试，成功了吗？
0 有用 Peipeipeiiii 2021-03-12
I still found it really hard to see the other side of the empathy wall. But I guess this is the precious thing about sociology/anthropology: TO OBSERVE.
0 有用 地下宇航员 2021-03-07
7.5/10.
0 有用 黄昏之鸟 2021-02-16
失落的美国梦。新教伦理与资本主义精神所带来的荣誉感，集体感，人生的确定性和意义感，被全球化多元化身份政治的话语强势取代（鄙视）。按人类简史的说法，各种意识形态，都是靠着一套叙事在支撑。新教伦理与资本主义精神是，全球化多元化普世价值，亦是。