Why is it that in the U.S., the white poor are usually conservative and the white rich are usually liberal?

Why is it that in the U.S., the white poor are usually conservative and the white rich are usually liberal?

Other urls found in this thread:

washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/06/05/its-time-to-bust-the-myth-most-trump-voters-were-not-working-class/?utm_term=.8e8fe7a5221d
nytimes.com/2017/08/19/business/moral-voice-ceos.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crandall_Canyon_Mine#Government_conclusions
npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/01/30/581930051/drug-distributors-shipped-20-8-million-painkillers-to-west-virginia-town-of-3-00
forbes.com/sites/katiasavchuk/2014/07/09/are-americas-richest-families-republicans-or-democrats/#1e4dc9b43e83
prod-cdn-static.gop.com/media/documents/DRAFT_12_FINAL[1]-ben_1468872234.pdf
presidency.ucsb.edu/papers_pdf/117717.pdf
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

the white poor live in neighbourhoods with hispanics and blacks, the white rich live in gated white communities

because the rich are out of touch with reality

The most gullible people in history, they seceeded and died only so the 1% could get away with slavery, now they keep lowering taxes for the 1% and wonder why the fuck their schools and roads suck dick.

Richfags are sheltered as fuck.

Poorfags come into contact with niggers a lot more, so know niggers are bad,

I'm a pretty richfag who lived in a shithole in London at youth. Niggers are terrible, paki's are terrible and Europe fags are pretty low par too. Whitie is quite annoying though, they are too flimsy and weak willed to understand fully that niggers are dread.

Some niggers are based but they tend to be ones with very low testosterone. My best friend is primary school was black, my best friend when I was 4-6 was paki. Some are alright, rest are awful.

I don't just hate people because skin colour, there is no point in that. It is how they behave that makes me hate them so much.

Because both are retarded, for very different reasons

There's a few reasons:

Education/cultural exposure
Religiosity
Shame

to name a few. To speak on pride/shame: Liberalism often asks people to lower themselves, to place a lower priority on their personal worth and wants. This is a lot easier if you can still rest comfortable that you're richer and smarter than most other people.

Conservatism, while it should by rights absolutely condemn the degeneracy and low achievement of poor whites, has been adapted to tell them that they are perfect just the way they are. It doles out participation trophies for being Real Americans, which are then converted into votes. Note that the two conservatisms, that of poor whites and that of rich whites, are basically not related at all. I don't know if I would say that there's two liberalisms, though. In fact that's alarming itself, that people of high education and broad exposure often seem to believe the same shit that dropouts and wastoids do.

Whites who live in diverse communities are more liberal than rurals in white communities.

Only rural and suburban retards like conservative politics.

>Whites who live in diverse communities
Because that's a sneaky way of saying "upper cast indians plus east asians". It doesn't mean "whites who live with the average black".

Why is it that when Grenfell tower was burned 99% of the victims were brown?

Where was the diversity then? Poor brown people are concentrated in places

>Because that's a sneaky way of saying "upper cast indians plus east asians". It doesn't mean "whites who live with the average black".
No it means exactly that. There is direct correlation with how much contact a person has with minorities and how prejudiced he is.
Now since you are the one who made the argument about people without contact to blacks just being ignorant will you be honest enough to now apply it to prejudiced whites?

Because that's bullshit.
washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/06/05/its-time-to-bust-the-myth-most-trump-voters-were-not-working-class/?utm_term=.8e8fe7a5221d

Because left-right American politics are not about a class divide anymore. The American left-wing doesn't care about the working class. They feel contempt for them and their ways. If anything, the American left-wing represents the economical and cultural elite.

Take a look at this:
nytimes.com/2017/08/19/business/moral-voice-ceos.html
>“In this maelstrom, the most clarifying voice has been the voice of business,” he said. “These C.E.O.s have taken the risk to speak truth to power.”
Or look at the self-importance that the Hollywood elite gives to themselves, believing to be guides for the plebs. Or how journalists basically think that they should be the ones telling people what to think.

Years ago, Michael Moore released a movie called "Roger & Me" where he criticized outsourcing due to its effect on working class communities. Nowadays, this kind of complaints are done by conservative politicians.

Not to say that conservative politicians care too much about the working classes. Many of them are completely OK with whatever the liberals say, as long as the taxes on the elite are reduced.

>There is direct correlation with how much contact a person has with minorities and how prejudiced he is.
Yes, and again, that is reflective of the opinion that upper class whites have of their colored peers.

>white rich are usually liberal


source?

They're easily misled, nobody in America beyond a minority puts in a serious effort in looking at politics. There's loads of people in Mid-america suffering right now from lack of jobs and adequate healthcare, but they all have been brainwashed into thinking that it's all Obama (one man)'s fault. The real answer is that republicans have had control of congress since 2012 and things on the economic side of things have been mediocore since they care more about companies than the people.

no

They don't as much as you think. It's the landed rural class that votes overwhelmingly conservative. The poor whites are split.

Few blacks get into the better communities, I actually don't think one lives on my street. Instead we have a lot of Paki's who are general cunts as people and Asians who are really really nice.

They call this 'diverse' and claim to love them, but they only love them because it is cool in their shitty little communities. This is why a lot of whities are fucking dumb cunts.

Upper class blacks are massive cunts though, they expect everyone to treat them very, very well. Same with paki's but they are more judgemental and stay quiet yet STILL ask for massive discounts.

I hate humans as a whole, but some are worse than others. I hate dogs too, and some are worse than others.

Education

Precisely this. Conservative body is mostly made up of libertarian types who mostly care about economic freedoms, that being middle tier business owners(think hard working millionaire types), and social conservatives who are mostly middle class rural and suburbanites. They have crossover, but that is the two pillars. Poor whites who vote republican are not a real majority and are often not conservative, they just hate the democrats running their local government because they pander mostly to their base of black and latin voters and come off as massively hypocritical to poor urban whites.

>Putnam’s study, which used a large, nationally representative sample of nearly 30,000 Americans, found that people living in more diverse areas reported lower levels of trust in their neighbors. They also reported less interest in voting, volunteering, and giving to charity. In other words, greater diversity seemed to be linked to both feelings and behaviors that threaten a sense of community
L O L

Poor whites are being taught to hate downwards in order to control them. Niggers and spics are the true cause of their misery, and not the fact that they are constantly fucked over by their bosses and leaders.

Is it the coal mining boss that cut safety protocols to blame for your debilitating black lung that the company also isn't paying for, or a coal mine collapse caused by ignoring safety regs?
No, it's the nigger and spic's that are stealing your money.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crandall_Canyon_Mine#Government_conclusions

Is it the farm bill's fault that your small farm isn't profitable, since the farm bill subsidizes large scale farms over small family farms?
No, it's the nigger and spic's fault.

Is it the factory owner's fault that they moved all their production to China, leaving your industry town with no jobs?
No, it's the nigger and spic's fault.

Is it the pharmaceutical company's fault that they are dumping painkillers into your towns, and fighting efforts to legalize weed so you have a not-as-addicting alternative.
npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/01/30/581930051/drug-distributors-shipped-20-8-million-painkillers-to-west-virginia-town-of-3-00
No, it's the nigger and spic's fault.

>hates dogs

Well there you go

It’s like Warren Buffet’s party affiliation:
When he was a little boy he was more conservative because he worked hard and wanted to keep his money. Now that he’s rich, to prevent people from thinking he is a money-grubbing asshole, he donates a shitton to charity and says he is a liberal.

...

The "poorly educated" are less intelligent and more susceptible to propaganda and fake news.

Congrats, you won the argument that was never made

>thinking every poor conservative voter is one-ssue voter
>thinking every poor white is a racist voter

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Because the majority of white poor are conservative and the majority of white rich are liberal

>thinking every poor conservative voter is one-ssue voter
>thinking every poor white is a racist voter

If poor whites cared about issued other than race, they'd be voting for candidates that support job retraining, drug rehabilitation, and universal healthcare to tackle the 3 biggest challenges poor whites face; jobs, opioids, and enviromental chronic illnesses.

Instead they vote for candidates that don't support any of the 3 issues because "muh niggers".

American rural poor are normally republican whilst American urban poor are normally democrat because there’s only two parties in America
The rich in America will be democrat if they’re a celebrity and need to keep that audience, or a champagne socialist but otherwise republican

Guys come on, this shit belongs on /pol/

Because that's wrong?
>forbes.com/sites/katiasavchuk/2014/07/09/are-americas-richest-families-republicans-or-democrats/#1e4dc9b43e83

>The politics of other billion-dollar families aren’t as well known. Of the 50 richest families, 28 mainly donate to Republicans and only seven contribute mainly to Democrats. Not all families stay on the same side of the political spectrum — 15 support candidates from both parties.

This may be beside the point. Poor whites -- not just low-earning, but really poor -- they don't vote. Voting rolls only account for about half of the country, remember. It's simply not true that non-voters don't have opinions -- if you talk to them, you'll find they often have more & stronger opinions than you or me.

Talk to a liberal non-voter, and he'll make excuses or promise to consider voting next time. Talk to a conservative non-voter, and he gets kind of hostile and may even give you the Sovereign Citizen's History of the World. Make no mistake, these people do matter. Non-votes are consequential too in their own way.

You're a complete and utter retard. I'm from eastern Kentucky and know plenty of coal miners. I've never heard any of them blaming niggers for the coal industry collapse. How would tgat even make sense? You're talking about things you know virtually nothing about.

>champagne socialist
heh, haven't heard of that term before, but have definitely heard of limousine liberal. Like Al Gore being for Climate change, because he makes bank shilling for it and polluting with his private jet. Disingenuous virtue signaling.

>Instead they vote for candidates that don't support any of the 3 issues because "muh niggers".
How did you arrive at this conclusion?

>blacks and latinos live in rural trailer parks
>poor whites live in urban ghettoes

Urban whites are typically far more liberal than rural ones.

So what's your explanation about why Kentucky coal miners don't want job training, healthcare, or a solution for the opioid epidemic.

>voting for candidates that support job retraining, drug rehabilitation, and universal healthcare
which candidates are these, not democrats, democrats believe whites are privileged aristocrats and should be denied welfare, jobs and opportunities in favor of minorities

Yeah but if we did this on pol it would be
>whiter than you Ahmed
>where’s your bill Sven
>baguette BRAAP

Champagne socialist is a term for those at the very top demanding their utopia being implement ie a 90% tax because they already have everything they’ll ever need except food so don’t mind
Whilst the worker who is on a modest wage but saving to buy a house now can’t

>white rich are usually liberal

Source?

So why haven’t you formed your party yet user
Drugs jobs and food
DJ food in the house

Honestly, it has much more to do with level of education than it does income. Even though those are also correlated.

Whites are more liberal the more educated they are, not the richer they are.

>job training
What do you mean? You get trained while working and you can start working straight out of highschool and the pay is very handsome. Support workers and technicians have trade schools and for the engineering positions you need a college degree obviously.
How the fuck did you manage to hamfist niggers into all this?

We weren’t talking about the superich user

Something tells me that a hard left economic party that was moderate or centrist on social issues would clean up among rural whites, especially if they recruited some left leaning religious figures or a new generation of liberation theologians.

>poor whitey doesn't vote democrat
>hurf durf must be because they hate niggers

Most rural communities are far from being diverse though

We can look at the platforms

prod-cdn-static.gop.com/media/documents/DRAFT_12_FINAL[1]-ben_1468872234.pdf

presidency.ucsb.edu/papers_pdf/117717.pdf

R

> Because over-prescription of drugs is such a large part of the problem, Republican legislation now allows Medicare Part D and Medicare Advantage plans to limit patients to a single pharmacy. Congressional Republicans have also called upon the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to ensure that no physician will be penalized for limiting opioid prescriptions.

Which basically amounts to "we'll solve the epidemic by making prescription opioids slightly harder to get"

D
>We must confront the epidemic of drug and alcohol addiction, specifically the opioid crisis and other drugs plaguing our communities, by vastly expanding access to prevention and treatment, supporting recovery, helping community organizations, and promoting better practices by prescribers. The Democratic Party is committed to assisting the estimated 20 million people struggling with addiction in this country to find and sustain healthy lives by encouraging full recovery and integration into society and working to remove common barriers to gainful employment, housing, and education.

This is a lot more comprehensive, and addresses a point that once someone has become addicted to opioids, holding another steady job becomes difficult (even if they manage to quit by themselves), and you need rehab to get back into things.

"Leading by example" is now "virtue signalling". Doing good publicly is now somehow worse than doing nothing at all. We live in really disgusting times.

You might not have understood his question. When he said job training, he really meant job RE-training. For other kinds of jobs.

>I AM YOUR MESSENGER, PLEBS, YOU MUST THINK LIKE I DO t. Champagne socialist from Hollywood
>WTF WHY DO THE IGNORANT PLEVS THINK I'M ARROGANT AND FULL OF SHIT?????

There is a difference between acting morally and mere posturing for the benefit of your conscience.

wat? The post showed the exact opposite of leading by example. Are you illiterate?

The only "virtue signalling" I do is using my blinkers and shitting on people who literally despise virtue, which is both gratifying to me and easy. I'm human waste myself, but I don't lash out at people who do more good than I do for making me feel ashamed. That's entirely my own problem.

Is there? I'd like to think that you're right, but I'm not so sure. Doesn't virtue arise out of conscience? Is it bad to act on your conscience? Is it any better to simply obey a code?

>Heh... the plebs are so ignorant that they don't know I fight for them when I hold a speech condemning FAHNALD DRUMPF at Oscars...

Nobody's talking about the nature of virtue you dictionary autist, we're talking about hypocrisy.

This is why the democrats lost the election m8. But go ahead keep calling half the country racist bigots and alienate them. I’m sure it’ll work great in 2020.

Convenience.
The white rich need to present the most socially acceptable face they can to maximize profits, hence PC behaviour-
The white poor generally lives in low service areas among other whites. They need to maximize social cohesion and mimimize economic wastefulness, hence they're against social deviation (which corrodes social cohesion) and statism (since most of taxation goes back to the cities and rural welfare is supported more by conservatives than liberals anyway).

> most socially acceptable face they can to maximize profits
> votes for party that raises taxes on the rich

what did he mean by this?

They force feed a lot of liberal drivel to you at uni, so people with education and therefore more wealth will likely hold liberal viewpoints.

rich whites are more educated i.e. smarter

poor whites honestly aren't much better than the nigger stereotypes they cling to

Virtue signalling means hypocrisy. It's an accusation of deception or insincerity on the part of people who think they're better than you. Some of them aren't better, some are. All I know is that "virtue signalling" is quickly becoming the first and last line of mental defense for people who can't come up with a virtuous argument against no-brainers like climate change awareness or diverse representation for a diverse country.

The argument has completely spun away from what's right and good, and toward whether or not anybody has the right to make you feel ashamed for not being good enough. At both ends of it, it seems like it's "me me me" and "my feelings" and "my pride" all the time from everybody. Goes to show that people across the political spectrum share the same basic character after all.

The rich have dedicated tax departments that use every rule in the book to legally get around taxes anyway. Not to mention, as stated, that the notion that the rich vote liberal is complete bullshit.

Except the most conservative whites are rural whites, which usually live apart from non-whites.

This is why democrats keep losing elections. Non-whites participate less in elections.

>voice racist and bigoted opinions
>get mad when someone calls you out on your behavior

This seems to be very common among poor people, why is this?

left-wing economic populism leading the poor to believe they're above any sort of immorality is at least partially to blame

If a Champagne socialist goes out and camapigns for socialist parties and attempts to redistribute his own wealth then he's not virtue signalling, he's living as he thinks society should be.

Well for one thing, social conservatism helps to make up for the deficiencies associated with poverty. Tight-knit, relatively patriarchal communities with heavy focus placed on childbirthing (usually starting when the parents themselves are young), traditional gender roles, adherence to organized religion, relatively strict social norms, and distrust of outsiders and of change are a time-tested way to keep things going even when people are dirt poor. When you have a good amount of money, you don't need any of that - you can have a good life without it.
Many poor non-whites in the US are actually socially conservative. It's just that, because the US is historically a white-dominated society, even conservative poor non-whites have been forced to adopt some degree of liberal views because the conservative views of whites tend to exclude them as an out-group.

Good post desu

>votes
I wrote "present". Ballots are secret.

>the white poor live in neighbourhoods with hispanics and blacks
not if they live near cities, in live in the the chicagoland suburbs and whites here are almost all dems

Except he makes sure he can use every tax loophole. Or corrupt a little bit to get a bit more than all the rest.

>unironically tell shit flinging trailer trash that they are “privileged”
>be surprised when there’s backlash
Democrats everyone

>It doles out participation trophies for being Real Americans, which are then converted into votes.
god i fuckin hate nationalism

>surprised when people get mad at being outright dismissed for voicing ideas against the established dogma
The inherent wrongness of racism and bigotry is like just your opinion. Of course people who don't agree with you are gonna get mad when you ignore them specifically because they don't agree with you rather than actually debate them.

Fact: Poors are dumb.

Dumb people tend to vote against their own interests.

If you need supporting evidence look at how bitterly mad all the viral marketers got at this thread

Charlie Donelly the Great was a proud Irishman you retards.

Of all the alt right school shooters none of them even look vaguely western european. Checkmate.

>vote against their own interests
Yeah right. Because the party pushing towards the absolute pulverization of salaries through mass immigration serves their interests. The party that wants to do away with rural subsidies (most poor whites are rural dwellers) serves their interests.
Screeching that you are the poor people's party doesn't actually makes your policies helpful for poor people inherently you dumbass, you actually need to provide for the poors.

As the person who wrote that post I don't think that's the only form of nationalism. Nationalism can also be a binding, empowering ideology, but sadly people are still more comfortable with their regional or ancestral identity than with the nation-at-large. That's easy enough to understand, because the nation at large is a pretty boggling hodgepodge.

>pulverization of salaries through mass immigration

Immigrants don't make salaries. Poor whites don't either.

>Why is it that in the U.S., the white poor are usually conservative and the white rich are usually liberal?
Poor people of most races tend to be conservative in their own lives. The difference is how they view government. Poor and rural whites tend to love independence and self sufficiency more. Governments tend to be very much anti-independence and self-sufficiency. Decreasing the power and dependence on government will shrink the government's capability to rule over them.
>and the white rich are usually liberal?
When you're rich, you forget that scarcity is a thing, and begin to assume that your living conditions are the standard. You start to feel invincible, like you're floating on air. There are no problems you can't just throw money at to make the consequences subside. Big government in your eyes exists to help everyone. Government waste or problems don't matter because there are infinite resources.

Personally i come from a 99.9% white country and i liked nonwhites until they started mass migrating to my country.

At first the few black people are seen as exotic, then 4 years later more of them come and all they do is sit around and peddle drugs.

They also rape and beatbox. Horaay for diversity.

>Immigrants don't make salaries. Poor whites don't either.
What exactly do you think they live off of? Welfare? Not everyone is an inner city nigger user. Welfare is not enough to live off of.

/thread

I think he's nitpicking at the use of "salaries" as opposed to "wages".

You're only seeing in extremes. Also

Many white middle and upper class people are very conservative, If you grow up in the suburbs there are many economic and social conservatives, though they are not necessarily the same people.

the fact is that rural and urban areas have different cultures and different needs. Urban areas require a lot of government intervention because of all the infrastructure and people living close together. Rural areas require minimal government.

Diverse communities are also less likely to be hostile to outsiders, since there really isn't anyway to not encounter them. This leads to less religiosity and less cultural inertia which makes social conservatism untenable.

This is all exacerbated by the fact Americans are moving to areas where people tend to share the same political orientation.

This is why they hate you. Maybe, just try to imagine, that they don't want your
"solutions" to those problems, they just want actual practical solutions that don't carry your ideological baggage.

Rich whites can afford to be sentimental and worry about the poor but do very little research on what helps them and the poor can’t afford to not know what helps them.

Thomas Sowell wrote a lot about this phenomena.

But why is there a similar pattern in Poland, where there are little to no non-whites?

Because they're conservative on account of being poor, and they only see negatives for embracing diversity. Poor whites who live/had to live around poor blacks/spics also only see negatives.

Well, compared to the third world, they are privileged, so are blacks in ghettos.

>practical solutions
>job training, better education and healthcare, and drug rehab aren't practical

Then what is practical?

Self interest. Whatever good left wing parties may do for poor whites will always be more than counter balanced by the deleterious effects of their pro immigration policies on wages, employment, social cohesion and personal safety. On the other hand rich people have the means to isolate themselves from the effects of immigration. In fact they benefit from it through lower prices for services performed by less educated people.
Note that I only refer to modern left wing parties. An old school anti immigration left wing party would be extremely successful under the current political climate.

>the white rich are usually liberal?
The rich whites who are liberal use the state to achieve their wealth, and as such they support statism and leftist political parties.
The poor white is actively harmed by leftism, and as such they oppose it.