Is the Kansas Theory Condescending to The Poor

I read a book a few years ago by Thomas Frank called What's the Matter With Kansas. In the book Frank examines why it is that the Republicans are able to convince so many people to vote against what are perceived as their economic interests.

The theory being that for those in the lower middle class and even the working poor voting for the Republican side would seem to be adverse to their own well being. Certainly no one can say that the average Republican economic plan benefits those people in the middle and lower income brackets.

I will freely admit this is a theory that I have often believed and spoken as if I was right and could not understand why folks would do this.

To be perfectly honest I still struggle with it. A couple weeks ago however I read a differing viewpoint that also struck a chord with me.

It accused those on the left and those who agreed with the Frank theory such as me of being condescending. I think they may have a point. It postulated that those who agree with the theory were making the assumption that those folks in the lower income brackets could not vote on cultural issues. One could say they could not afford it.

When one sees wealthy East Coast liberals voting against their own economic interests in the form of higher taxes for example one never questions their sincerity. In fact they are often held up as role models. Look at this, a man willing to pay more in taxes to stand on principle.

So you have to ask yourself why is it that we view those folks in Kansas, or Tennessee, or in Washington County, Maine who vote for Republicans, and hence those economic plans that might well hurt their bottom line, do so because of a belief in self sufficiency or cultural issues as making the wrong choice. Why are they not noble.

This is a complex issue but I think that the first thing we have to realize that the left loses men in every election. One way to fix this is to stop making assumptions that make you seem like you are an elitist.

It is totally fine to say that folks in Kansas or anywhere else vote against their economic interests. It is a valid point. At the same time however perhaps those on the left need to ask themselves why that is? What positions of theirs are so extreme to create this gap.

The next time we praise Warren Buffett for wanting to pay more in taxes perhaps we should consider that the folks down the street who struggle to get by and vote on a strong belief in a cultural issue are in their own way just as noble.