"Elitism", Class and American Politics

An interesting article in the Worker this week outlining the impact of class on American political discourse focussed on the recent attack against Obama that he is an "elitist". The fake furore erupted months ago when Obama was recorded saying that people in rural American towns had grown "bitter" and become "attached to guns and religion" because of the failure of the American political system to deliver meanginful improvements in their lives.

Now, apart from being demonstrably true, this quote and the way the media reported it indicated some quite interesting aspects of the "American Ideology". Zizek said in the 'Sublime Object' that ideology - attempts to explain and interpret the world by way of a single operation (Marxism, Capitalism, Ecology) - always leaves behind a "real, hard kernel" that cannot be incorporated. This "constitutive lack" is the fragment of the real world that not only cannot be incorporated ("quilted") but is also, in a sense, crucial to the formation of the ideology in the first instance.

To give an example: capitalist ideology would say that we are "free" under capitalism - free speech, free labour, freedom of religion, association etc, etc. And whilst this is true (let's imagine that these freedoms are not being eroded every day) the "freedom" we enjoy under capitalism exists simultaneousy, and indeed is derived from, a very real unfreedom - that is, the fact that every worker under capitalism is forced to sell their labour power to capitalists.

In America, this works in quite a specific way. American society is built on the prospect (illusion) of social mobility for those at the bottom - the American dream (so-called because, as George Carlin says, you need to be asleep to believe in it). This has helped to create the illusion, and concomitant political discourse, of "classlessness".

But what is the reality? The reality is that not only is American one of the most unequal, class divided societies in the world but that it is increasingly so. The bottom 80 percent of Americans owned only 15 percent of all wealth in 2001, a three percentage point decrease since the 1980's (we should all know how and why this came about). In the industrialized world, only in Switzerland does the inequality instrinsic to capitalism appear as stark as it does in America.

The point being that when Obama mentions class, however obliquely, it arouses displeasure precisely because "class" is this "real, hard kernel" which cannot be incorporated. Class is the trauma, the original moment of crisis that warped the social space for the "classless" society. So the media elites and the politicians flap around for a insult (elitism! that'll do), a way of burying the trauma again, so that polite discourse can carry on. Talking about class to an American politician/journalist would be, for them, like trying to hold a discussion with someone who had a great gaping, weeping sore on their forehead - uncomfortable, all averted eyes and sneaked glances.

The only way it can possibly be dealt with is by finding a useful proxy - this is where "elitism" becomes useful. According to this metric, Barack Obama is part of the elite, but Hillary Clinton and John McCain aren't. The fact that Clinton and McCain are both from hugely powerful and wealthy political families and Obama is not isn't important. "Elitism" here refers to a demeanour, a certain "folkish" quality that can be conferred on politicians who hold your "values".

George Bush, that down-home ordinary Texan who chews tobacco, hunts and loves God is not part of the Elite. Obama, the snobbish, effete liberal who Hates America and is probably a sleeper agent for Al-Qaeda, is part of the Elite.

So, how do the American elites deal with "class"? That's it, by not dealing with it.

To be fair, this is how I routinely deal with my problems.