Maybe Calling People “White Trash” is Unnecessary?
Carville, MTG, and hierarchy in America.
Via HuffPo: James Carville Attacks GOP, Marjorie Taylor Greene As ‘White Trash’.
“I tell people I have the equivalent of a PhD in white trashology, and we saw real white trash on display,” Carville told MSNBC anchor Ari Melber.
Carville singled out far-right Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), saying she “dresses like white trash” and should take fashion advice from serial liar Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.), in a video shared by Mediaite.
“The level of white trashdom in the Republican Party is staggering,” Carville added. “I mean, for somebody that has observed it for a long time like I have, I’ve never seen it manifest itself on a level that it’s manifesting itself.”
This all reminds me of Carville’s quip that “If you drag a hundred dollar bill through a trailer park, you never know what you’ll find” in regard to some of the sexual misconduct allegations against his former boss, Bill Clinton. The notion of “white trash” (or, I guess, “trailer trash”) in that instance was a clear attempt to question the value and credibility of Paula Jones. After all, who ya gonna believe, a former governor or some bimbo from the trailer park? And who else but the worst of the worse can’t afford to live anywhere better than a trailer? Perhaps that was all part of Carville’s PhD thesis.
So, let me note that I do not like the phrase “white trash.” It is a racialized notion that is decidedly classist. I also don’t like referring to human beings as “trash”–especially when the characteristics that are ascribed to the notion are usually cultural signifiers (e.g., a typical “white trash” person is an uneducated person with a southern accent who lives in a trailer).*
The term reeks of hierarchy and feels very much like a racial slur.
Indeed, it is not hard to see the connection between larger racial prejudice and wanting to segment off the tainted whites. Along those lines is this obversation (via NPR: Why Is It Still OK To ‘Trash’ Poor White People?)
Matt Wray says that one of the earliest recorded usages of the phrase “white trash” was in 1833, when the daughter of one of the largest slave owners in Maryland said that there were no tensions between black slaves and white slave owners, only between black slaves and “white trash.”
All of this reminds me of the late Senator Robert Byrd’s (D-WV) infamous interview on Fox News Sunday in 2001 wherein he said (Via CNN):*
“They are much, much better than they’ve ever been in my lifetime,” Byrd said, but added that he believed people talk about race too much.
“My old mom told me, ‘Robert, you can’t go to heaven if you hate anybody.’ We practice that. There are white n******. I’ve seen a lot of white n****** in my time. I’m going to use that word. We just need to work together to make our country a better country, and I’d just as soon quit talking about it so much.”
My Grandfather, who was raised in the Deep South, once told me pretty much the same thing. And my grandparents, who came out of a rural blue-collar background to rise to the outer bands of the upper middle class, would also be quite disparaging of poor whites with whom they wished to distinguish themselves. They came out of a culture in which the racial hierarchies were clear: whites were clearly above blacks, but there were also levels of white. (And this culture persists).
(Side note: odd, isn’t it, that it is always white men in positions of power who think that we talk about race too much?).
In terms of Carville’s critique of MTG, it seems wholly unnecessary to focus on how she dresses (which, to be honest, mostly hasn’t drawn my attention–although I seem to recall her SOTU garb was attention-grabbing). It is what she says and how she behaves that matters.**
Also, I know that this is Carville is being Carville, but I am not sure what the efficacy is of the following, save playing to an audience:
“They have a lot of stupid people that vote in their primaries. They really do. I’m not really supposed to say that, but it’s obvious fact. And you know, when stupid people vote, you know who they nominate? Other stupid people.”
So, I am guessing some readers will want to simply “amen” that sentiment, but I would note that when it comes to political analysis it is of quality no different than the kinds of things Rush Limbaugh used to say about Democratic voters (and is of the same the intellectual usefulness as when Jeanne Pirro thinks saying “DemonRats” is clever–or, at least, she knows it is something her audience loves to hear).
If Carville is as smart as he thinks he is, perhaps he could say something a bit more intelligent. And, likewise, if Democratic voters are as smart as they wish to see themselves, they should demand such.
The politics of denigration aren’t going to help any of us in the long-run (and really, not in the short-run, either).
*And yes, I censored the n-word. I am not comfortable with it. It is interesting to note that in press accounts in 2001 there was no masking nor uses of euphemisms like “the n-word.”
**I will say that sometime attire is fair game for political commentary when, as is the case with both Kirsten Sinema and George Santos, the politicians in question are rather obvious using fashion in a conscious way.
I dunno. Smearing and denigrating gays, librarians, Disney, drag queens, and teachers as groomers and pedophiles looking to indoctrinate children with black history seemed to workout pretty well for Ron DeFascist, given his re-election margin, thanks to
stupid white tra–Florida voters. Although I will agree he dented (but didn’t destroy) his long-term national ambitions in the process.Rush Limbaugh had radio segments celebrating gays dying of AIDS, reading the names of those who succumbed and then cheering their demise. Limbaugh was made an icon by conservatives and awarded a Medal of Freedom by Republican hero, Donald Trump. I’m not sure just calling people stupid is enough to justify comparisons to vile pig Rush Limbaugh. Lots of us call people stupid. That does put them on par with a lowlife scumbag who thinks AIDS deaths are cause for joy. And I have no problem with calling such a person and his enablers trash.
Her dad was a contractor and she went to UGA to get a degree in business and then started a CrossFit. She’s small business/petite bourgeoise–by far the craziest segment of America.
Woke alert! James Carville is being cancelled over claims he used hurtful language.
Carville’s act has, I confess, worn a little thin with me, but he does have a way of getting to the heart of the matter. And he, as you note, hardly invented the phrase. What I’d like to know is how this plays with her ex-urban and rural GA constituents. Would they resent this characterization or would some of the persuadable consider that maybe they’re not sending us their best?
I’ve seen a couple of pieces lately that cause me both hope and trepidation. People are saying some of the younger Dem congresscritters are doing well at countering the MTG, Gym Jordan, etc. performative politics because they are themselves used to working in an attention economy. AOC is great at it, but still seems to retain some seriousness of purpose.
@DK:
At the risk of sounding overly earnest, I am not in favor of emulating fascistic tactics.
@gVOR08:
Carville’s act has, I confess, worn a little thin with me, but he does have a way of getting to the heart of the matter.
But she’s not white trash. Maybe the politics of calling her that in 1992 might have been okay, but now it sounds nasty and misbegotten–makes more sense to call the MAGA people inferior legacies set up by their awful parents who are big fish in tiny bowls and loath anyone who they can’t cram in their world.
@Modulo Myself:
Why? Because her family had money?
My problem with “white trash” is that it implies that other races are implicitly trash – or at least it is unsurprising when other races act trashy.
Only when it is “white” does it require the differentiator.
@gVOR08:
She’s not poor, so no. It’s telling that Carville talks about money and trailer parks. What’s the difference between that and marrying Mary Matalin and turning yourself into some redneck schtick? There’s a lot to be written about how the Clinton 90s was filled with people who got on their knees and followed as a one-million dollar consulting fee was dragged down their Chevy Chase (or wherever) street, and then here comes James Carville looking down on trailer parks.
@Modulo Myself:
Having grown up near the area MTG represents, I’ll only say that not a few post-retirement white ladies there would respond to this by telling you “trash” is not just about money. After laughing and saying, “Oh you think she’s not trash, huh? Bless your heart.”
I’m immediately reminded of my now-retired elementary school music teacher, a beloved cult figure among my peers. She was a Republican when we were kids. Now she Facebook messages me anti-Trump memes. The story of recent Georgia politics. in a nutshell.
Full disclosure…my boat is named “White Trash”. I mean, it IS white, and it REALLY IS trash. It was that or “Epoxy Moron”.
That said, I have discovered another more betterer description for the GOP. It is a jobs program for psychologically disordered individuals.
https://www.salon.com/2023/02/13/ptsd-expert-seth-norrholm-george-santos-likely-has-a-disordered-personality/
Still…while I truly love the phrase, “Psychologically Disordered Individuals” – White Trash makes for a much better bumper sticker.
When I spent 35 years traveling from state to state working in the landline telephone industry I was always the “fvcking contractor” to phone company employees.
When me and other travelers got together at the bar after work to drink and tell each other lies we were all “Telephone Trash”. It was a matter of pride.
Carville is just exhibiting his “shabby-genteel” airs. While his hometown is named after his grandfather, his not in fact of the plantation-owner class but rather the Southern Democrat of Jim Crow class who were the equivalent of Orwell’s “shabby-genteel” and the most aggressive in enforcing the segregation.
“White Trash” is less of an economic demographic than a state of mind.
White Trash has nothing to do with how much money you make, although it does help.
Seriously though, while I agree with the OP that talking about US citizens this way is probably not helpful over all. But the fact remains that the GOP can normalize calling half the people in this country groomers, pedophiles, communists, deviants, and lie through their nose about anything and everyone from moderate conservatives to anyone even slightly left of center and their base just loves them all the more. It’s the lack of shame and humility that makes them trash.
1) Many (most?) people are bigoted by nature
2) Some people have been materially and psychologically harmed by bigotry
3) Those two groups are in no way exclusive
If you denigrate an individual because of their socioeconomic status, their age, their gender (or the fact that it has changed), the color of their skin, their religion, the gender of their sexual partners, their age, their intelligence, and a fair host of other characteristics, then you are exhibiting bigotry. It doesn’t matter what that group is or how much you think they deserve it or that they have had it easier than you, bigotry is bigotry.
As I often say, if the reaction to being wronged was to do less wrong than others, we would all have been living in peace and harmony millennia ago. But in fact the normal human reaction to being wronged is to look for someone you can wrong in return.
@Rick DeMent:
Didn’t Rosanne Barr once refer to herself as “America’s nightmare: white trash with money.”
One reason people love that MLK quote is that it still allows you to make the same judgements as before. Just replace ‘color of skin’ with ‘content of character’ and you’re good to go. Sure–the n-word is bad because of race but doesn’t it express an essential truth about all people, not just black people?
@Tony W: This is also very much part of the problem.
I am White trash. I’m even trailer trash – trailers next to bayous, no less. I occasionally note that I am a rarity, in that I am (arguably) Jewish White trash. In middle school I cleaned trays to pay for my student meal. I was often one of the poorest kids – I knew better than to ask for presents or clothes my folks couldn’t afford. High school drop-out, waiter, apartment manager, home and office cleaner, criminal, owner of successive rusted-out Dodge Darts, denizen of laundromats, pursued by a thousand unpaid bills. I learned to swim in a turd-choked bayou in Niceville, Florida FFS. I mean, come on, that is the White trash CV right there.
The term does not bother me in the least. On the contrary, I’m proud that I made it in the world despite few advantages. I love that I outperform competitors with their advanced degrees and family wealth. It’s part of my founding myth. Don’t take my White trash heritage from me.
An interesting biographical note that seems relevant. I may not have grown up as white trash, but they lived next door, for sure. One of my sister’s friends’ house had a dirt floor. I got pushback for using the terminology, despite identifying with it, from none other than the Great Khan himself, Ta-Nehisi Coates. Other commenters were uncomfortable with my use of it, so I stopped. I would have done anything for the Golden Horde in those days. I am sad that they are gone.
And I’m aware that a few of you might well give me the side-eye after reading that paragraph. All I can say is that blog/group/thing happened at a time when I really needed it. Kylopod was there, for sure. Maybe a few others of you?
Judging from the comment thread, I’d have to say “yes, it is necessary.” As to why, I’ll leave that to the apologists.
While I endorse a policy of stepping back from the use of “white trash” directly, I think MTG’s sartorial choices are every bit as fair game as Kirsten Sinema’s and George Santos’. Just be sure to approach them and couch them in similar terms.
MTG is making choices as to how to dress, and isn’t dumb. Not by a long shot. I mean, the meaning of her performance, as far as I can tell, is “fsck you and your shaming! I’m fine!”
@JKB:
In a quick search I can find no connection between Carville and the namesake of Fort Benning…other than his father was stationed there. And with a JD and a net worth of around $10M he hardly fits your description of the “shabby-genteel.”
As is typical your comment is rated 5 pile-of-shit emojis.
Hang on, is this James ‘suggesting the use of latinx will turn off people by the millions’ Carville?
In regards to your second footnote MTG herself has noted that her outfit at the SOTU was deliberately designed to invoke the Chinese balloon story. So she was also using fashion (if you can call it that) in a deliberate way and is fair game.
@Michael Reynolds:
From swimming in shit, to falling into shit and becoming wealthy.
Good on you.
The American Dream!!!
@Rick DeMent: I would say that, in it’s origins at least, it’s a state of attitude. It was the message that some people weren’t even as good as niggas. After all, niggas were property; you don’t throw away property while it still has use.
BTW, Carville is using the term tactically. His target is not ‘White trash,’ his target is the broader GOP and its pretensions. He’s mocking MTG to get at the GOP caucus. Is it at all effective? Meh, who knows.
@DK:
@Rick DeMent:
I’m seeing these responses, and I have to admit I’m not sure what point is being made here. If either of you are suggesting that the GOP pays no political price for their rhetoric, that’s hard to square with the recent midterm results. Yes, DeSantis won big, and yes, they (just barely) flipped the House. But it was a historically underwhelming midterm performance overall.
Also, is this how we’re going to react to the slightest criticism against anyone from our “side”? We’re just going to say, “Meh, the Republicans are so much worse”? I’m not especially alarmed by Carville’s remarks, especially because I don’t see him as all that relevant a figure at this point. But I do think it’s reasonable to point out that this type of rhetoric doesn’t help us very much. We’ve been fighting a decades-long battle portraying liberals as snooty elites who look down upon the common folk. To some extent, the damage is already done. I don’t think the rural and white working-class voters are coming back anytime soon, and the Dems should focus on their present coalition of voters from metro areas, the suburbs, the college-educated, younger voters, and minorities. But that doesn’t mean we can’t reclaim any ground. For example, John Fetterman and Josh Shapiro did notably better in Pennsyltucky (a concept popularized by Carville himself) than Joe Biden, who himself did better there than Hillary. They didn’t do it by calling the people white trash.
Given how irrelevant Carville is to today’s Democratic party, how are the voters supposed to demand better? and from whom?
@daryl and his brother darryl:
I see it as a rise from swimming in shit, to making shit up. I get paid to make up stories. I can’t believe it, either, but apparently it’s a thing you can do to earn actual money.
@SKI: Given the defense of the term herein, I guess we could look locally, so to speak.
@Michael Reynolds: In other words, you are affirming the notion that being in poverty is trashy?
@Assad: Yes, it is. And the difference between the two is that calling people po’ white trash turns away no one that matters to his goals. If Latinx were being turned into an insult rather than being connotated as an insult (because “I don’t want to be known as that”), everybody would be using it.
@Just Another Ex-Republican: How does wearing a tacky (and fake?) fur stole (?) invoke the Chinese Balloon story?
@Steven L. Taylor:
I don’t think anyone who’s ever been poor has a high opinion of poverty. It’s pretty miserable. Channeling my formerly poor self, I think it’s a bit of a tell that middle class folks assume we are offended by being called poor. Guess what? We know we’re poor. If people stop calling us ‘White trash’ will that fix the muffler so I can drive to work and not lose my job? No? Then WGAF because I’m about to be homeless and BTW it won’t matter to me at all if you decide to call me, ‘unhoused.’
@Kylopod:
Sure but the “mainstream media” (which has come to mean anything not specifically in the right wing-o-sphere) Will bend over backwards to write pieces like the OP all day long, and ignore the dumpster fire on the right just because they don’t want to come off as “lacking objectivity” or some such nonsense.
Although to be fair it might be that if they did write about all this nonsense coming out of the mouths of MAGA’s proportionally they would be writing little else.
As for the midterm results, that is pretty cold comfort when you consider that 40 years ago none of these yahoos would have ever made it out of a primary let alone get seats on prestigious House committees.
It’s a stunning example of asymmetrical evaluation of candidates from the two parties
White trash probably isn’t a term that should be used much anymore, especially if one has a principled opposition to racist insults.
As far as Carville using the term, I’m not particularly surprised. But I don’t think it ultimately matters much. Carville is a dinosaur in the Democratic party and he’s not running for office. This is the kind of thing that would be a massive own goal if spoken by a candidate (akin to Romney’s “47%” or Clinton’s “deplorables”) but coming from Carville it doesn’t matter much unless it becomes adopted by actual candidates.
So, meh.
@Andy:
One would think.
@Kylopod:
Really? The good professor said the politics of denigration doesn’t work out short term. I said yes, they did work out short term for Ron DeFascist. That point seems pretty clear, how did you miss it?
Yes. It happens to be true, so why shouldn’t we tell the truth?
I don’t understand this point, because neither Biden nor Hillary called the people of Pennsylvania “white trash.” There were other, far more important and relevant forces at play in Fetterman and Shapiro’s showings than guys like James Carville using a term that white people like him use all the time (starting with nominating Doug Mastriano and Dr. Oz in the post-Jan 6, post-Dobbs Biden era).
@DK:
The good professor said “The politics of denigration aren’t going to help any of us in the long-run (and really, not in the short-run, either).” In which the “us” he intended was all of us, as Americans (and really as human beings). He certainly understands that denigration can be a useful tool, as history (and contemporary politics) clearly shows (unfortunately).
@Steven L. Taylor:
I think maybe white people of a certain class and life station maybe overestimate how offended the types of whites who refer to each other as “white trash” are by in-group use of the term. Not unlike educated whites not understanding the complexities of blacks’ in-group use of the n-word or straights shocked to hear gays refer to each other as f—-s.
Those out of the group don’t get it, and really, they don’t need to. It’s none of their/our business.
@DK:
So it’s a very-offensive term repurposed in an ironic way by its targets? I guess we should all use it 24/7 then.
@Rick DeMent:
You won’t get any argument from me about false equivalences in the mainstream media.
40 years ago there were still open segregationists serving in Congress–in both parties. 40 years ago there were Congressmen and Senators using homophobic slurs on the floor of Congress and saying gay people shouldn’t be allowed to hold jobs or serve in the military or should be thrown in prison, or that AIDS was God’s punishment for their decadent lifestyle, and so on.
@Michael Reynolds:..‘unhoused.’
Dwelling challenged.
I disagree. Treating people like MTG with a modicum of respect normalizes them. It says that although we may disagree on the subject of Jewish Space Lasers, and whether Democrats are a cult of child molesters, we can come together and find common ground.
Some people should be shunned, mocked and marked as unacceptable.
A pithy insult that follows them around is good. A stream of random insults is good. I don’t love the term “white trash” but it fits her, and as one insult in a steady stream of disrespectful terms, I’ll let it slide.
It comes down to this: do you punch Nazis, or do you debate them? (Caveat: QAnon is not exactly Nazi, etc)
You can’t debate brain worms.
I also think it’s dangerous to treat her with any respect in the House proceedings. Administration and administration-friendly witnesses brought in for any committee she is on should just not answer her questions, talk over her, repeatedly shout her craziest views back at her demanding answers or just sing sea shanties.
@Mister Bluster: Person experiencing the elements.
@Modulo Myself: As a general matter, it is a generalisable effect since late 19th centry, la petite bourgeouisie are particularly susceptible to this kind of political trend, far-right Populism with a queer mix of populist economics blended with reactionary social attitudesSee for example, Poujadisme in France. I am sure there are historically similar examples in USA land.
@Michael Reynolds: on the other hand yes, it does rather strike one that it is a proper professional class bourgeouisie , rooted in the professional manipulation of ideas and words, to queerly overweight words over the verités of actual physical condition. Unhoused rather thans homeless… of course representing as I do a sixth generation of university education and an imperial confetti lineage of rootless cosmopolitans, I suppose I am personally entirely jaded.
@DK:
I suppose people can call themselves what they like.
Although I think you may misunderstand the degree to which I may, at least in terms my larger family, have knowledge of the group in question.
@Gustopher:
See, I would say ridicule for the space lasers and other statements/behaviors.
Indeed, I think going the “white trash” route gives her more credit than she deserves on those counts.
@Steven L. Taylor: In other words, there is no need to denigrate MTG by calling her names. There is more than enough substance to work with.
@Steven L. Taylor:
“White trash” isn’t about money.
I grew up in a family where my mother dug through couch cushions hoping to find enough change for a gallon of milk for us kids. My first bicycle literally came from the city dump. The only scooter I owned was made from a roller skate and some scrap 2x4s. And I spent about a quarter of my grade school weekends and summers pumping water by hand at an outside pump (or bringing it from the city in the winter), and shitting in an outhouse.*
But we weren’t white trash–because we were raised to behave properly. It was “Yes, sir” and “Yes, Ma’am”. Please and thank you. Excuse me. My apologies. Ladies first, and you hold the door open for people regardless of gender. Hats off indoors. Coats on a hanger. Don’t talk with your mouth full, and stay at the table until you’ve asked to leave, and been told you can.
There were plenty of white trash in our town that had lots more money than we did. And there were tons of white trash coming up from Chicago every summer driving expensive cars and wearing enough gold to feed our family for a year. They were crass, rude, disrespectful, demanding, and snotty.
White trash is about behavior and respect, not money.
====
*One of the happiest days of my childhood was watch Dad light that damn thing on fire because we finally had running water.
@Gustopher: Given that on days that Luddite and I go to eat Korean food, I drive past at least fourteen multi dwelling enclaves made from tarps and other debris, I don’t find making light of the housing problems of what is arguably the richest nation in the history of history a satisfactory response. 🙁 I do get that you, Blunder, and others are trying to be ironic about societal frustrations, though. I just wish that irony was a sharper tool.
@Michael Reynolds:
Similar story, as I get paid to draw pretty pictures and make fancy buildings.
Who’da ever thunk it?
@Gustopher:
There are plenty of people who are decent and humane who feel themselves included in the term ‘white trash’. You might as well be insulting people who live in public housing or in trailer parks.
@Mu Yixiao:
So you weren’t white trash but everything you learned was about how not to be white trash? Got it, it’s a totally true thing which applies to other people but certainly not you. That’s how slurs work.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Bingo, and criticism of substance is inherently much more effective if the goal is to actually weaken them or their ideas. Dumb name-calling doesn’t do that, but it sure is good for getting high-fives from people who already agree with you, which I think is the actual motivation in a lot of cases.
@Steven L. Taylor: We are allowed to respond to each individual instance of cray-cray one by one but we’re not allowed to make the obvious generalization, “She’s crazy”?
There are basic psychological differences between liberals and conservatives. Carville said something mean about a horrible person, so OTB is having a circular firing squad about just exactly where the line is for acceptable discourse. If a conservative comments that Hillary is shrill, the follow up won’t be that an ad-hominem argument is out of line, it’ll be more like she’s ugly, too. Many may feel Carville’s comment is counterproductive. How do you feel about infighting?
@Just nutha ignint cracker:
I think we are poking at the people who are focused on renaming the problem, as if that will solve it.
(I’m fond of “people experiencing the elements” as it takes the people-first language that is in vogue right now but which takes the focus away from the problem, and then lays out the problem so starkly that it cannot be ignored — it’s a gut punch in the structure of a joke. My favorite form of humor is being absolutely serious when people think I am joking, and joking when people think I’m serious.)
We absolutely have a housing crisis, particularly in and around the liberal cities where people want to live. Partly because of NIMBYism, partly because of a lack of infrastructure, and partly because our smaller cities are collapsing so desperate people try to move to where there are opportunities, have a crisis and are then stuck.
It terrifies me.
Old Blunder has been homeless himself. Sleeping in garages and on peoples front porches when I was flat broke. When a bad storm ripped up Sleepytown and I had to live in a run down motel waiting for the electric to be restored at home. I came back from work one day and the place I was staying at had been condemned by the city and I was double homeless.
Today I make anonymous donations to food pantries and the local homeless shelter when I can. I wouldn’t want anyone to think that I was being charitable.
@gVOR08:
Well, if we are going to be accurate, I didn’t write a post about not calling people crazy.
That may sound pedantic, but I think it rather matters in making an assessment, yes?
But, FWIW, I am not sure just calling her “crazy” is especially effective–not because it is name-calling as much as revealing the specifics matters.
From my reading, most of the conversation is about why “white trash” is a perfectively fine formulation to use (with some dissent).
I suppose YMMV, but is that what you want from this site?
Again, I am not sure that there is a lot of fighting going on here. But, beyond that, “infighting” suggests that there is a specific “in” identity you expect here. Is that the case?
FWIW, I wrote a piece about what I thought about a thing I read because it intersects with things I have thought about for some time. That sometimes (but not always) generates a discussion. (The post actually started as what was going to be a single-line quick take in a tab-clearing exercise. More words decided to come out.
@Mu Yixiao: All well and good, but this isn’t about what people call themsevles.
@Modulo Myself:
Everything I learned was how to be a respectful person. That has zero to do with money.
I grew up with farmers who drove rusted out POS trucks, had ripped up bib overalls, and manure-stained boots… and would hold open the door for a lady, say “Thank you, miss” to the checkout girl, and have a smile for everyone.
It’s not about “trying not to be white trash”, it’s about being respectful of your fellow humans.
{sigh}
Here’s another thing my mother father taught me: Walk away from simplistic provocation, it isn’t worth the effort.
… end of line …
@Mu Yixiao:
Yes, but the question still remains as to where you got the idea that being polite means you weren’t “white trash” and why some other people were because they wore their hats inside, ate with their mouths full, and didn’t say “yes ma’am” etc.
@Steven L. Taylor:
1) You specifically tied the term to wealth in your question to Michael. I refute that notion.
2) I never said it was just about what I call myself. My family (and most of my poor friends) were never seen as white trash–by others–because we behaved in a polite and civil manner.
Someone who can’t remain civil during the SOTU, and heckles the President during his speech deserves to be called out for their behavior.
Superficially, I think this is likely people wanting to engage int he same kind of name calling that has been so popular on the right. Trump made it into an art form and it is part fo why he is so popular. Making fun of a handicapped person is not acceptable for most of us, but for Trump and his fans its more than acceptable, it is to be celebrated. It works well for conservatives because that is part of their personalities and what they like. I just dont think it works so well for liberals/progressives/Democrats. Its just not in the DNA so it sounds kind of false. If you spend a lot fo time and capital on defending people who have need to be defended/represented, it seems kind of hollow. Maybe briefly funny but not something to repeat over and over the way conservatives will repeat the same petty insults over and over.
At a deeper level it gets complicated because there certainly is a subculture that fits under the “trailer park trash” description. It sent really limited to poor people, though they kind fo dominate it. Having several in the family and working with the group I find them difficult and there is a lot unappealing about the group.
Steve
@Mu Yixiao:
While I can accept that the general descriptor includes more than poverty, I think you are incorrect to assert that it isn’t primarily linked to poverty. The stereotype of “white trash” is people living in trailer parks on in shacks with dirt floors, not people in middle-class tract houses.
@Mu Yixiao:
Which can be readily done without using the term “white trash,” yes?
At a deeper level it gets complicated because there certainly is a subculture that fits under the “trailer park trash” description. It sent really limited to poor people, though they kind fo dominate it. Having several in the family and working with the group I find them difficult and there is a lot unappealing about the group.
Sure and take one of these people, give them money, a private school education, and well-connected parents, and they’re screaming ‘I love beer’ at their Supreme Court confirmation hearing. The ‘trash’ part is what the upper class tells the lower classes about behavior as a joke.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Because of how people treated the polite people in return–and how they treated the those who weren’t.
And believe me: Where I grew up, they’d have said it to my face if they thought it–and they did to others.
@Mu Yixiao: You miss the point.
Saying “I was taught to be polite” is one thing.
Saying, “I was taught to be polite because that meant we weren’t white trash” is quite another.
Let’s say the polite middle-class families were not telling their kids that kind of thing.
A possible question for further consideration: why is it that the term “white trash” exists, but I am unfamiliar with “Mexican trash” or “Black trash” or “Asian trash” etc.?
For that matter, the only other variation I can think of is “trailer park trash” which I associate with white people.
(Indeed, the only other example I can think of was Admiral Cartwright in Star Trek VI stating that “Klingons would become the alien trash of the galaxy” due to their collapsing economy–and it was clearly meant to be a xenophobic slur that inferred that they would become poor and needy).
@Michael Reynolds:
@DK:
As someone who grew up in a poor area and was “white trash” adjacent, I agree. When you are poor, you don’t like being spoken down to but honestly don’t really have the time or energy to get into these kinds of linguistical spats. So what if middle class people go woke and stop calling you “white trash” – they’ll just replace it with a softer term but the same intent. What do you care what the word du jour is when your reality is a half-empty ketchup drawer you refill from McDonald’s and a car that’s held together by duct tape and solder your neighbor swiped from his third job?
Not to mention the term references a very real type of personality and behavior you end up living around when you are not making much; you don’t find as many of them in the middle or high end of the wealth spectrum because a lot of their life choices and attitude towards the world end up sinking them right back down to the bottom. Kinda like how not all hypocrites are conservatives but most conservatives are hypocrites, not everyone who’s poor is trash but damned if most trash ain’t poor (Trumps sadly excepted). When I was young, I could tell you exactly who was gonna grow up to continue the cycle of trashiness and who might not be well-off but would still do fine. The term reflects an aura of being wherein finances are a large part but as we’ve clearly seen, you can take the girl out of the park but not the park out of the girl.
@Steven L. Taylor”
Yes, because when one acts like the stereotype, one tends to lose one’s money and job and can no longer afford middle-class accouterment. The stereotype also holds having/being a baby mama (or several), addictions, loud public drama that tends to get one fired and other things that are really bad at ensuring a good wage long term. Picture this: your doctor comes into to see you but you’re interrupted by a screaming woman calling him a cheating bastard since he slept with her sister and he hasn’t paid child support for his 5 kids in years. Do doctors behave like the accused? Yes but the whole interrupting work for drama thing is a hallmark of white trashiness; classier places have security to intercept the crazy while lesser-paying jobs kind just let them in or don’t care. He wouldn’t be a doctor for long if that kept happening though and getting fired/ let go tends to tank one’s wallet enough to – you guessed it – loose the nice dwelling and end up in sh*ttier housing.
Maybe he should have just said she should pull the bone out of her nose on his nationally syndicated radio show. Then, he might get a hagiography upon his death instead of this hand wringing.
@KM:
This sounds like the classic conservative argument that the poor are poor because they deserve it, or am I missing your point.
(Also note I directly responding to Mu’s assertion that “white trash” stereotypes are linked to socioeconomic indicators while he wants to say it is just about behavior).
@Mu Yixiao:
I think the point is that “white trash” is a pejorative, and one that can be used against people who might not fit one’s specific definition of the term, whatever that definition is.
It’s meant as an insult and is intended to be insulting, it’s not meant to be an accurate social or demographic descriptor. Your family was not “white trash” – ok, but people could still use that term to insult your family.
That’s how I interpret Carville’s use. He’s deliberately using the term as an insult, not as a descriptor.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Where did you get they deserved it from??? My point is cause and effect, not a moral imperative. Self-destructive behavior tends to destroy things, including your ability to keep up with the Jones. It’s not classist to point out that the consequences of your own actions can keep you down, especially when upward social mobility is ever harder. When the cards are stacked against you, it’s extremely dumb to make it even worse.
The example I gave was based in reality; we had to let someone go because of repeated public instances of very loud, very explicit and occasionally violent social drama being dragged into the workplace. He lost a well-paying job because he couldn’t stop acting… well, like white trash on an episode of Jerry Springer. When there’s an episode of Who’s the Father in the lobby and it includes the admin for the 7th floor as well as 3 women security’s trying to wrangle, you aren’t going to be making your mortgage payment this month.
Again, I’m from a very poor area. I grew up with guys who had warrants out for their arrest all the time for driving without a license be the one who picked us up from school. Mothers would bought smokes and lotto tickets instead of food so I had to share my sandwiches with their kids. Fathers who let the floor rust out of the trailer because they wanted to buy the newest Ford truck instead and watch it get promptly reprocessed. Families who could never get ahead in life not because of lack of chances but self-sabotage and bad decisions come back to bite them in the ass time and time again. They didn’t deserve to be poor but they had a hand in not being able to rise out of it.
@Steven L. Taylor:
I’d take it a step farther. Dividing people up and insulting them based on degree and color of trashiness plays exactly into the hands of those pushing Jim Crow governance.
1: Divide people into groups
+ 2: Set them against each other
= 3: Stop worrying about them ever cooperating against you
And yes this applies to everyone, regardless of political persuasion, ethnic or sexual or gender identity. It works well with most humans, regardless of flavor.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Bingo. What is going on is that most people are fine with bigotry, they just want to limit it to groups they don’t belong too. Either you treat people as individuals or you don’t. And it just proves you are a bigot if you think it is fine to call someone “white trash” or the N word simply because you feel they deserve to be insulted. I suppose I can come up with various people who are Jewish or Hispanic or, heck, even South Side Chicago Irish that deserve to be insulted. But I would just be showing my own bigoted ass if the words I used to insult them were… heck, I can’t even write them down.
@MarkedMan: I should be clear here. I’m not saying we should cooperate with MTG. She’s a dangerous conspiracy theorist and fantasist, and an obnoxious lout to boot. On top of that she’s a hateful bigot. We would only damage ourselves by trying to even associate with her. But if you think the go-to way to describe her involves her race, then a) you’re being bigoted yourself, and b) you are pissing off everyone in that category, especially ones who’ve felt looked down on themselves, playing right into the hands of the powerful who want to keep everyone else at each other’s throats.
@Gustopher: And significantly because wages are inadequate in most places. Of course, that’s the workers’ faults. They shouldn’t live in places where they can’t afford the rents.
I can see we’ve reached the talking past each other point now. Good job everyone!
@JKB: Indeed. I think this
led to
… because in British society, those men in the first quote were often the younger sons of aristocracy. The further you were from being able to inherit under the rules of primogeniture, the more likely you were to have to earn a living in a profession. Yet, you had likely grown up in luxury and so were accustomed to a certain lifestyle. I have no doubt that they tried to replicate it, despite not having the income to do so.
Although since inheritance laws in the US are entirely different from the UK, I’m not quite sure we have the same set of downwardly mobile sons. “Fail sons” in the US still tend to fall back on Dad’s money and connections.
@Jay L Gischer: I was there! I loved TNC’s blog, especially his “Talk to me like I’m stupid” entries, and his “conversating” ones.
@Steven L. Taylor: Growing up on the West Coast in a significantly redlined city, we had plenty of Mexican, Asian, Filipino, and Samoan trash. And they were called that, too. As far as Black trash goes, I think that they’ve not yet moved out of being “property” far enough to rate being disdained as trash yet, but I may be oversimplifying things.
@Michael Reynolds: totally off-topic, but I saw a really fun Twitter thread recently, where someone started trying to compile a list for their English learner friend of all the different ways to use the word “shit.” (e.g., “the shit,” “no shit!”, “talk shit,” “bat shit,” etc.) Other people started adding to the list. It was epic!
@KM: “What do you care what the word du jour is when your reality is a half-empty ketchup drawer you refill from McDonald’s and a car that’s held together by duct tape and solder your neighbor swiped from his third job?”
Indeed! And in fact, being able to take pride at you “white trash” roots may only be an overt example of
white pri…Nope. Not gonna say it. Only make people madder than they already are.
@Steven L. Taylor: “This sounds like the classic conservative argument that the poor are poor because they deserve it, or am I missing your point.”
I read someone trying to make a cause-and-effect argument, but it might have been easier for me because I grew up in a working-class area (and had my first job in an industry) where that scenario was being played out with great regularity.
@Monala:
It’s interesting how many of us ended up converging here.
@MarkedMan: “I’d take it a step farther. Dividing people up and insulting them based on degree and color of trashiness plays exactly into the hands of those pushing Jim Crow governance.”
And is exactly what MAGAts admire about Trump, too.
@Just nutha ignint cracker: I agree that there are causes and effects. No argument whatsoever. If you waster your money, are a lout, and treat people poorly then you are likely going to be on the poorer side of things.
But acknowledging that is not the same as validating the category of “white trash” because such people exist.
I seems to me that many people are too willing to say that “those people” are, in fact, “trash.”
@KM: So, are these people “trash” and what is the threshold over which people are just people who made poor decisions and when are they “trash”?
BTW, I am not saying a lot of people don’t make really poor decisions. I can think of any number of members of my own extended family that made decisions I certainly thought were foolish. But that is a different discussion, at least to me, as to whether there is a legitimate category of persons we should all be calling “white trash.”
@Andy:
Indeed and exactly.
(And, moreover, part of my point is that it is rather hard to see a phrase that categorizes other humans as refuse as anything other than an insult).
@Just nutha ignint cracker: To a degree, yes. Although not entirely, I would argue.
Certainly not as much as some discussions I have been involved with.
@Just nutha ignint cracker:
You are missing my point. First, none of those terms have the cultural cache that “white trash” has and I lived for a while in SoCal, and while I heard plenty of derogatory things said about Mexicans and Asians, I do not recall them ever being called “trash.”
My point is simply that when “white” is the default, then you need a modifier to identify and denigrate whites of lower status in ways that is not true of other groupings, when you can just use other sluts that are obviously connected to the groups that aren’t dominant. In many ways, the existence of “white trash” as a slur is a signifier of white social dominance.
@Steven L. Taylor: If you tell your racist neighbor that a “Black family” bought your house, that is all he needs to know to be upset. If you tell him a “white family” bought the house that is cool. You need “white trash” to indicate that they are the wrong kind of whites.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Exactly. Why is no one called “black trash”? Same reason there’s no white history month. It’s always white history month by default.
“Ignorance and blind rage on display.” would’ve been more effective and more accurate.
@Steven L. Taylor: @KM: Here’s a question: Has the usage of the term “white trash” changed over the years? I remember being told (by a Southerner) that in the South, “white trash” didn’t so much refer to people with dirt floors. etc., but (white) people who indulged in uncivil and self-sabotaging behaviour, who had a chip on their shoulder about everything, and for whom nothing was ever their fault.
If we can’t call them “white trash”, I’d dearly love to know what we CAN call them, because they certainly do exist and certainly do muck up society for the rest of us trying to live peaceful existences.
@grumpy realist:…I’d dearly love to know what we CAN call them,..
Jerks?
So noted, however the colloquial meaning is not the same for all people.
You have your interpretation, I have mine (which is actually closer to that of Mu Yixiao’s).
Are you arguing that your interpretation is the “proper” one, or is your point that calling a person’s actions as worthless/empty/performative “unnecessary” ?
@Bob@Youngstown:
I would say that he objects to the phrase because
It’s certainly a phrase I have used and I agree with many upthread that it has a certain utility. But I agree with Steven that it’s lazy and loaded with racial and classist connotations and therefore, at a minimum, is very unlikely to win people over.
@grumpy realist: Here’s something that I am asking folks to think about: what is the goal of including “white” in this formulation? What is the goal of othering trashy people from what I presume are the “good and normal” whites?
If the issue is behavior, why is race a relevant aspect of the conversation?
@Bob@Youngstown: @Bob@Youngstown:
I would respectfully suggest that you are making an argument that is often used to defend slurs.
But is that really what you want to do?
And what is else would assigning the label “white trash” be called other than as a slur?
I would also refer you to my comment prior.
(I would also suggest that my interpretation is pretty mainstream–after all, even the defenders of the term above don’t seem, on balance, to disagree with the basic definition. The disagreement seems to be about whether it is problematic or not.).
@grumpy realist:
I meant to emphasize this.
Whos’ “them”?
Also: I would suggest that when we feel the need to call some generalized group by a derogatory name, it is a good time to pause and rethink.
I think the point here is not about what the usage means or how bad it is to use it, but-
What is the likely result of Carville using it on “liberal” MSNBC?
This country has an active politics of resentment – people voting on a perception of “liberal elitists” disrespecting “Real Americans.” The GOP and its allies (Fox NC, etc.) work hard at stirring people up over this. This just feeds right into that.
FWIW, IMO the term has regional connotations: rich Southerners keeping poor Southerner whites diverted by playing them off against poor Southern blacks. The GOP, the white party, is now nationalizing the tactic, demonizing BLM, Antifa etc.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Great, so now we can’t call a-holes a-holes anymore without deep navel gazing?
@Grumpy defined “them” for you in their org post while I offered a slightly different but interrelated group (constant bad life choices often make one blame the world rather then oneself for their fates). I believe @Micheal also gave a definition up top. Not a vague generalized group like a “them” but a specific subgroup defined by attitude and behavior. That the group themselves is defined by negative attributes doesn’t change that it’s a legit and valid definition.
At this point, it’s really sounding like you just want to chide people for impoliteness and tone police rather then admit the necessity for terminology. There really are such people in the world and language abhors a vacuum; the term doesn’t have to be a slur in it’s creation to be used as one but the term does and should exist regards. Do you feel “MAGA” is a slur since it defines a similar group? Is “lib” a slur now because many Americans now use it to define a in-group via negative terms? Even if we drop the “white” part, your objection to the “trash” bit as well means it’s not that it’s racial or classist or even insulting that’s the problem – its that you think that expressing it reinforces an unfair stereotype when many of us are straight up telling you such folks are very, very real. We’re not insulting stereotypes but speaking to you about actual observed human behavior and personalities that need a name. We can’t just label everything a-hole or jerk, you know – those words have meaning too and society is already suffering from word dilution.
So my question to you Dr Taylor is this: what term would you use since you’re the objector? To @grumpy’s and mine definitions, what is the proper term to use in polite and professional society then? And if you think a term isn’t needed, kindly offer how one should speak of such things. I need to know so when I go visit back home and my peers use the term I can correct them with the new middle-class comfortable wording. After they’re done laughing, they’re go right back to using it because ultimately it’s a negative term for an existing negative thing and prettying it won’t do a thing. It’s not a general insult for people of a specific color like n-word nor for poor people as a whole so they’re not going to be offended when they hear it. They’re going to be baffled why this is now a thing and politely ignore me when I show them this thread. However, I shall do my part to tell the in-group they no longer have WT-privledges and relay the better term you offer.
@KM:
Did I say you can’t call a-holes a-holes?
Where did I say that?
@gVOR08:
Because they used “ghetto” or “hood” instead. The term exists for all racial groups, just not by swapping out the racial color in front of trash.
In other countries the term is “chav” instead of “white trash” – how about we use that instead?
@KM: As to the rest of you comment, I may have time to respond later.
I would still ask: why are you so invested in the term “white trash”?
I am honestly baffled that people think this is a term in need of defending due to its inherent value.
@KM:
There are white people who are trash? Work that one out for me.
Also: my racist grandparents would have had the exact same defense of the deployment of the n-word.
You guys all want to use the term, use it, whatever. Know that people will react to it, though, depending who hears you use it.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Because it’s a derogatory term for an extremely general and vague grouping whereas the discussed term has a more focused, specific subgroup in question?
Look, if the objection is don’t mindless insult people with objectionable terms, I agree with you. But when you start taking away specific words to address specific things, you either need to replace the word with a more acceptable term or dilute another word to the point it will be used for the same purpose and thus be tainted with the same issue. Again I’ll cite the n-word since there have been several variations tried over the last century and each one eventually gets associated with derogatory intent because that’s how people use it. Eliminate “White trash” and replace it with “bleepblopbloop” and soon that’s gonna be the new one.
We should not be talking down to people – true. We shouldn’t obscure specific undesirable behaviors and attitudes under a vague negative term rather then single it out even if it comes out as derogatory- also true.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Because you clearly don’t live in the bad part of town or have to deal with these folks on a regular basis. You are speaking from a comfortable upper middle class position and honestly, it’s getting a little condescending that you’re telling people who have experienced that life that there’s no such thing and we’re all just being rude for no reason. I hate to break it to you but there really are people who bitterly blame the world for all of their own failures while continually making terrible choice after terrible choice, rendering them with little income, a terrible living situation and non-stop drama that prevents them from having a decent life. They are not poor because the system is against them but because they keep sabotaging their life and refuse to accept it was them. They are not lower class because of capitalism or bad circumstances but because they can and do things that keep them there. You wanna know who resents be called “white trash”? People who it doesn’t apply to because someone uses it as a blanket insult instead of understanding the cultural nuances behind it.
I keep asking you for a better term for an existing thing and you’re coming a hairs breath from accusing me of being a racist rather then provide it. I’ve been poor @Steven but I’ve not been white trash – there is a difference no matter how much you keep dodging around it. This is starting to sound like someone claiming “they don’t see color” when a POC tries to cite real world experiences counter to the prevailing opinion or insisting on Latinx when actual Hispanic speakers tell you how odd it is. Perhaps instead of accusing someone who’ve lived the life that they are insulting middle class sensibilities by point out reality, you can provide the term you are comfortable with and we can all move on.
So stereotype vs. slur dispute, over flexible meaning word that could be either depending on usage.
@Steven L. Taylor:
For me the difference is that a Black person behaving trashily has had institutional, historical and individual racism to contend with, and at least something of an excuse. What’s the White dude’s equivalent excuse? “Trailer trash,” a similarly-deployed term might include groups that have cultural excuses for self-destructive behavior that Whites don’t.
As White trash I wasn’t a victim of anyone but myself.
@charon:
There’s also an element of class resentment. Sometimes the subject class – po’ White folk – does not need or want professors deciding what we should be called. For our own good. The army of terribly concerned people should occasionally allow the objects of their sympathy to make their own decisions and raise their own objections.
And FFS, could everyone get over this magical thinking that imbues euphemism with mystical power? It’s stupid. It does not work. Inventing a new euphemism accomplishes nothing and is about nothing but showboating for others who wish they’d come up with the euphemism. It’s a circle jerk for people who want to feel good about themselves despite doing fuck all.
@KM:
Unlike James Carville?
I dunno, I guess for me it’s pretty simple. Appending race to an insult is racist and should be avoided. I’ve used “white trash” (and other problematic terms) in the past and understand what it means, but don’t anymore because it’s a racist insult and in my social circle it’s understood to be a racist insult.
I remember another thread here at OTB that discussed the term “trap house” in reference to a party and was reliably told by several commenters here that it is a racist term and the only possible intent for a non-black person to ever use it is racist. Yet here with “white trash” suddenly the nuance comes out, it’s not racist at all, it’s legitimate to use for “those people” that it applies to, which seems to be lower-class white people who don’t hold the proper views.
One can try to claim it’s some kind of neutral descriptor, and maybe for some that is an honest belief, but I think most English-speaking Americans understand that it’s an insult and that it is almost exclusively used as an insult. That is certainly the way Carville was using it and I highly doubt Carville has to “to deal with these folks on a regular basis.” And oh, the horror of having to “deal” with “folks” who are beneath your station.
@KM:
So we need a term to describe “those people.” That seems pretty condescending to me. And if, you use a term you used before, someone is being an a-hole, call them that. Why do your need the term “white trash”? Why is it so worthy of defense?
@KM:
May I note two things:
1. It is condescending of you to assume you know much of anything about my lived experiences.
2. Your defense is exactly the kind of defense that people who use others slurs over time have used.
So ‘white trash’ is just no big deal if you’re white trash and also a fundamental distinction between good and bad which drives all social functions of poor respectable people. Well, case closed–let’s get the most elite-sounding Dem to give up the intersectionality and Latinx and start in with talking shit about white trash America. What can go wrong?
(Why, oh why am I doing this?)
@KM:
Ok, let’s get more specific: “ghetto black”. That okay? “Ghetto is often used to refer, in-group, exactly the way “trash” is used in your signifier. Or, if that one ropes in people who live in the the ghetto through no fault of their own, how about “trash black”? Is that not offensive?
Of course there are self destructive people who make poor choices, but they are not confined to one ethnic group. What do you think is accomplished by carefully pointing out which race a person belongs too? Are there different standards for the “trash” of different ethnic groups?
It’s like when someone told me she was walking down the street and she saw this black lady who was walking four tiny dogs and they were all dress dressed in identical little coats. It throws me off. Why did the color of the lady come into it at all? What am I even supposed to do with that piece of information?
@Steven L. Taylor:
And your defense is that you know better because you’ve determined it’s a slur when other people who it can apply to are trying to tell you that’s not always the case. @Micheal’s right – has anyone actually asked those in question how they feel about this or is all of this sudden lecturing coming from people it wouldn’t apply to?
Please raise your hand if the term can be applied to you and let us know your opinion. That’s what we should be following since that’s the affected group’s life. If the distress is coming from them, then nix the term and apologies all around. If there’s no damn chance you’ll have it called to your face, maybe have a seat and listen to the room before trying to tell others about their experience? Nobody is saying go insult poor people left and right. We’re telling you that maybe butting in to scold folks for what you think isn’t a proper term when nobody asked because you know better is treating them exactly the way you are condemning – that we’re not acting like proper white people and acting lesser or trashy with our language and behavior. We’re not acting correctly and thus it’s just like people defending horrible insults based on things one can’t change vs something you absolutely can. It’s not like anyone on this thread is using the exact same arguments used to erase identities and cultural distinctions deemed improper in the past…..
This isn’t about diversity or sensitivity anymore. This is becoming don’t use the term that makes me uncomfortable anymore without addressing the reasons it’s used. This is deliberately blurring distinctions because it makes some people uncomfortable and it’s easier to lump everyone into vague groups that can’t possible hold any sort of judgment or gradation. All pigs are equal but some are more equal then others; they can set the terms and others can’t.
Furthermore, the folks who live where that term has actual meaning are now going to be treated as radioactive the same way the n-word is because they recognize a difference in their own life experiences. What can go wrong telling a good portion of America just trying to make do they’re exactly the same as their deliberately trashy neighbor due to their financial status in the eyes of polite society? That it’s rude to differentiate and everyone who’s working class or poor should all be labeled the same way no matter how they live or act so we don’t offend our betters?
Its been a long time since I lived in rural Red State America but it’s coming back to me why they call liberals elitist. Whatever – clearly I don’t know anything, I’ll be sure to mind my language back home where this is a thing. I’m sure they’ll appreciate the thread educating them on how wrong they are and how we shouldn’t need to make a distinction between us all, let alone have a term for it that might be negative. What can go wrong?
@MarkedMan:
I dunno man but if you can figure out how to stop, please let me know 🙂 I tried the open thread but it’s like a moth to a flame.
Part of why this argument keeps going is that @Steven keeps objecting to the “trash” part as well as the “white” part. It absolutely doesn’t need to be there for the concept to be communicated – “trash” works too but the “need to refer to those people” keeps being referenced so it’s not that it’s racial, it’s that it’s derogatory towards a specific group.
My continuing objection is that yes, there is a such a group and yes, there needs to be a negative term towards a negative concept. Call them ghetto, MAGA, white trash, trailer trash, chav, scummy, etc won’t change the fundamental issue in play. We can’t pretend they don’t exist because MTG, Trump and others are in the news all the damn time. We can’t ignore that its an important distinction to those whom the term could apply; we don’t tell other in-groups they can’t differentiate among themselves and that they are all the same. If it’s important to your self-identity that you aren’t like your neighbor who indulges in uncivil and self-sabotaging behavior and who’s had a chip on their shoulder about everything keeps them from getting the meager success you worked hard for, why should you accept someone from a higher social strata telling you how impolite that is and what a bad person you are for doing so?
The exact term is irrelevant. We’ll adopt one that doesn’t have any racial animus but it’s still gonna have negative tones towards the negative thing. You can’t change that as it’s the nature of language. I keep waiting for the acceptable term but haven’t gotten one yet. Have we agree on “trash” by default of most of us using it? What’s the newest term?
@KM:
It is not unusual for people who use slurs to insist that they aren’t that bad.
Clearly, the term “white trash” is overtly racial and has a host of problems, many of which I have outlined, and others that we have not fully explored.
I have focused on “trash” specifically in some of the responses because I find it quite astonishing the degree to which you (and others) are defending, very vigorously I would note, the right to call other human beings “trash.” That alone should perhaps make one pause and rethink.
Claiming the moral high ground for the right to label other people as trash (or garage or refuse) is a weird flex, yes?
@KM:
Well, I literally live next door to a farm in Alabama, so there’s that.
And the great crime of elitism that I am exhibiting is calling into question whether it is appropriate to call some subset of Americans “white trash.” (And BTW, when people in the past were told not to call other groups names, those people were also accused of being elitists).
Look, it is clear you aren’t going to change your mind as a result of this interchange. I just would ask you to give it all some thought when you are feeling less defenisve
@Michael Reynolds:
One, I suspect that a lot of people who are called white trash don’t care for it,
Second, while I acknowledge your biography, you are as far from “white trash” as the term is usually deployed. Part of why it is easy for you to claim to term is that it really doesn’t apply and you are in a sufficiently powerful position to not have to worry about it.
But sure, let’s call people white trash.
@KM:
I get your point. On the other hand, I only object to “trash” insofar as I’ve been taught that it is almost always more useful to call out the behavior, not label the person. Calling someone “white trash” focuses everyone on the group they belong to. Call someone out for trashy behavior and the focus is on the behavior.
@Steven L. Taylor:
*sigh* And it’s a weird flex to pretend that there aren’t people who qualify and that we’re all bad for noticing it. Again, noticing and calling out bad traits and behaviors in people isn’t inherently a bad thing or we wouldn’t be having this conservation since you clearly think I and the others are bad for our behavior. Not once have you considered any of the points I or others have made, only likening them to bigoted excuses for slurs and hatred but I need to contemplate your point?
I’m getting defensive because you’re not asking me to give it some thought as part of a reasoned debate, you’ll telling me I’m wrong because you’re right and should contemplate why so I can understand your more enlightened way of thinking. Kumbaya and all that. You keep focusing on the fact that it’s a slur and not the behavior that leads to the label. It’s rather like those that object to being called a racist because it’s bad rather then examining the reason for being called a racist. My point is a thing exists and needs a name; if that thing is negative then of course the name is negative. It’s magical thinking to assume that not naming a thing denies it’s existence or offering a softer name changes it’s being. We can’t even create a positive term to use for the non-trashy people since it will, by exclusion, tell trashy people they are trashy. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t so why not call it what it is?
I get it – it offends you people want to attach a negative name to a group of people for something you don’t consider to have deserved it or is important enough to note. The thing is it’s not your choice. You don’t get to tell @Micheal he doesn’t qualify because of his current status when he told you that’s who he was once upon a time. You don’t get to tell me when most of my youth has been a struggle against the stereotype and I have family and friends who still qualifies. It’s a very real thing for a lot of people to look around and be surrounded the mentality only for someone else to be astonished you’d want to draw a line between you and it.
Think of it like this: if everyone in your town was doing meth but you, would you take pride in not being a druggie? Would you consider meth-head to be an insult or a descriptor of the lifestyle? Would you be offended hearing druggie used to describe another or go “yeah, that sounds like Bob alright”? If someone said we shouldn’t say druggie anymore because it’s rude and we shouldn’t argue for the right to call someone that, what does that mean for you when now everyone in your town is referred to in the exact same way and now you’re lumped in with them? That to an outsider, the behavior you abhor doesn’t matter enough that they’ll all call you the same thing because you don’t matter to them, only using non-offense language does.
Please contemplate that. Please think about that while it doesn’t matter to you, it matters to someone else and that your well-meaning efforts are erasing a line not yours to address. By all means, we should be kinder to each other and use less insults. That doesn’t mean you get to dump a judgment call on people for making judgement calls you don’t approve of.
@Steven L. Taylor:
There’s something to that, but honestly I never did worry about it. Just like I didn’t worry about other things people called me, including faggot and n-lover and God knows what all. I know who I am.
@MarkedMan:
This is very important, in my view.
@KM:
As @MarkedMan notes, then call out the behavior.
Where in this whole thread have I suggested that there aren’t people who make bad decisions about their lives?
I am not telling you can’t use the term. I am not telling MR that he can’t refer to himself as he wishes. I am expressing an opinion on a blog, a medium explicitly dedicated to the sharing of opinions.
Are you telling that I can’t have the opinion I have?
BTW, I expect we would agree on a number of things about why it is bad to have a meth habit and why certain choices are really bad for one’s well-being. But we aren’t arguing about that.
Does that apply to insults generally or just this one? Is it a weird flex to pretend that there aren’t people who qualify as “house ni****s” or “Uncle Tom’s” or even “black trash?”
Can we apply that to inner-city poor black people who often don’t make good choices and call them “black trash” as a shorthand?
It seems to be there has to be an objective principle here somewhere for when it is appropriate to use sweeping racist and insulting terms to describe large groups of people and when it isn’t. It’s not clear to me why “white trash” should be carved out to be an exception to the general idea of avoiding the use of racist insults. So I don’t see a principled argument here, but if you can describe an objective principle that can be used to asses when such language is acceptable and when it isn’t, then that would be helpful in understanding your position.
Never in the history of blog comments, has so much been written by so many about something so unimportant.
@Michael Reynolds: You obviously have never seen the debate over “Is Die Hard a Christmas movie?”
@MarkedMan:
That depends on whether you want to demonize the person, and people like them.
In the case of MTG, I think it’s worth doing so — remind the world that people like her, and people who associate with her, are not to be accepted in polite society.
She has shown no redeeming qualities. She’s a low-class, crazy-ass person.
She would need to modify more than just a few behavioral issues to be acceptable, she would have to completely transform herself.
@Gustopher: But as a college-educated, middle to upper-middle-class, business owner, she does not fit the generally understood parameters of “white trash.”
BTW: you were able to personalize it pretty well: “She has shown no redeeming qualities. She’s a low-class, crazy-ass person” without making into some generalized statement.
It is like people above who asked if we can’t call crazy people crazy or a-holes a-holes. What is rather interesting to me is that in all of these examples, it appears altogether quite easy for people to find other pejoratives while still defending the essential and indispensable nature of “white trash” as a term.
(And, btw, the OP is not about, in any way, defending MTG or saying that people should never be honest about her obvious flaws).
@Michael Reynolds: And they say only professors can be condescending!
@daryl and his brother darryl: For the record, Epoxy Moron is pretty funny to me.
@Steven L. Taylor: The reason we don’t have “black trash”, “Hispanic trash”, or “Asian trash” is because historically, they were already considered by pasty-white Americans as being “trash” simply because of being black/Hispanic/Asian and no further distinction needed to be made.
I still think that the term “white trash” has changed in meaning and usage over the years. I suspect such terms were not known among the Boston Brahmins–who could get the same opinion across by saying “they’re not of our kind” so there was no need to use a separate term. When did the term “white trash” develop? (Heck, in the 1880s the term used on the East Coast wasn’t “white trash”; it was stating that someone was Irish, who occupied the scum-at-the-bottom-of-the-white-people-social-ladder at that point.)
@grumpy realist:
This was the point I was trying to make, yes.