“White Trash” Continued
Because I actually think its important.
A brief preface.
I think some people interpreted my post (the crazily entitled “Maybe Calling People “White Trash” is Unnecessary?“) as some kind of admonition to be nice to MTG and/or not to be critical of Trump voters. That was not the point, as I thought was quite clear. Carville’s quote about MTG was a launching-off point.
Also, there was some disagreement in the comment thread as to the generally accepted definition of the term “white trash”, especially as to the degree to which it has classist connotations (i.e., aimed at poor people). While I certainly can’t control what individuals think a word means, I would note that sources ranging from Dictionary.com to Merriam-Webster to Urban Dictionary to Wikipedia all define the word the way I was using it: a derogatory term/slur aimed at poor whites.
A last thought: I am not saying that there aren’t people who make bad choices and create and perpetuate poor living conditions for themselves and their families. But this is human reality, not a white one, and really, to me, a wholly different discussion.
Dehumanizing language ought to be a red flag as a general principle, or at least, it is to me. Objectively speaking, classifying a particular set of persons in a society as “trash” is dehumanizing. This strikes me as an obviously true statement that ought not be controversial. To be honest, it strikes me as a slam-dunk case that should inspire, at a minimum, a pause to consider if the classification is warranted and what general effects such language has. This was the basic thesis of my post on the usage of the term “white trash.”
Indeed, it was a fairly simple post that had the following foundation:
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.
Who knew the controversy that lurked in that notion?
I think, too, that if a person considers themselves even vaguely “liberal,” an advocate for democracy, and/or a respecter of basic human dignity that the designator “trash” ought to be enough to likewise cause a second or third thought as to the wisdom of the application of the term.
That, too, brings some controvery, it would seem.
Consider, to pick but one example, the way in which prisons in the United States are filled to the brim because we have decided that some significant segment of the population deserves to be treated like refuse. I know that that has only a tangential relationship to the term “white trash” but it is a worthwhile consideration as to the potential consequences of certain mindsets.
I will say, more on point, that if people who share a certain set of characteristics are, in fact, white trash who deserve their circumstances, it makes for a great excuse not to fund services for such folks since, after all, they brought ot on themselves! It is also follows from such logic that the well-off fully deserve their position in life. It is all justice, a sort of economic Calvinism.
But let us also interrogate not just the “trash” part but the “white” modifier. First, the notion of white trash suggests that the clear norm for white is non-trashiness, hence the need to identify those who fail to meet the standard. It clearly exists because “white” is the default in American society and it is a good and powerful default. My grandparents moved out of south Dallas to north Dallas in the 1970s because Blacks were moving into the neighborhood. A Black influx was considered bad. A Black neighborhood, to this day, is typically associated with a “bad” part of town. This is never true of simply a white neighborhood (which may just be called “the neighborhood” and certainly not “the ‘hood”). White people moving in is not a problem. Now, white trash moving in would be. But consider the various power dynamics and general significances of the various modifiers.*
Further, the notion of white trash specifically suggests that for a white person to have made bad choices, and to be living poorly, is a sign of having failed their whiteness, and their rightful place in society. It is clearly a racialized term.**
And by the way, part of the reason it can be bandied about, joked about, even self-applied in some cases is because of the relative power of being white in the first place.
So, I don’t think it is condescending, elitist, or overly intellectual to suggest, as a general rule, that we should not use dehumanizing language about people we don’t like (or, really, at all) and that it should not be acceptable to cast blanket aspersions over a specific sub-group of the population in a way that is clearly insulting and degrading.
That this is considered controversial or trivial is, to my mind, unfortunate (to engage in some understatement).
And while a lot of people may not want to hear it, some of the comment thread in that post does remind me of arguments I have heard over my lifetime in defense of racist and sexist language. (In terms of “they” deserve it, or “they” use that language, too, and so forth. It seems to me that the fact that these discussions boil down to a “them” and “they” should likewise create room to pause and think).
And while I know a lot of readers think that this topic is just one of tone policing or Ivory Tower pontificating, I actually think these kinds of discussions are quite important. As readers know, I take democracy and representative government seriously. While I recognize its flaws, being a proponent of democracy means actually believing that humans are, at some fundamental level, equal and deserving of some degree of being treated as such. I honestly find the categorization of people, especially in a blithe, vague fashion, as “trash” to be a violation of those values. And, to be honest, I am a bit surprised and more than a little disappointed that this is not obvious (or that the overall discussion is otherwise trivialized).
I could, no doubt go on and drill down on any number of points because, again, rather than being some trivial matter, it is actually quite serious. Not only is democracy itself serious, but it also seems pretty obvious to me that the history of derogatory categorization of fellow citizens isn’t a pretty one (both in ways very dramatic and others relatively mundane yet still significant).
Let me addend some biographical notes since a lot of people in the comment thread think that I don’t know what I am talking about due to my educational, professional, and economic status.
A huge chunk of my family came from a mining town outside of Birmingham, AL, many of whom migrated to Texas in the 1950s in search of better jobs. The other side came from a smattering of locations in Texas and Louisiana. It was a decidedly working-class group. My parents were the first in both of my extended families to go to college and so my upbringing was middle-to-upper-middle class.
For what it is worth, two of my sons live in a trailer (so I have some regular contact with a trailer park), my great-grandmother and great-aunt lived in a trailer in the hills outside of Birmingham, AL when they died (in the late 90s/early 2000s, respectively). I have lived in enough places to know what the general reaction of many people is when the phrase “live in a trailer” is deployed. I literally live next to a farm. Note I am not claiming that I am a farmer, but it is a bit amusing, and a little offputting, for commenters to cast me as some deeply urban elite who lives in sprawlings metropolitan area and could have no idea about these matters.
Further, I live in Alabama and work in a town that is semi-rural with a population of roughly 15,000. The odds that I have more than a passing knowledge of the various ways poorer, non-urban people live are pretty high.
*I sold my house in Troy, AL in 2002 to move to the outskirts of Montgomery. My neighbor worriedly asked me who had bought the house. There was no doubt she was worried about the wrong kind of person moving in, i.e., a Black person. To this day I wish I had said, “A nice Black lesbian couple” but I was not fast enough on my feet (indeed, was taken aback that the question was asked in the newly minted 21st Century).
**To this general point I would recommend this piece from The New Republic: Why Are White Racists Always Called “White Trash”? and the following from Lucas Lynch, How the Term “White Trash” Reinforces White Supremacy.
Really well articulated Steven. In particular this section:
While Hillbilly Elegy got more traction, as it was more of a breezy read, Nancy Isenberg’s White Trash: The 400-Year Untold History of Class in America was a much more useful book. The parallels between our history of racial repression and class are more than passing.
A short review at the Wisconsin History Dept website:
Carlos Lozada‘s WaPo review:
Largely agree. I dont think I have used the term white trash in 50 years. It didnt make much sense in some ways. However, I have used the term trailer park trash figuring that since I had lived in the “projects” in our area growing up for most of my teen years and briefly in a trailer park I had some idea what I was talking about. Most of the people around us, in the projects or in the park, were actually decent people. Most worked. Most cared about their families. I liked them. That said, there were some who seemed determined to live down to the worst stereotypes. I remember watching Idiocracy for the first time and thinking “Damn, those were our neighbors down the street, the ones everyone hated.” They picked fights with the rest of us kids and generally tried to make our lives miserable. Anyway, I always thought it was more about attitude than how much money they had and it could be true of any race, not just white people.
Will have to think about this. Maybe I shouldn’t use the word trash. Maybe I call them the “assholes I used to call trash.”
This here is one of the things that I don’t like about using singular-they to refer to non-binary people. It’s inherently othering.
Language changes, and this is what the they-folk have largely settled on, so I’ll drag myself along and use it, but it nags at me more than the oddness of the new meaning.
(singular-they has been used for unidentified people for ages, but using it for an identified person was vanishingly rare until recently).
And more than just the us/them othering, “they” has also been used ominously, as a placeholder for some shadowy, ill-defined other that wants to control your lives.
– That’s what they want you to think.
– They say you shouldn’t eat for an hour after swimming.
(I thought I had better examples, and I’m sure if I were to pull out my copy of Them: Adventures With Extremists by Ron Jonson, I would have better ones. Can we just pretend I did that?)
Them is the lizard people. And the lizard people are pretty much always the Jews. If you were to talk shit about a non-binary person, it would sound vaguely antisemitic.
I’ll use singular-they despite all of that, because that’s what the they-folk want, and it is respectful to address people a they want, but it’s a little not good at the same time. I wish the they-folks would settle for one of those fancy experimental pronouns people drag out every once in a while, like zir or whatever, but one that is less grating.
And then there are the morons who say with complete sincerity that their pronoun is “it”. These people will not be respected that way, as “it” goes beyond othering straight into dehumanizing.
In a world where we have Nazis in the streets (we’re still allowed to call Proud Boys Nazis, right?) and a major part of the Republican base, and all sorts of laws criminalizing gender non-conformity being proposed, and dehumanizing rhetoric being used to define them, these morons want to be called “it”.
When I was in college in the early ’80s, I did a go-and-serve to the poorest part of the Appalachia. We were housed at a small mission house up in the hollers. The house’s yard was a congregation point to the local kids, all white and all of many generations in the hollers. This description is a very polite way of articulating my much more guttural internal reaction.
As part of our stay, we visited one young family where the 20-something mom and dad had moved down the mountain – to a trailer I might add – where they had access to town jobs. Their young son, literally a first cousin to the kids in the holler, was as normal to me as my own younger siblings. Aside from the possible lesson that upward mobility is possible, the lesson really took home is that the stress and malnutrition of poverty have very real physical impacts on the children that endure it and the adults they are prone to become.
Consider also that your original example was Marjorie Taylor Green, a person who has a metric shitload of power. The power of race, the power of wealth and the power of being a Representative — and not just any Representative, but a key member of the Republican coalition.
And whiteness is one of the weapons she uses, she and her Proud Boy friends. A whiteness tied in with Christian Nationalism and QAnon. Our modern right-wing extremists are less racially pure than in the past (you will find Filipino Proud Boys, etc) but they are still tied into their history of white supremacy.
I don’t like the term “white trash” in general, but applied to her, it attacks a part of her identity that she is weaponizing against others. To the extent that the term is ever acceptable, it belongs on her. It marginalizes her whiteness.
I’m ok with it being used against white nationalists. All of the troubling aspects of it — the suggestion that they are a terrible example of their race, the othering, the denigration — are things that should be applied to white nationalists.
Your kids in the trailer park, not so much. Unless, of course, they are white nationalists.
@Gustopher: I would suggest, though, that applying the term to MTG obscures not only what her real background is (which gives her an excuse, to some at least, that she is the way she is because she was poor and educated, and neither are true) plus it implicates otherwise innocent poor people who live in trailers.
This little trout sees the bait, and swims on.
Professor, I understand and respect your opinion on the term, but I use it and I use it without any guilt. My father was in the navy and being half Japanese, I grew up being called all the typical racist Asian names–slopehead, zipper head, gook, chink, slant-eye, you name it I’ve heard it. One of my first memories in America is being chased down the street by a bunch of white kids calling me racist names. Unless you have experienced growing up like this, you have no idea what it’s like and what effect it has on you. Not a clue, and I dismiss anybody who claims otherwise as someone not to be taken seriously. (Note : I’m not directing this at you or saying you said this, just in general). And notice I say “grow up” experiencing this, not a year or two. It never ends. My first day at college I got into it with a few frat boys who thought calling me chink and chinaman would be funny. I learned at a young age that returning insults and calling racists honkies, keeblers or crackers had no effect, it didn’t bother them. But call them white trash, and oh boy, that triggered them. it seemed to hurt them and make them feel devalued; the same way they would make me feel when they used their racist insults on me. So I use it because, in my experience it’s the only thing that really sets the racists off. And I don’t care if it’s racist, hurts their feelings or pisses them off. check that, I care how it affects them as much as they care how calling me racist names affects me. Now, I want to be clear that I only deploy it against those that have proven their racist ways in public, or to me, not as a general statement of those that live in trailers or are poor. I’ve learned in over 50 years of living as a minority that there are people where logic, kindness, rational discussion and empathy don’t work. I used to think that way, that I could convert racists by being the adult, but you know I have never converted a racist by being kind, rational or empathetic. They’re wasted DNA in my opinion now. My patience is at an end. So yes, I use it against racists and feel no guilt. If that makes me a hypocrite, elitist and a racist as well, I can live with that. fuck em.
@Steven L. Taylor: It’s imperfect, I’ll admit.
But it hits the right tones — the lighter skin tones that she weaponizes — and I’m not willing to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Find another two-to-three word descriptor that describes her accurately, and undermines the white supremacy that her appeal is linked to. What else so succinctly says “being white isn’t good enough?”
I didn’t participate in the white trash thread the other day mainly because I’m not sure I had anything to contribute to that.
However, I also have a visceral reaction to all kinds of peoples and backgrounds that are different from my own upbringing which is solidly white middle-upper middle class surrounded by the professional classes and a family emphasis on education and upper mobility.
I am also a practicing Christian. One of the hardest practices I constantly work at is finding the humanity in all peoples whether they are different in color, economic status, cultural interests, politics, etc. It is hard work to engage with a person and look beyond the initial reaction to their looks and behavior and try and see and understand the essential humanity in that person. I fail often.
Since “white trash” implies that all non-whites are trashy by definition (you never see the expression “black trash,” “Mexican trash,” etc., because in those cases the racial qualifier isn’t even needed), you basically told them that they are no better than you, that they are at your (inferior) level.
While that must have been triggering for them, it also means that you continue to reinforce the notion that whites are at the top of the racial hierarchy and – like you – that’s not where they are at.
Sometimes you gotta fight fire with fire, I guess, but I can also imagine that in other circumstances the use of the expression “white trash” should definitely be discouraged.
As per my previous comment, I think that “white trash” rather reinforces white supremacy.
@drj: This thread hits a few reminders with me. While stationed at Gunter AFB in Montgomery, AL, I was told by an instructor there that “N…rs
come in ALL colors. White, black, brown, yellow, and red.
That’s why context is important.
Even putting aside the nonbinary issue, they has always had a multiplicity of meanings. The whole conspiracy-bait “That’s what they want you think” is just one of a variety of ways in which the pronoun is used to gesture vaguely against some unnamed mass of people, and not all of those ways have the same conspiratorial (let alone anti-Semitic) overtones. For example, I’ve frequently heard “They said it couldn’t be done.” That’s also a lazy cliche. But it doesn’t carry the same connotations of there being some shadowy cabal secretly pulling the strings.
You are absolutely right in everything you say, but when you’re 14 and being faced with a few knuckleheads who think it’ll prove their manhood to go racist on the token Asian in school, let’s just say those thoughts don’t cross your mind. There are two thoughts, flee or fight. And when you’re the new kid in the school, and a minority on top of that, if you don’t stand your ground, you’re gonna be bullied the rest of your time there. I learned this the hard way. And being a military brat, I had to go through this every 2 to 3 years when my dad would get transferred. And not to sound arrogant, but most of the racists I’ve encountered would be too ignorant to understand that nuance. All they know is a yellow person just forgot their place and disrespected their “superior” ass. And again, I only use that term in the singular against someone who has just been racist against me or proven it in public. I don’t use it to describe any group of people except proven racists. I’ve known great people who are poor and/or live in trailers, and absolute racist bags of shit who are educated and wealthy so your type of domicile, education level or income category don’t matter to me. I don’t typically like to fight fire with fire adn I understand my way doesn’t convert or win any hearts and minds. My patience is simply at an end and I don’t care to try to convert, mollify, coddle or understand the racist POV. I now mock.
@drj: The white supremacy is already there. It runs through our culture as pervasively as Christianity, sexism or microplastics.
Pointing out that white supremacists are hardly the best example of the race they champion reinforces the notion of race (itself a construct of white supremacy), but it also is a quick bit of othering that hits emotionally as well as logically. It’s morally the equivalent of using sexy women in advertising, for whatever definition of sexy works for the audience.
Big boobed babe fondling a rifle? People, somehow, respond to that. My brothers love that shit. (I think those images have steered me away from that particular shape of woman, rather than towards the guns, so I have responded as well).
When the Michigan militia white nationalists that wanted to kidnap the governor had their pictures everywhere, and people pointed out that they were not particularly fine looking specimens of the white race, the human race or even primates, there was white supremacy baked into that.
It’s dumb. Race itself is barely real. There’s more genetic diversity within some races than between the races. White Supremacy is like Poodle Supremacy among dogs. Or crab-shaped-animal supremacy, although given the number of times things have evolved into crab shapes, that one might have something going for it.
(Race is exactly as real as carcinization — it tells you there is an ecological niche where various skin shades are beneficial, but doesn’t say much about the actual individuals)
And anyone who looks at MTG’s feet… you will be pondering whether she is inbred. (Why did I look up why she is called Marjorie Three Toes? why?) And again, white supremacy is part of that as it is so tied into beauty standards. Unless her feet are the first step in human evolution to a crab shape.
With all of that, do I feel awkward using something that references and reinforces white supremacist ideas to denigrate white supremacists? Slightly, but only slightly.
It’s like quoting Bible verses about love thy neighbor and helping the unfortunate to the people who use Christianity as a weapon. It won’t change their minds, and it reinforces the notion that Christianity is linked to morality, but for those who already believe in that silly sky god thing, it points out that there are much better ways of going about their Christian thing.
Which is a long winded way of saying you’re not wrong, but I don’t think your correct point should be given as much weight as any effort to separate the most vocal white supremacists from the white people who might respond favorably to them if not for social pressure.
Or how about this: Violence is wrong, but should you punch a Nazi? While I want to flippantly answer “just one?” the more correct answer is “maybe not, but sometimes yes”.
Anyone who does not understand “Marjorie Three Toes” should not look. Also, she clearly has at least four toe-like things per foot-like thing.
@taiko: I am very sorry about the way you were treated.
I will note that you are reinforcing the notion that the term in question is a slur intended to harm.
@Michael Reynolds: I thought you didn’t believe in virtue signaling 😉
@drj: I concur–it very much does.
@Gustopher: Yes, but the issue is not how the term makes MTG look bad, but the way in which it reinforces an overall view of what “white” is. You aren’t making inroads against MTG calling her “white trash” nor are you damaging white supremacy, you are reinforcing the notion that white is superior.
I would argue that the way to combat white supremacist language is not to play that game at all.
TBH, and this all I am going to say about this subject, being called white trash never bothered me. Being called trailer trash never bothered me. Being called porch monkey never bothered me. I wore all those labels with narry a care. You know why?
I was white. No matter what, that could never be taken away from me. And that was all that really mattered.
Even when cops pulled me over for DWB, all it took was one look at my Caucasian features and blond kinky hair and they said, “I’m sorry sir, my bad.”
My whiteness means that I have more power in society, and that most of those insults don’t matter, because they reinforce the whiteness and thus the power. I expect that is the same for most white people.
There are people who will try to define racism as racial-bigotry plus power, and I think that’s a crappy definition (or at least not the common definition), but something else should have that meaning, because racist epithets against white people have very little effect.
“White trash” however goes after that protective layer of whiteness — that’s why it has a sting. I do wonder whether that’s part of Dr. Taylor’s objection, deep below the surface, covered in layers of logic and reasoning.
(I’ll stand by my claim that white supremacy is as ingrained in American culture as microplastics, and say that I don’t think either of us could come up with a definitive answer.)
But that’s all a digression to what I really wanted to do, which was to link to this article.
Some very performatively aggrieved white people are Upset about things like “sour cream citizens”, “lightbulbs,” and my new favorite, “vanilla villains.”
There’s also a bunch that I would feel uncomfortable quoting as they are a play on really racist terms for black people, and that’s definitely not my place. I don’t begrudge a bunch of brown folks blowing off steam though.
(I would feel differently if I was working for a black owned company with mostly black coworkers and they were keeping such a list, though, as it’s all about the power.)
Why do I really want to link to an article that has a list of racial slurs against white people though? Because about 10% of them are kind of great. Amazingly creative.
And because a key part of this discussion that hasn’t been centered in it is power.
Objectively, this list is bad. But it’s bad and meaningless, so it’s not that bad. Or not that impactful.
And objectively, “white trash” is racial. But it’s used against those with power. And the most effective because it cuts through some of that power.
Also, “vanilla villains” is just great. The alliteration, the swapping of position for the n and the l sounds. It’s a tiny bit of ineffective racist poetry.
@Steven L. Taylor: I tried to drag him in with my comment on singular-they too!
@Steven L. Taylor:
I have less issue with white supremacist language than I do with white supremacists.
White supremacist language is short-to-medium-term permanent. Certainly for the duration of my lifetime, it’s here to stay. I don’t like it, but it’s there.
White supremacists should be mocked, denigrated, and shunned to separate them from society as much as possible. To reduce their power and their effectiveness. To make them uncool.
Whether the use of the white trash stereotype is helpful or not, eh, we disagree.
Incels aren’t particularly popular, and a lot of people back away and rethink their ideas when they start showing up to agree with them. They are nearly politically neutered.
I think we need to demonize the white supremacists and the stealth white supremacists of the alt-right as a whole.
@Gustopher: My point is, however, that the main thing we need to change is the culture and one of the ways culture changes is through language, hence my view that we should avoid that which reinforces the culture of white supremacy, which I think the term “white trash” does (among other problems with the term I have noted).
@OzarkHillbilly: Yup, this is well put and very much part of my point.
@Just nutha ignint cracker: Bingo indeed. Our Hillbilly friend nails it.
And sparks this thought from me:
@Steven L. Taylor: You view this much more abstractly than me.
There is a gaping hole in my protective white armor — I’m queer. I’m demonized by the far right, and the medium right and basically the political arm of half the country.
Bigotry against queer folks isn’t going to be eliminated. It’s there forever. It can be pushed back to manageable levels, to reduce the threat, and that requires making normies who might be a little bigoted on their own not want to side with the major bigots.
I tend to think of racism and white supremacy the same way.
Being bi/pan and completely lacking in swish, people assume I am straight more often than not. Straight people think I am straight unless I say something. I have gotten to see both sides, and as a rule of thumb I can say that most straight people don’t really care if queer folk live or die so long as they don’t have to see the deaths on tv. It’s all “I support LGBT, but…” The serious bigots have to be kept less appealing than whatever comes after that.
ETA: And honestly, I don’t care how the major bigots are kept less appealing. Curing the society as a whole is just tilting at windmills.
@Gustopher: We disagree on the efficacy of your suggested approach, but that’s fine.
And I have no illusions about eliminating these problems, but they can get incrementally better.
To me, the problem with this argument is that the message you think it sends is only going to be received by people who respect your opinion and agree with you.
To everyone else, the usage of that kind of insult (and any other racialized insult) will tell people nothing about MTG, but a lot about you which will engender certain assumptions about you in their minds as a result.
In the same way, consider this hypothetical – Random person A and random person B are two people I don’t know. Random person A calls random person B a “ni***r.” What does that tell me? Well, it doesn’t tell me anything about random person B except maybe that there might be a higher-than-average likelihood that they are a black person. In contrast, I learn a lot about random person A, especially if there is additional context to the deliberate use of the insult, because the use of that word as an insult sends a pretty strong signal about what that person believes and is really like.
Similarly, a random person who hears or reads you calling MTG “white trash” is going to tell them a lot more about you than MTG.
Finally, I don’t think the insult actually attacks part of her identity or stings her in any way.
In the first place, I’m sure MTG does not care much what you think, and you calling her this will simply be a signal to her that you are the enemy and your opinion is therefore worthless to her and her supporters.
Furthermore, she is likely to use it as evidence to try to show her allies and others that people on the left like you are hypocrites on race and are also condescending elitists – so it directly plays into her messaging. (note that I’m not making that argument about you, I’m simply describing what MTG and her allies would say about you).
So rather than stinging her, she can use it to her advantage to reinforce one of her core messages. And fundraise off of it. “Politicians” like MTG love to be attacked by political enemies and they use it to build a following and make money – and she’s made a shit-ton of money by using attacks and actions against her. It’s the same on the other side – there’s a reason that AOC is the top generator of small-donor dollars for Democrats in the House – she’s the most frequent target of Republican attacks which she skillfully turns into messaging and money.
So even from a practical standpoint, name-calling is very likely counterproductive except for mobilizing and high-fiving people who already agree with you.
The other thing to consider is Donald Trump. We had four years of a constant stream of both accurate and unfair attacks, invective and insults aimed against him during his term and before and he still ran a competitive election in 2020. His cult-like following is buttressed by those attacks and similar attacks on his supporters who understand that there are a lot of people out to get Donald Trump and marginalize his supporters.
@Andy: Thanks and I agree with the analysis in your comment.