Strangers in Their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the American Right

The author begins this study with an inquiry into what she terms the “Great Paradox”—a tendency amongst right-wing voters (especially those who espouse Tea Party beliefs) in under-resourced states to vote against their own social and economic interests. She is particularly interested in environmental pollution and environmental regulations, and she asks herself: “How can such a polluted state take such a dim view of government regulation of polluters” (55)? Among other similar studies, she notices a tendency to examine only the social and economic factors that impact political belief formation and voting patterns, and she wonders what role emotions play in these processes. As a result of years of interviews with subjects in and around Lake Charles, Louisiana, all of whom self-identify as Tea Party Republicans, she articulates what she calls the “deep story.” Deep stories are narratives of self, society, and nation that feel true to an individual or a group. At the end of her study, she concludes that the deep stories of Tea Party voters do more to shape their political identities than facts and figures and even lived experience: Affect is more important to most voters than fact.

Initially, the author finds three key factors that impact political identity that are profoundly impacted by emotion: After conducting a series of interviews with multiple subjects, commonalities begin to emerge. She finds that among Tea Party affiliated voters in Louisiana, ideas about taxation, faith, and honor shape political beliefs. There is widespread mistrust of the government, both state and federal. Tea Party voters resent what they perceive as the misuse of their hard-earned tax dollars and the over-reach of the government into business affairs. One of their key resentments is about the use of taxpayer dollars for governmentally funded social welfare. They feel that the agencies responsible for administering welfare or overseeing affirmative action and other diversity programming are bloated and inefficient. Because the subjects are, by and large, deeply rooted in various communities of faith, they see the church as better situated to help those in need. They also feel, for a variety of reasons rooted most prominently in demographic changes and in the scorn with which they are treated by “liberal elites,” that contemporary American society strips them of dignity and honor.

The author then uses this set of observations to develop what she thinks of the “deep story” of Tea Party Republicans: Against the backdrop of a declining economy, they envision a white, working-class “everyman” who has been waiting in line patiently to achieve the American Dream. This man works hard, perseveres in the face of adversity, and finds a sense of honor in their work ethic and ability to endure difficulty. Suddenly, a series of people cut the line. By this, the author addresses the subjects’ belief that people of color, immigrants, women, the LGBTQ+ community, and other members of minoritarian groups receive government “handouts” in the form of welfare, affirmative action, housing assistance, and other kinds of state aid. White, working-class Americans are not given these benefits and continue to struggle financially. To add insult to injury, white working-class Americans are ridiculed in the (liberal) media as “hillbillies” and derided as racists. They view their identitarian position as central to American cultural identity, writ large, and are deeply wounded that this identity is now dismissed as “backwards.” It is this deep story that propels these voters toward the Republican Party: After all, they reason, the Republican Party does not waste their tax dollars or interfere in the affairs of their businesses, and (most importantly) the party respects them and treats them with honor and dignity.