Coarse-grained complexity

For those interested in the wonky side of complexity theory

http://understandingsociety.blogspot.com/2016/11/coarse-graining-of-complex-systems.html?m=1

Paul Krugman: The Populism Perplex [feedly]

----

Krugman's answer (at least PK is honest): "I don't have a fucking clue".

Paul Krugman: The Populism Perplex
// Economist's View

 What should Democrats do to win the votes of the white working class?:

The Populism Perplex, by Paul Krugman, NY Times: ...what put Donald Trump in striking distance was overwhelming support from whites without college degrees. So what can Democrats do to win back at least some of those voters?

Recently Bernie Sanders offered an answer: Democrats should "go beyond identity politics." What's needed, he said, are candidates who understand that working-class incomes are down, who will "stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industry."

But is there any reason to believe that this would work? Let me offer some reasons for doubt. ...

Any claim that changed policy positions will win elections assumes that the public will hear about those positions. How is that supposed to happen, when most of the news media simply refuse to cover policy substance? ...

Beyond this, the fact is that Democrats have already been pursuing policies that are much better for the white working class... Yet this has brought no political reward. ...

Now, you might say that health insurance is one thing, but what people want are good jobs. Eastern Kentucky used to be coal country, and Mr. Trump, unlike Mrs. Clinton, promised to bring the coal jobs back. ... But it's a nonsensical promise..., there may be a backlash when the coal and manufacturing jobs don't come back, while health insurance disappears.

But maybe not. Maybe a Trump administration can keep its supporters on board, not by improving their lives, but by feeding their sense of resentment.

For let's be serious here: You can't explain the votes of places like Clay County as a response to disagreements about trade policy. The only way to make sense of what happened is to see the vote as an expression of, well, identity politics — some combination of white resentment at what voters see as favoritism toward nonwhites (even though it isn't) and anger ... at liberal elites whom they imagine look down on them.

To be honest, I don't fully understand this resentment. In particular, I don't know why imagined liberal disdain inspires so much more anger than the very real disdain of conservatives who see the poverty of places like eastern Kentucky as a sign of ... personal and moral inadequacy...

One thing is clear, however: Democrats have to figure out why the white working class just voted overwhelmingly against its own economic interests, not pretend that a bit more populism would solve the problem.


----

Shared via my feedly newsfeed

NYTimes: Intent on Unsettling E.U., Russia Taps Foot Soldiers From the Fringe

Hard to truly eval this article, but there are more than a few fascist breadcrumbs, and at least one giant loaf -- the Creep -- that keeps pointing to Putin

Intent on Unsettling E.U., Russia Taps Foot Soldiers From the Fringe http://nyti.ms/2iq6964

Keith Ellison and Bernie Sanders: How To Remake the Democratic Party - In These Times

Losing all three branches of government to a fascist movement and campaign DOES MANDATE a new direction and leadership for the Dems. Exploring reasons for this historic defeat, however, must NOT serve as excuses or apologies or cowardly assertions that Trump was, or is, unbeatable.

http://inthesetimes.com/article/19743/bernie-sanders-keith-ellison-democratic-party-dnc-chair-our-revolution

A Sacred Populist: Pope Francis Shakes Up His Church [feedly]

A Sacred Populist: Pope Francis Shakes Up His Church
http://prospect.org/article/sacred-populist-pope-francis-shakes-his-church

Rex Features via AP Images)

For years, the solemn benediction given by the Pontiff of the Catholic Church to the City of Rome and the world on Christmas Day has been urbi et orbi, a blessing that conveys nothing less serious than the full absolution of his flock's sins. (The phrase translates literally as: "to the city and to the world.")

But when thousands of faithful Catholics gather on St. Peter's Square in Rome this Christmas, the current head of their church, Pope Francis, might be just as likely to wish them—along with the hundreds of millions tuning in via radio, TV, and the internet—a very down-to-earth buon pranzo, which literally means "enjoy your lunch." Francis has issued this unconventional greeting on previous occasions, eliciting horror from Vatican officials of all ranks.

It's just one of the many ways that Pope Francis has broken ranks with the conservative wing of the Catholic Church, especially on issues that involve the church's moral teachings, like divorce and sexual orientation. At a time of worldwide political upheaval, Francis has flouted Catholic pageantry and customs, and aligned himself with everyday people, disfavored groups, and the poor. It's a stance that delivers a populist message unsettling to many in the Vatican. 

This challenge departs sharply from papal traditions. For centuries, papal rituals and customs have made the Vatican look like the last bastion of absolute monarchy. Starting with Pope John Paul II, the bishops of Rome have loosened some of these ties of protocol. Yet the steps Pope Francis has taken since ascending St. Peter's Cathedral have broken those constraints wide open. On his election, the Argentinian-born pope refused to wear the sumptuous papal vestments, telling the cleric in charge of the liturgy that he could wear that outdated ornament himself if he were so intrigued by it. The current pontiff never moved into the papal palace, and refuses to drive in a fancy car.

On his first papal visit—to Lampedusa, a refugee island in the Mediterranean Sea—Pope Francis criticized capitalism and globalization as demons of our times that treat humans like leftovers. He performed a foot-washing ritual that traditionally takes place on the Thursday before Easter on female and Muslim prisoners, raising eyebrows among conservatives. In his sermons, Francis uses simple rhetoric that caters to the common woman and man, whom he emulates.

While liberals have welcomed this Pope's approach to his office, church conservatives are outraged. Some see Francis as an antichrist bent on nothing less than the destruction of a church order that they perceive as sacred and God-given. When Francis issued a papal document that is widely interpreted as relaxing the punishments the church imposes on divorced Catholics, many church elders saw the beginning of the end of Catholicism as they knew it.

 

FRANCIS CAME INTO OFFICE AS THE SUCCESSOR to Joseph Ratzinger, who goes by the name Benedict XVI. In the Catholic conclave that followed the death of John Paul II in 2005, the German cardinal had been regarded as a safe bet. He had been a close ally of John Paul II, who had been mourned by hundreds of thousands, and whose funeral had been attended by queens and kings, heads of state, prime ministers, and other power brokers. Ratzinger knew the Vatican inside out, and was the clear choice of the establishment.

Tellingly, Pope Francis had never seen eye-to-eye with Ratzinger, the papal insider. After Benedict XVI abdicated from the throne of Saint Peter in 2013, the cardinals who supported the man then known as Bergoglio took advantage of a moment of turmoil within the church. The abdication of a sitting pontiff had not taken place in centuries. The legal questions of how the Catholic Church deals with an acting pope who serves alongside a retired one have yet to be answered. This uncertainty weakened traditionalists, who were losing a champion in Benedict, and created an opening for the more controversial Francis.

Unlike his predecessor, Francis does not identify with or have any interest in intellectuals. He's been known to attack and criticize priests and bishops, accusing them of clericalism—that is, taking advantage of their privileges in the parishes and communities. This particularly irritates critics of Pope Francis, who as the church's highest clergyman has himself shown no interest in minimizing his papal authority. At a time of populist insurgencies around the globe, Francis turns out to be something of a populist himself.

Vatican higher-ups are close to mutiny. They accuse Francis of pandering to the public on such issues as marriage and divorce, without thinking through the implications. The pope's public pronouncements do not convert directly into doctrine; but Vatican leaders fret that churchgoers may not know the difference. They also reject his unconventional style as "unfit for the office," criticizing him for not speaking well in foreign languages, and for making off-hand remarks about whether parents should smack kids who misbehave ("if their dignity is maintained") and that Catholics need not breed "like rabbits."

It's still not clear where Francis is leading his church. So far, he has managed to draw critics from both left and right. Liberals are disappointed because his pronouncements have so far sparked no substantive changes. Conservatives are irate that their supreme pontiff may step onto the loggia of Saint Peter's on Christmas Day and utter what they regard as yet another unprecedented or foolish statement. To them, Francis never will be more than a "buon pranzo" pope. But like many political leaders around the globe, Pope Francis appears determined to shake up the established order.

 -- via my feedly newsfeed

More alarms on devastating resurgence of black lung disease, but where’s the political outrage? [feedly]

More alarms on devastating resurgence of black lung disease, but where's the political outrage?
http://blogs.wvgazettemail.com/coaltattoo/2016/12/16/more-alarms-on-devastating-resurgence-of-black-lung-disease-but-wheres-the-political-outrage/

If you happened to be a regular reader of the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, yesterday's bombshell about black lung disease was enough to frighten you.

In the paper, researchers at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health reported that they had confirmed a cluster of the mostly deadly form of the disease — Progressive Massive Fibrosis, or PMF — at a clinic in the Kentucky coalfields. This cluster hadn't been discovered during the regular NIOSH routines that track black lung, and raised serious questions that the extent of the crisis was far worse than previously explained:

… Cases in this report were not identified through standard coal workers' pneumoconiosis surveillance, and whether similar clusters of cases exist in other communities is not known. Thus, the actual extent of PMF in U.S. coal miners remains unclear.

But if you happened to be listening to NPR's All Things Considered later in the day, you heard the results of a new investigation by the great Howard Berkes:

Across Appalachia, coal miners are suffering from the most serious form of the deadly mining disease black lung in numbers more than 10 times what federal regulators report, an NPR investigation has found.

The government, through the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, reported 99 cases of "complicated" black lung, or progressive massive fibrosis, throughout the country the last five years.

But NPR obtained data from 11 black lung clinics in Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Ohio, which reported a total of 962 cases so far this decade. The true number is probably even higher, because some clinics had incomplete records and others declined to provide data.

The reaction from experts in the field — people who have spent their adult lives studying black lung and trying to fight the disease — was nothing short of terrifying.

Robert Cohen of the University of Illinois, Chicago:

I can't say that I've heard really anything worse than this in my career.

Edward "Lee" Petsonk of West Virginia University:

I've spent much of my career trying to find ways to better protect miners' respiratory health. It's almost like I've failed.

Scott Laney, one of the authors of the NIOSH paper:

The current numbers are unprecedented by any historical standard. We had not seen cases of this magnitude ever before in history in central Appalachia.

I guess it's still early, but the thing I notice is that my email inbox is pretty empty today.

Where are the formal statements from West Virginia political leaders expressing their outrage at this situation? Where are the press releases demanding action?

When anyone releases a new regulation aimed at fighting climate change or trying to curb mountaintop removal pollution, the last place you want to be is between any of our state's politicians and a microphone or camera. But 1,000 cases of the most severe and deadly form of a disease that has killed 78,000 coal miners since 1969?

Crickets.

Of course, nobody really much campaigns around these parts on a platform of promising to protect the health and safety of coal miners. Those days are gone, especially now that Ken Hechler has passed.

We're hearing a lot right now from politicians and the political media echo chambers about the middle class, the working class, people who live in middle America. What I can't understand is how it is that issues like black lung — or any number of a long list of worker health and safety threats — isn't really talked about like it's a working class issue.

During this year's presidential campaign, Democrat Hillary Clinton did mention black lung, but only briefly on her website and in context of protecting the program that provides benefits to victims of black lung. She didn't propose more steps to end this terrible disease. Secretary Clinton did talk a bit about coal miner safety, after former Massey Energy CEO Don Blankenship showed up at an anti-Clinton rally. She expressed her support for making crimes like Blankenship's a felony, instead of a misdemeanor with a maximum of one year in prison.

If President-elect Donald Trump talked about black lung, I must have missed it. But does anyone really believe a Trump administration will make tougher regulations and enforcement of mine safety and health protections a priority?

When mine safety and health came up during our state's gubernatorial campaign, it was in the form of a ridiculous attack by the United Mine Workers on Republican Bill Cole and in defense of Democrat Jim Justice, our now-Governor-elect who can't seem to pay all his mine safety fines on time, and over a bill that was signed into law by Democratic Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin.

What people who are truly friends of coal miners ought to do is make sure that all of our elected officials have to sit down and listen to what it sounds like for Mackie Branham — one of the coal miners Berkes interviewed — just trying to breathe.

 -- via my feedly newsfeed

Hidden Anxieties of the White Working Class [feedly]

Hidden Anxieties of the White Working Class
https://workingclassstudies.wordpress.com/2016/12/19/hidden-anxieties-of-the-white-working-class/

Donald Trump won the election by what once seemed a far-fetched strategy: energize working-class whites, especially those in rural locales and the Rust Belt. Trump's economic and cultural appeals to working-class whites have been widely analyzed by the media. He promised to bring back factory jobs. In struggling Appalachian states, he promised to bring back coal. He addressed concerns about undocumented immigrants and terrorism. With varying degrees of enthusiasm, working-class voters responded to his promises; no one else was promising them anything.

But many analysts were still puzzled by his appeal. Why were many working-class voters willing to put their trust in a billionaire businessman from New York City, a place so clearly identified with elites? They don't understand that instead of alienating these voters, Trump's lifestyle probably enhanced his appeal. The combination of his performance of masculinity and his conspicuous consumption spoke to fears that working-class voters have not only about economic decline but also about the potential toll of upward mobility. In Trump, working-class voters saw both the promise of economic regeneration, and the possibility that they or their children could move into a more privileged class without forsaking their cultural identity.

Trump's version of masculinity—angry, blunt-speaking, and indifferent to sensitivities called "political correctness"—reflects a stereotype of working-class men reminiscent of figures such as Archie Bunker from the 1960s sitcom All in the Family and Walt Kowalski from Clint Eastwood's Gran Torino (2008). Trump carried himself with a determined swagger and wore a trucker's cap. While some saw Trump playing a character, as he did on The Apprentice, working-class viewers found him familiar, a man who spoke like people they knew. While working-class voters perceived the East and West Coast elites as looking down on them, they felt that Trump understood and shared their views. In other words, he inspired working-class nostalgia not only for lost jobs, but also for the social status that accompanied these jobs. When these jobs disappeared, the very fabric of working-class communities was torn

Some have argued that Rust Belt residents from places like Pennsylvania or Ohio could easily improve their lives by relocating. This suggestion implicitly dismisses the many family and community ties that bind people to locations, and, as Paul Lauter once stated, working-class people must rise in solidarity with their class or leave it. Further, well-meaning elites don't understand that a working-class person's decision to stay put is likely motivated by both personal and economic factors. A recent study by the Pew Research Center found that those who moved long distances from their communities of origin were more likely to have graduated from college than those who remained.  A worker with only a high-school education will not necessarily fare better in relatively affluent Maryland than in Ohio. Class mobility, not geographical mobility, is required. As working-class scholar Barbara Jensen has argued, changing classes involves changing cultures and too often devaluing one's culture of origin.

In their seminal The Hidden Injuries of Class Richard Sennett and Jonathan Cobb explore how blue-collar men deal with the emotional toll of lifelong unrewarding work.  (Not all blue-collar work is unrewarding, of course, but that's a subject for another essay.) Knowing they themselves will not advance, they labor for their children's futures. Middle-class parents also sacrifice for their children, but they usually have more rewarding jobs. To paraphrase Sennett and Cobb, middle class jobs are "models," working-class jobs are "warnings." The status of unemployment is a starker warning. In effect the working-class parent must tell his or her children, "Whatever you do, don't be like me." If the working-class parent is successful in launching his or her children into the middle-class, those children may look down upon their parents' lives and values. Anthologies of essays by academics from the working class such as my co-edited Working-Class Women in the Academy and C.L. Barney Dews and Carol Leste Laws's This Fine Place So Far from Home depict academics from the working class struggling to adjust to the academy's middle-class culture and remain true to their working-class roots. Academia, like many social and cultural institutions, is predominately composed of middle- and upper-class people who do not understand the working-classes and often disdain them. While many working-class and middle-class people these days worry that their children will fall down the class ladder, many also worry about what would happen if their children do manage to move up.

Enter Donald Trump, an extraordinarily wealthy man with about 500 businesses around the world. He talks and behaves like one of the guys, one of the white working-class guys. Working-class voters saw Trump as speaking to them, not down to them. He seemed like one of them, just one with more money. His promise to revive blue-collar jobs was likely read as a promise to preserve working-class values and cultures. Trump embodied the possibility that working-class people, or at least their progeny, could rise in income without changing their values and behavior. They needn't join the ranks of the elites.

I am not negating Trump's appeal as a political outsider at a time when Americans affiliated with both parties were disillusioned with elected politicians. Neither am I minimizing the suffering of Rust Belt working-class whites or the fear that Trump's election sent through many communities. I also think we should be concerned that so many voters, including many from the working-class voted for a man who regularly made racist, xenophobic, and misogynistic statements. These votes are extremely unsettling, at the very least.

But if we want to understand white working-class voters' support for Trump, we have to unpack not only their economic anxieties and political resentments, but also their cultural fears, including their concerns about the costs of elusive upward mobility.

Michelle M. Tokarczyk

Michelle M. Tokarczyk is a Professor of English at Goucher College who has published widely in Working-Class Studies.

 -- via my feedly newsfeed