Analysis Of Strangers In Their Own Land By Arlie Russell Hochschild

1279 Words3 Pages

In the book, “Strangers in their own land” by Arlie Russell Hochschild, a sociologist from Berkeley, CA who sets out on a journey to the heart of Louisiana in an attempt to climb over the “empathy wall’ to understand the great paradox of the conservative tea party of the south. She confronts the tea party followers of the south and why they vote and support a free market capitalism, when the same system has destroyed their homes and environment? In search of answers Hochschild discovers the narrative that gives these people meaning, explaining their political convictions. Trying to bridge the deeply dividing gap between the two political groups that define this nation today, with race, class, and gender all playing a role. Hochschild explains and describes in detail the “empathy wall” and how we create these walls …show more content…

Mike was from the rural parts of Louisiana and worked for a small business, always supporting free market for all business. But then he supports the same politics who are allowing big companies to gain monopoly power, running the small businesses into the ground, why? that is Hochschild’s great paradox. Why did Mike Schaff vote for someone who didn’t have his best interest in mind? Why was he misled? Ignorance you might ask? Not that easy. Mike was a well-educated man who talked regularly about politics with family and friends. However, these were like-minded people who shared the same beliefs and views who are also being misled as well. Hochschild said it best when referring to What’s the Matter with Kansas? We are misled by a rich man’s economic agenda baited by social issues. For instance, if fox news told Mike that the democrats are going to take your guns he might be more inclined to vote for a right-wing party. It’s the old bait and switch, many politicians are guilty of this, making people worried of a certain social issue to make us not look at the big

Open Document