Trump’s election? Maybe it’s a matter of degrees
Our educated class is blind to 60 percent of Americans
How could so many welleducated people be so wrong in underestimating the appeal of Donald Trump from the moment he entered the race until his astonishing election? Clearly it was a failure to understand the strong appeal he obviously has for many Americans.
One answer, I think, is that well-educated people are well educated, which largely means that they have graduated from four-year colleges and universities. There’s obviously nothing wrong with obtaining such formal education, but it does severely limit our ability to understand and appreciate the strong views held by so many of the six in 10 adults who do not have such degrees.
One of the major divides during this election was between those who have such degrees and those who do not. But politicians, writers, pollsters, reporters, academics, pundits and so on, not only have degrees, but largely move in circles only with others who have degrees. And in doing so, they missed seeing a large part of the electorate.
Professors (including me) are perhaps one of the most insular and insulated classes of degree holders. In their day-to-day professional lives, doctors, lawyers, politicians and businesspeople all talk with many people without degrees. But we professors largely talk to our students (who have or are obtaining degrees), other professors (who have degrees) and academic administrators (who have degrees).
As a result, we pass along to our students — and through articles, discussions with reporters, TV appearances, etc., to the general public — an understanding of the political landscape and a picture of the electorate that is largely devoid of any real understanding of the problems and views of the majority of voters without degrees. We don’t convey their strong feelings; we don’t consider the depth of their despair about the economy; we don’t ask what they think of their country.
Perhaps it’s time for colleges to start teaching classes in bluecollar studies, just as many colleges now have a large number of classes — if not entire departments — in women’s studies, African-American studies, Hispanic studies, LGBT studies and so on.
Being familiar with bluecollar thought won’t make much difference in how professors teach — or their students learn — circuit theory, relativity, or mathematics. But it can be crucially important in understanding and analyzing political issues such as affirmative action, police practices, religious freedom, gun control, international trade and transgender-friendly restrooms.
Like black or Hispanic or women’s or LGBT studies, blue-collar studies would not only expose outsiders to a new worldview, but encourage members of a campus minority group to speak their minds. Frequently in this election, college students have said that they’re reluctant to express pro-Trump opinions on their campuses, whether in class discussions or even in private conversations.
It’s important that the United States’ educated class understand the other 60 percent of the country. A few blue-collar studies classes here and there would be a start.