Book Analysis Essay on "Strangers in Their Own Land" by Arlie Hochschild

Introduction

Arlie Russell Hochschild's book "Strangers in Their Own Land" is a well written and thoughtful book with dialogues and storytelling written after speaking to focus groups and interviewing Tea Party members. Hochschild selected the bayou area since it had a high concentration of petrochemical industries and high pollutions levels in the waterways. There is little support for environmental regulations in the area despite covering self-interests of the residents. She focuses on the cultural values that might have contributed to people being hostile to government support (Obama's administration) despite requiring federal aids. Some of the central values are residents' attitudes on their religious commitments, jobs, and taxes.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The core of the Hochschild's book is an attempt to refine the opinions of Tea Party Supporters who went ahead to back Donald Trump in his bid to become the President in 2016 elections. Tea party supporters are against the ongoing changes in the United States in recent years. There has been discrimination of women, increased immigration and racial minorities among other dominant concerns. They consider these changes as inhibitors to achieving the American dream. Also, they feel the current regime (then Democratic-led by President Barack Obama) is advocating for affirmative action programs and other kinds of aid. As a result, the Tea Party increasingly feel alienated in their own country, hence Hochschild's title "Strangers in Their Own Land."

Hochschild's Argument in the Book

The political upheavals of 2016 have triggered debate among commentators and social scientists concerning the nature and causes of populism. As a result, theories have been developed to explain events such as Brexit and Trump victory. Arlie Russell Hochschild provides her perspective in her book "Strangers in their Own Land." Hochschild's book predicted the political outburst as it occurred before Donald Trump was considered a serious contender of the US presidency. Hochschild acknowledged later in the book that Trump's rise was "like kindling before a match is lit" (221). She focused on an issue she termed as "keyhole": the environment. She based her study in Louisiana since it was the home of both a high percentage of right-wing citizens and the nastiest environmental pollution in the United States. She had conducted a background study by reading credible books on the Tea Party and the American Right to settle on this area of study. She failed to understand the reason the Louisianans supported environmental deregulation yet it cost them their loved ones, health, and homes - a phenomenon she called the "Great Paradox."

Hochschild wanted to have a full understanding of emotion in politics - conservativism in the state and the widespread hostility to government. Given hardships most of the Louisianans experienced in industries, she wanted to understand their reflection on their stance in politics. The deep story "a story that feels as if it were true" (p. 16) is reinforced by the whole context of Louisiana - companies, churches, government, and media. Despite environmental degradation threatening the extinction of certain species while oil contributing less than 15% jobs to the residents, politicians from state to local levels continued giving speeches celebrating Louisiana's former richness. Louisiana's former splendid bayous being sacrificed to pave the way for heavy industries. Respected News media such as the CNN and New Orleans media refused to focus on the effect of petrochemicals from these industries to the plants and humans. Besides, Bureaucrats - environmental issues watch-dogs - loosened their regulations to accommodate industries.

From the deep story by Tea Party members, it seems the left-leaning government has been allowing minorities to cut ahead of those who have surrendered everything for the richness of Louisiana and they hate it. Hochschild cites many authors in explaining her great paradox. For instance, in Thomas Frank's "What is the Matter with Kansas" Hochschild justifies people's support of low taxes and limited regulations and policies aiming at helping big business and the rich. Social issues such as abortion and gun rights, support socially conservative voters' intentions of voting against their economic interests. Therefore, residents rally behind Donald Trump's ideology to "make America great again." Bitterness goes deep as they believe the government has conspired with "others" against them. They feel big businesses have done their part offering them jobs, but the left-leaning government wants to drive these businesses out consequently affecting their jobs, imposing taxes that will be reflected on their salaries and finally giving that money away to non-Christians, foreigners, and non-workers. These Tea Party sympathizers' political opinions, as portrayed by Hochschild, are deep-rooted in Christian philosophy; hostile to this life while they strive for a better life later as defined by Nietzsche. They yearn for a life where being moral, faithful and hardworking would win just rewards. Tea Party Members would ultimately vote for Trump (an "emotions candidate" (p. 225) in the 2016 Presidential elections.

Strengths and Limitation of Hochschild's Study

Strengths

Although many ethnography researchers prefer conducting their studies through close observation of people without building meaningful relationships, Hochschild went an extra mile and developed meaningful relationships with her participants; building trust which helped her gain access to participants' thoughts and feelings. She conducted her research not just at their homes but by "visiting places of birth, churches, and burial plots, sharing meals, driving places together, attending events, and more" (p. 249). She could tell her informants who she was and the reason she was there explaining how the political divide in the country concerned her.

Instead of conducting deductive research to test pre-determined ideas, Hochschild conducted inductive research making discoveries as they arise. She attended public rallies concerning the environment where she could meet central figures in her book. During her interviews, Hochschild asked participants to sign consent forms before she began recording their dialogue. She was more than ready to turn off the recorder at informant's request.

Limitations

For five years, Hochschild conducted her ethnography by gathering her data from a circumscribed group of people instead of gathering data from as many people as possible. Therefore, while her research aimed at learning how people identified themselves as Republican or Democrat, the study is not suited to all kinds of questions. Further research is, therefore, necessary to draw certain assumptions.

Summary of the Book

Arlie Russell Hochschild's book "Strangers in Their Own Land" is a well written and thoughtful book with dialogues and storytelling. Hochschild, sociologist and an expert in social emotion, uses her expertise to help people understand how it feels like to stay in marginalized ("red") America; that is, emotions of people living on the political right. She spent five years in Louisiana bayou country doing her research where she interacted through interviews with support groups and Tea Party members over coffee, cookies and photo albums to hear their "deep stories." Her ability to create rapport and show kindness to these people makes this book helpful. Hochschild wanted to understand why people in the poorest states, affected by industrial pollution, in need of public social services and federal aid consistently voted for candidates who oppose such programs (favor tax cuts for the rich, against environmental regulations, dismantle trade unions and determined to eliminate social security and public health care). In this context, she wanted to understand how people in Louisiana, which has witnessed the violation of environmental regulations and watched trees, birds, and people die as a result of toxic wastes could still support deregulation in industries and cuts in federal aids.

Hochschild convincingly shows that framing the issue as people voting against their economic interest is deceptive as it ignores taking people's emic accounts (ethnography) seriously. She defines empathy wall as a barrier in understanding people deeply creating hostile feeling to those who have different beliefs. Hochschild established that it is "possible, without changing our beliefs, to know others from the inside, to see reality through their eyes, to understand the links between life, feeling, and politics: that is, to cross the empathy wall" (5). She concludes that Louisianans feel culturally, economically and demographically marginalized thus Donald Trump's ideologies (republicans) sounding as angry as they are. Her research agrees with Scott's analysis of social change and the human condition; well-intentioned plans (in this case affirmative action programs) if not well implemented can result in deaths and disruptions to millions. When the residents cannot fully understand these programs, then they tend to interpret the whole idea differently and in most cases wrongly. Therefore, the success of these plans for social organization largely depends on the ability to be recognized by the locals placing their values, desires, and objections at the center of planning. Had the residents been educated on the importance of public health care, social security, trade unions, and environmental regulations, they would not be too resistant to such programs.

References

Hochschild, A., R. 2016. Strangers in their own land: Anger and Mourning on the American Right. The New Press. 368 pp. ISBN: 978-1-62097-225-0.