“The man who has money is king”: Discursive constructions of affluent domination of US politics in letters-to-the-editor, 1948–2016

ABSTRACT

Scholarly and popular publications alike are rife with accusations and evidence of the wealthy’s outsized influence on US politics. The rich can vote more easily, have greater sway over policy, and comprise a disproportionate share of Congress. Yet few are asking what citizens have to say about both the real and perceived power of the rich. Scholars do not yet fully understand how the people process these realities in public fora or build communal interpretations of wealth-driven political power. This paper takes an historical perspective, asking how people across a period of increasing economic polarization and campaign spending made sense of democracy without equality and what they proposed to do about it. To that end, I conduct a fantasy theme analysis of nearly 400 letters-to-the-editor from 12 newspapers spanning the 18 US presidential elections from 1948 to 2016. This analysis contributes to a conceptual model of how citizens felt politics worked in the United States across an era of increasing inequalities. I argue the fantasy theme of affluent domination is one element of a rhetorical vision pitting the interests of the working poor against the wealthy for control of a political system that to some looks remarkably little like democracy.

KEYWORDS:

• Wealth
• inequality
• citizen discourses
• fantasy themes
• textual analysis

Acknowledgments

This study exists because Rod Hart asked a question and I had to answer it. Eternal thanks to him for his curiosity and support. Additional thanks are due to all those at the Annette Strauss Institute and beyond who have contributed to the Campaign Mapping Project over the years.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

More information on the data used here is available via the Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Life. Any inquiries about data access or use should be directed to their offices. https://straussinstitute.moody.utexas.edu/research/campaign-mapping-project

Notes

1. Gilens and Page, “Theories of American Politics,” 572.

2. Economist, “Influence of the Rich;”; Lavin, “Eat the Rich’.”

3. Bump, “How to Influence Politics.”

4. Schudson, The Good Citizen.

5. Coleman, How Voters Feel; Cramer, The Politics of Resentment.

6. Griffin, “Class War,” 132.

7. Carnes, “Millionaires Run Our Government.”

8. Igielnik, “Economic System Unfairly Favors the Powerful.”

9. Silke, Quinn, and Rieder, “The Truth about Power?,”, 241–247.

10. Thurber, “The Contemporary Presidency,” 366.

11. Canes-Wrone and Gibson, “Congressional Love?”, 1–27; Jorgensen, “Political Money,” 561–570; Griffin, Newman, and Buhr, “Class War,” 131–145.

12. Jones and Gee, “Oligarchy Dominated by Billionaires?.”

13. Wahl-Jorgensen, “Shifting Emotional Regimes,” 768.

14. Gilens and Page, “Theories of American Politics,” 576.

15. Bormann, The Force of Fantasy, 24.

16. Bormann, “Fantasy and Rhetorical Vision: Rhetoricial Criticism,” 396–407.

17. Ibid., Bormann, “Fantasy and Rhetorical Vision,”396–407.

18. Birdsong, “Consequences of Economic Inequality;”; OECD, “Inequality and Poverty;”; Stone et al., “Historical Trends in Income Inequality.”

19. Weber, From Max Weber, 173.

20. Weber, 163. Ibid., 163.

21. Weber, 163. Ibid.

22. Weber. Ibid.

23. Gilens and Page, “Theories of American Politics,” 566.

24. Harvey, A Brief History of Neoliberalism, 34.

25. Harvey, A Brief History of Neoliberalism.

26. Gilens and Page, “Theories of American Politics,” 564–581; Suhay, Klasnja, and Rivero, “Ideology of Affluence,” 367–380.

27. Cramer, The Politics of Resentment, 4.

28. Harvey, A Brief History of Neoliberalism, 36.

29. Weber, From Max Weber, 180.

30. Harvey, A Brief History of Neoliberalism.

31. Harvey. Ibid.

32. Kornhauser, “The Morality of Money” 119–170.

33. Kornhauser, “The Morality of Money,” 119–170; Ibid.; Salek, “Money Swears,” 1–19.

34. Salek, “Money Swears,” 1–19.

35. Peck, “‘You Say Rich,’” 526–535.

36. Salek, “Money Swears,” 1–19.

37. Thurlow and Jaworski, “Introducing Elite Discourse,” 243–254.

38. Thurlow and Jaworski, 243–254. Ibid.

39. Thurlow and Jaworski, 243–254. Ibid.

40. Thurlow and Jaworski, 243–254. Ibid.

41. Bonikowski and Gidron, “The Populist Style,” 1593–1621.

42. Bonikowski and GidronIbid., 1596.

43. Weber, From Max Weber, 184.

44. Cramer, The Politics of Resentment, 222.

45. Pappas, “Nativists from Populists,” 148–152.

46. Peck, “‘You Say Rich,’” 526–535.

47. Peck, 526–535. Ibid.

48. Bonikowski and Gidron, “The Populist Style,” 1596.

49. Harvey, A Brief History of Neoliberalism, 15; Harvey,Ibid., 16.

50. Bonikowski and Gidron, “The Populist Style,” 1593–1621.

51. Nicholson and Segura, “Party of the People?,”, 369–389.

52. Pied, “Conservative Populist Politics,” 193–206; Nicholson and Segura, “Party of the People?,” 369–389.

53. Pied, “Conservative Populist Politics,” 193–206.

54. Wahl-Jorgensen, “Shifting Emotional Regimes,” 766–778.

55. Wahl-Jorgensen, 766–778. Ibid.

56. Wahl-Jorgensen. Ibid., 768.

57. Cramer, The Politics of Resentment.

58. Pappas, “Nativists from Populists,” 151.

59. Drum, “The Real Reason Americans Are So Damn Angry All the Time;”; Males, “Why Conservative Parts of the U.S. Are So Angry.”

60. Bormann, The Force of Fantasy, 5.

61. Bormann, The Force of Fantasy.

62. Bormann, “Fantasy and Rhetorical Vision: Rhetorical Criticism,” 398.

63. Bormann, Ibid., 399.

64. Bormann, The Force of Fantasy, 7; Bormann et al., “Visions of Committed Voters,” 287–310.

65. Bormann et al., “Visions of Committed Voters,” 290.

66. Bormann, “Fantasy and Rhetorical Vision: Ten Years Later,” 292.

67. Bormann, The Force of Fantasy, 8.

68. Bormann, “Fantasy and Rhetorical Vision: Ten Years Later,” 292.

69. Bormann, The Force of Fantasy, 11.

70. Bormann, Ibid., 12.

71. Bormann, Ibid., 24.

72. Greene, “Rhetorical Capital,” 327–331.

73. Thurlow and Jaworski, “Introducing Elite Discourse,” 243–254.

74. Harvey, A Brief History of Neoliberalism, 5.

75. Bormann, The Force of Fantasy.

76. Bormann et al., “Visions of Committed Voters,” 287–310.

77. Weber, From Max Weber, 178.

78. Anderson, Imagined Communities.

79. Anderson. Ibid.

80. Bormann, “Fantasy and Rhetorical Vision: Rhetorical Criticism,” 396–407.

81. Pew Research Center’s Journalism Project, “Newspapers Fact Sheet.”

82. Pew Research Center’s Journalism Project. Ibid.

83. https://straussinstitute.moody.utexas.edu/research/campaign-mapping-project Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Life, “Campaign Mapping Project.”

84. Hart, Childers, and Lind, Political Tone: How Leaders Talk & Why, 235.

85. Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Life, “Campaign Mapping Project.”

86. Hart, Civic Hope, 24.

87. Hart, Ibid., Civic Hope, 8.

88. Hart., Civic Hope.

89. Hart, Civic Hope, 23.

90. Hart, Ibid., Civic Hope, 76.

91. Sotillo and Starace-Nastasi, “Working-Class Town,” 249–276.

92. Sotillo and Starace-Nastasi, “Working-Class Town,” 249–276. Ibid.

93. Anderson, Imagined Communities, 133.

94. Anderson., Imagined Communities.

95. Hart, Civic Hope.

96. Bormann et al., “Visions of Committed Voters,” 287–310.

97. Cramer, The Politics of Resentment.

98. Cramer, Ibid., 65.

99. Bormann, “Fantasy and Rhetorical Vision,” 288–305; Bormann, The Force of Fantasy.

100. Coleman, How Voters Feel, 8.

101. Coleman, Ibid.,16.

102. Bonikowski and Gidron, “The Populist Style,” 1593–1621.

103. American Federation of Government Employees, “Unions Provide Checks and Balances against an Abuse of Power.”

104. Bormann et al., “Visions of Committed Voters,” 287–310.

105. Bormann et al., 287–310. Ibid.

106. Perrin, Citizen Speak.

107. Perrin, Ibid., 2.

108. Perrin, Ibid., 147.

109. Citrin and Stoker, “Political Trust in a Cynical Age,” 49–70.

110. Bureau and Creamer, “Poverty in the United States;”; Miller, Simmons, and Weir, “Characteristics of the Low-Income Population.”

111. Bormann, The Force of Fantasy, 94.

112. Bormann, 94. Ibid.

113. Cramer, The Politics of Resentment, 173.