who says the U.S. have no history?

Aclaración: Sometimes my minimalist approach to blogging leaves the door wide open for misinterpretation. Let's see. I don't mean to imply that those who voted for Bush in the red states are a bunch of racists (although I do think some of the Bush votes are spurred by prejudice). What I was hoping to illustrate with this map is the historical context for voters' cultural identification. It seems that the national divide that these elections brought to sharp focus can be better understood when we bring in the issue of cultural/emotional identification. As any Spaniard knows all too well, civil wars respond to a real polarization within a nation, a polarization that leads to armed conflict and creates wounds that never quite heal. The Wombat File offers some good thoughts on the weight of cultural identification in these elections and Metafilter scoops out an eye-opening insider's explanation of "radical" conservatism, that is, Southern conservatism. It's not the only answer, but it's an important aspect of a complex whole we must seek to understand.

maps courtesy of Sensory Overload

Comments

[Unkown Guy]

Oh yeah, that's the way it is! Get a clue, take a look at county poll results then you can play a banjo on my knee...

[Brocco]

The only bush to trust: my own
;)

[Pato]

Joe, I'm not calling anybody a hillbilly. Is that how you understand cultural identification in the heartland? You have jumped to that conclusion, not me.

I think of America as incredibly diverse, and I'm not talking just race or ethnicity. We may have only had two candidates, but there were millions of different reasons why citizens voted for Bush or Kerry. I believe cultural identification is one of many emotional factors influencing votes. What do you think?

I wouldn't resort to a stereotype in any circumstances. Stereotypes are simple answers to complex realities. And I hate simple. Simple doesn't exist. Simple is a strategy to cover up complexity, which is the only certainty we have about reality. Simple is a lie, is manipulation, is extremely suspect. But simple is soothing, so if you need to be soothed, Bush's discourse may be very appealing, IMHO. To me, simple is far from soothing. It's terrifying, really.

I welcome you to engage in dialogue. You seem to be a Bush supporter and your perspective would be very valuable here as we aim to understand each other. Explain your reasons to support Bush and I'll explain my reasons not to. Clearly, we all care about this country and want to direct it in the best possible direction. That's a lot of common ground. But we disagree on how to do that. Let's hear each other out. I can't think of a more positive, hopeful approach to this polarization.

Un saludo.

[honda-radio]

Thx! :)