I was reminded of Freud’s paradox by a poignant article in The Times a few months back, which described a Republican leaning district in Minnesota, and its constituents’ conflicted desire to be self-reliant (“Even Critics of the Safety Net Increasingly Depend on It,” Feb. 11). The article cited a study from Dartmouth political science professor Dean Lacy, which revealed that, though Republicans call for deep cuts to the safety net, their districts rely more on government support than their Democratic counterparts.
The people of these districts aren't deluded, they are racist, and expect their subsidies to be maintained, ag, medicare, defense, etc. They want the money to go from being handed out by bureaucrats interested in levelling inequality, to churches, corporations and corrupt local governments interested in aggravating it. In fact the more the misery of the cities grows, the more prisons will be located in rural America. So why does a philosopher decry others for missing facts, when he does so himself? Because he sees the rural people as stupid. And yet, rural America gets more subsidies, has lower unemployment in the Republican Belt, and so on. They block the other party when in power, and work on the barest majority when in power. 40 votes for me, 60 for thee.
The inability to see the economic utility of racism for those that practice means that it will continue.