The Four Americas: Is there any hope?

Some people see America divided in two. George Packer sees four Americas. He’s a leading journalist and author, whose new book, Last Best Hope: America in Crisis and Renewal, is distilled into an essay in The Atlantic.*

The 2016 election shattered my understanding of this country. I’ve since struggled to rebuild it. Packer offers some good insights. He actually pinpoints 2014 as the year America’s character changed. Though that refers to only one of what he sees as really four stories. Four different mentalities that have evolved, each sparking reverberations in the others. He labels them Free, Smart, Real, and Just America.

Free America originally wove together Enlightenment libertarianism with traditionalist conservatism. Opposing big bossy government; “speak[ing] to the American myth of the self-made man and the lonely pioneer on the plains.” This became the Republican party’s ideology.

Packer says “libertarians made common cause with segregationists, and racism informed their political movement from the beginning,” with the 1964 Goldwater campaign. That raised my hackles. I was active in that effort and didn’t observe racism being part of it. We had other ideological fish to fry. Though we did welcome any support we could get, including from segregationists who had their own reasons.

That was then. Packer says that after Reagan, “Free America’s” leadership went downhill. Gingrich being the key political figure of the era, turning politics into scorched-earth war. Then from Gingrich to Cruz to Hannity, “with no bottom.” Government was still the bête noire, but this was no longer a matter of Enlightenment philosophy, but rather of tribal blood-and-soil white caste assertiveness. Republicans “mobilized anger and despair while [only] offering up scapegoats. The party thought it could control these dark energies . . . instead they would consume it.” Culminating in January 6.

Smart America —a core of today’s Democratic party — refers to a relatively new elite class of educated professionals, whose cosmopolitanism somewhat overlaps with Free America’s libertarian streak. Both have a meritocratic ethos, believing talent and effort should determine reward, thus both having limited sympathy for the underclass. Packer says meritocrats no longer feel part of the same country — Smart America having withdrawn, as it were, into its gated communities, disengaged from some larger national project. Seeing patriotism as vulgar, thus leaving it the province of yahoos.

Sarah Palin embodied what Packer labels Real America (which is how it sees itself). Its anti-intellectualism has deep antecedents, standing in opposition to the elites of Smart America. Which, Packer says, discredited themselves with the Iraq mess and then the 2008 financial crisis. “Real America” also reviles “other” people it sees as both alien and unworthy. Its heart is white Christian nationalism (with Christianity more salient as a tribal cultural signifier than as a religious creed).

Those “Real Americans” seized upon Trump as their voice, which he channeled with (I’d say unwitting) “reptilian genius.” If the elites considered them ignorant, crass, and bigoted, “then Trump was going to shove it in [their] smug faces.” Thus did his vileness actually, perversely, work for him.

Free and Real America seem hard to disentangle today; the latter having really subsumed the former. Smothering its principled antecedents, now confined to an impotent rump of Republicanism.

Packer fingers 2014, the year of Ferguson, as a hinge point, a sort of coming-out party for his fourth cohort — Just America — as in “social justice,” with its abiding idea really being Unjust America. Upending universal Enlightenment values of rationalism in favor of a subjectivity seeing everything in terms of power relationships and modalities of oppression (gosh, I’m starting to sound like them). We know by now how insufferably intolerant these “woke” people can be, trolling everywhere for pretexts to assert putative moral superiority over others. (An analog of sorts to white supremacism.) Which, Packer says, does nothing to actually address the kinds of societal problems they spout about.

While Packer divides us into the four groups, the fourth doesn’t seem on a par with the rest, which comprise big population segments. Just America, for all its shrillness and undeniable cultural intimidation, is actually only a small minority. Meantime Packer ultimately sees a dichotomy, putting Free and Real America together in one bucket, Smart and Just America in another. That latter linkage is dubious.

I see the real divide as between, on one hand, Trump cultists in an ugly alternate reality together with the hard left “woke” totalitarians — Crazed America — and, on the other hand, contrastingly reasonable and rational folks of good will. Sane America. Among whom differences of opinion are comparatively benign.

Anyhow, Packer says the societal division “emerged from America’s failure to sustain and enlarge the middle-class democracy of the postwar years.” (Actually the picture is much more complex than the conventional wisdom of a “disappearing middle class” would have it.) Packer holds that each of his four groups “offers a value that the others need and lacks ones that the others have. Free America celebrates the energy of the unencumbered individual. Smart America respects intelligence and welcomes change. Real America commits itself to a place and has a sense of limits. Just America demands a confrontation with what the others want to avoid.”

I found that too a bit forced. However, says Packer, they all impinge upon each other, pitting tribe against tribe vying for status, pushing each into ever more extreme versions of themselves.

But he says America isn’t dying. We have no choice but living together. And a “way forward that tries to make us Equal Americans, all with the same rights and opportunities — the only basis for shared citizenship and self-government — is a road that connects our past and our future.”

Those words sound like platitudinous moonshine. And his concluding ones contradict them: “we remain trapped in two countries . . . the tensions within each country will persist even as the cold civil war between them rages on.”

That’s closer to reality. The “crisis” of Packer’s book title is clear enough; the “renewal” part much less so.

* All quotes are from the essay. (I thank Robyn Blumner of the Center for Inquiry for pointing me to it.)

6 Responses to “The Four Americas: Is there any hope?”

  1. Don Bronkema Says:

    Forced? Smart & Just cohorts shoodbi allies in ‘grand lutte historique’ to defuse bleached yahoos. Time will dispatchem, ovkorss, but only after grave damage. We must unify to obliterate capitalism, anti-green prodigality, the oleagyny of res-ligio, the diktat of Sinogulag, misogyny, misology & Neo-Stalinist cataplexy. As for ‘wokism’, it’s ungrammatical, so must give way to Wittgenstein, Jacobsen & Chomsky. Try wakeism or Aufklarruung. Musa qualquier Ameriki ingenium et ore rotundo loqui, but few hark. Tears must flow til ecodise…

  2. Robyn Blumner Says:

    Hi Frank,

    I agree that we are really divided into Crazed America and Sane America. And I agree with who you lump into Crazed America on both the left and right of the political spectrum.

    No need to provide me with a “shout out” when I send something your way. I know you’re interested in how we got to this scary point in history, so when I see something illuminating I always think to send it to you.


    Robyn E. Blumner *President and CEO*, Center for Inquiry *Executive Director,* Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science 1012 14th St. NW, Suite 205 Washington, D.C. 20005

    The Center for Inquiry strives to foster a secular society based on reason, science, freedom of inquiry, and humanist values. Our vision is a world where people value evidence and critical thinking, where superstition and prejudice subside, and where science and compassion guide public policy.

    On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 9:09 AM The Rational Optimist wrote:

    > rationaloptimist posted: ” Some people see America divided in two. George > Packer sees four Americas. He’s a leading journalist and author, whose new > book, Last Best Hope: America in Crisis and Renewal, is distilled into an > essay in The Atlantic.* The 2016 election shattered m” >

  3. rationaloptimist Says:

    Robyn, I actually agonized over that word, “sane.” I don’t think all those other people are clinically insane. It’s politically insane. One can be compartmentalized. In the context I considered the word justified. (And I do appreciate when you think of me.)

  4. cocobiskits Says:

    The Just America may be small in numbers but they are so obviously big in effect. Never underestimate the influence of a minority filling space and having an effect (good or ill).

  5. Lee Says:

    I would divide people differently. Group One are the ones who idolize selfishness. With few exceptions, they don’t feel the need to help strangers who need help. They think that poverty programs, anti-racism programs, etc. are mostly a bad idea because they divert resources to people via other than what people would garner via selfishness. These people are often labeled “greedy” or “mean” by those from the other groups.

    Group Two are the ones who see that some groups need help, usually their own, but not other groups. These people think that helping other groups means that they won’t receive the help that they need. These include some (but not all) identity groups on both the left and right, and are often accused of “discrimination” or “reverse discrimination.”

    Group Three are the ones who see that there are many people who are barely getting by, whether the issue is poverty, racism, environmental devastation, etc. These people think that we are a very rich nation by any standard and we can afford to help those who are suffering. These people are often labeled “socialists” by those from the other groups.

    Despite the harsh labels, each group has its merits. The goal is to balance these in a sensible way.

  6. Don Bronkema Says:

    Greed drives Man like a daemon, but an infinite pie needn’t be divvied up. The ‘End of Scarcity’ will arrive a century later than Keynes in 1930 forecast [2100, not 2000], but that long-awaited desideratum is certain, absent one of 14 terrestrial or cosmic calamities ID’d by respondent’s risk-analytic colleagues. Tek is the word. Prep your grand-stirps for N-dimensional creative leisure. O/wise generacide, oblomovism & Trumpian bricolage.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: