Podcast (weimerica-weekly): Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: iTunes | Android | RSS
Welcome to Weimerica Weekly Episode 27. The podcast airs every Wednesday.
This week’s podcast is on the tiny house movement.
Weimerica Weekly is a podcast hosted by Ryan Landry that touches on the cultural, political and sexual topics that fill the mindspace of our United States of Weimerica. The politicization of all cultural and social degeneracy is examined with a focus on how it fits together.
Weimerica Weekly is produced by the Hestia Society and distributed by Social Matter.
Related Show Links:
La Wik entry for the tiny house movement.
Fresno, California passes groundbreaking tiny house rules.
Thanks to G.W. Rees for the introduction and outro music. G.W. Rees’ music can be found here on Soundcloud, Youtube, Facebook, Flickr and Instagram.
Sponsorship:
If you are interested in sponsoring Weimerica Weekly, e-mail Ryan Landry at Mrossi34228 at gmail dot com. Sponsorships start at $10 an episode, and all proceeds will either go back into the podcast or provide some compensation for your most grateful host.
Weimerica Weekly
Or subscribe with your favorite app by using the address below
Man, you are a take-no-prisoners kind of guy, Ryan. A regular one man Inquisition sniffing out the heretics.
If they don’t demand free stuff from the government, so what?
Listen, middle class life, while good for the vast majority, isn’t necessarily good for everyone or for society in general. The middle is just that, the middle. It serves a very important purpose but there may be more to life than nine-to-five drudgery. Maybe a lot more.
Did a bad boy arty type snake your woman once upon a time? It’s beginning to look like you’ve got some “issues.”
Thanks for listening.
No one’s forcing you to go public.
Actually, I think it’s an interesting topic. You just don’t like ’em. Fine. They are not a symptom of degeneracy, however. They are works of art people live in. I’d argue they show the incredible creativity of whites. Tiny houses add, not subtract.
Let me ask you a question and anyone feel free to respond.
Its always puzzled me that people who self-identify as conservatives like cookie-cutter, tract homes with poor proportions and want to drive everywhere. While people who self-identify as progressives like old urban houses. Very odd no? I mean wouldn’t conservatives want to “conserve” their heritage? And shouldn’t progressives like brand new disposable houses since they hate their culture anyway?
Anyone with any insight on this I’d like to hear it.
And I really want to thank Ryan for bringing up this topic.
“Its always puzzled me that people who self-identify as conservatives like cookie-cutter, tract homes with poor proportions and want to drive everywhere. While people who self-identify as progressives like old urban houses. Very odd no? I mean wouldn’t conservatives want to “conserve” their heritage? And shouldn’t progressives like brand new disposable houses since they hate their culture anyway?”
No. Conservatives move to decent, safe neighborhoods because they love their kids and want them to have a decent neighborhood and some semblance of a normal childhood. Progressives move into old houses in marginal neighborhoods to prove they aren’t racist. Better that their kid be killed by a savage than they be accused of being a racist or a bigot. That would be like a sacrament.
In case you don’t recall, the progressives ruined every homogeneous white ethnic neighborhood in the country over the past 50-60 years.
Oh, come on. Progressives, for the most part, want to live in the whitest neighborhoods they can afford and send their kids to the whitest schools. Believe me. Yes, there might be a few very selfish ones who want to status mark using their kids but that’s rare.
I could say that conservatives simply ran away without a fight when it came to preserving their neighborhoods. While liberals actually fight – admittedly like girls – but still, they will fight.
Massive resistance? Conservative whites fought all over the place, not just in the South, to save their neighborhoods. Boston Irish were resisting up until the late 80’s. The Feds sent in the National Guard with bayonets affixed. At some point, you have to decide if you are really better off to your children dead or in prison.
I can’t speak to other areas, but around here, the progressives live in shitty “transitioning” neighborhoods or even really bad neighborhoods. My wife used to work with some of these fools. They prattle on about wanting their kids to be exposed to a “diverse” group of people. A buddy of mine is a cop in one of the worst areas and he related a story to me about a young progressive running up to him in a panic after hearing gunshots. The progressive was nearly in tears asking “I love down the street. What happened? What happened?” My buddy told him: “Some brother just got his head blown off; You do know you live in the ghetto, right?”
MD, you inadvertently just let us in on a dirty little secret. The average middle class white male left the cities on his own accord. There was very little “white flight.” The fact is, whites left for the burbs because they wanted to. Cities were, and are, viewed as pestilential and full of ethnic strife. The utopia of suburbia offered the mixing of the white ethnic groups. But, there were side effects. Like a sterile alienated machine cult removed from the geographic and traditional core of power.
What do you mean by “left on his own accord?” Their schools and neighborhoods were forcibly destroyed by the federal government and communists masquerading as “civil rights” activists. They didn’t, in most cases, take up arms in a futile revolt against federal tyranny, but that doesn’t mean that they desired their end. What would have had them do?
The whole thing is starting anew now, with Barry’s dictate that new ghettos now be built in the whitest neighborhoods.
MD, I don’t have figures but I know that the vast majority of whites moved to the suburbs voluntarily. They were not forced by the Feds. You can easily verify by venturing into the nearest city (with a guide in your case) and see that all the old houses are still there. The gentrifiers are fixing them up and doing the job their grandparents wouldn’t do.
“You can easily verify by venturing into the nearest city (with a guide in your case) and see that all the old houses are still there. The gentrifiers are fixing them up and doing the job their grandparents wouldn’t do.”
I grew up in a racially-mixed area and was one of the few white kids on my football team. I didn’t form my opinions from the safety of an ivory tower. I saw firsthand what happened to my neighborhood (my parents still live there) and many, many like it. When I was a kid, teenage black savages hit my buddy’s 8 year old brother in the face with a brick. When I was in 9th grade, four savages pulled up in a car and stole my Mt. Dew and Doritos at the point of a gun. When I was in middle school, the neighboring high school was shut down for two weeks over racial riots. I don’t need a guide into these neighborhoods. I know them well.
The “gentrifiers” in these neighborhoods are mostly fools. They are the ones who believe in all of the silly notions of equality and diversity and they think that their kids will be better off for going to city gulags (schools) with illiterate savages. Of course, many will wise up and move or send their kids to private school. The areas of my city with the most hipsters and gentrifiers just happen to be the areas with the highest number of robberies and thefts. The morons who have moved in are easy targets for the black criminal class. Its like taking candy from a baby, a very naive and foolish baby.
That’s interesting. Thanks. My point still stands. Whites weren’t driven out by blacks. Your parents managed to tough it out. If everybody was like them they could have put up a fight and kept their old neighborhoods.
“That’s interesting. Thanks. My point still stands. Whites weren’t driven out by blacks. Your parents managed to tough it out. If everybody was like them they could have put up a fight and kept their old neighborhoods.”
Tough it out to what end? So your kids can go to a shitty school, your house can decline in value over 30 years, when the old guy next door passes away a mammy with five delinquents can move in, all the houses around you can fall into disrepair, etc.? I’m all for the idea of a family home and homeplace, a neighborhood, a place to plant your roots, etc., but when the law prevents your from protecting your neighborhood and schools, there is nothing that can be done. The real catalyst for my neighborhood going to shit was in the 1970’s when they plopped down 1,000 ghetto units in the middle of a white neighborhood. The residents fought it, but of course, they lost. Within a couple years, there was a significant black population, then by the mid-80’s, it was half black. The cops have told me that 80% of their calls come from this one development.
That’s crummy about the development.
Your family got caught up in an overwhelming cultural collapse involving millions of people over many generations. These types of things just sweep people up in their path. But, unlike the brain-washed gentrifiers you have a better understanding of the real world. Some people never learn.
“These types of things just sweep people up in their path.”
Well, I don’t view what happened as a natural disaster or an accident. It was done intentionally.
Whoops. Somehow that video was cut off. Here is another talk, by the author, about the same book. Or, just read the book. Its rather long, but very informative.
Tiny houses represent the end of the American Dream.
Tiny houses allow SWPLS, hipsters, libtards, and others to adjust to the new economic reality while trying to maintain their dignity and self-respect behind a facade of hipness.
Tiny houses symbolize a surrender.
Not everybody can be an investment banker or physically tough. Tiny house people aren’t necessarily hipsters, which I take it you mean to be feminized. They appreciate craft, style and attention to detail. This is critical for maintaining élan like good grooming and stylish clothes.
Good design adds. Bad design subtracts. Bad design is soul-crushing monotonous “machines for living.”
Hipsters and leftoids who live in tiny houses are trying to sugarcoat the housing decline.
I’m very conservative but I do like older homes much better than the “cookie cutter” types. However, I would like to purchase one and remodel to my needs.
That’s great. I highly recommend you get a copy of The Old-House Journal, Guide to Restoration, edited by Patricia Poore. The best by far. Good luck.
>>nine-to-five drudgery.
Sometimes a job’s a job. Not everyone who works a 9-5 is miserable wishes he was an “artist” living in East Village, trying to not become a caricature from RENT.
My frat just capitulated. Going full bore diversity.
Weimerica is not just about degeneracy. Its about the weird in America that is a symptom of our messed up culture and society. Educated and sometimes well paid people living in tiny houses is weird. I like tiny houses but they are not a good sign. Writing I have issues is just lame.
Yea, that’s some post-modern argumentation right there.
“You don’t like something? Hmm, sounds like you have some sort of issue or insecurity.”
I was half serious half jesting with that bit. I could have used an emoticon I suppose but then I’d have to admit I’m a bad writer.?
>>nine-to-five drudgery.
Sometimes a job’s a job. Not everyone who works a 9-5 is miserable and wishes he was an “artist” living in East Village, trying to not become a caricature from RENT.
My cousin’s a web developer working 9-5 making 40K in Chicago, works doesn’t get you much in the city, but he isn’t reaching for the gun (not that any are allowed in the city).
My one of my friends works mostly 9-5 as a elementary school teacher. Add in my brother who works in the finance industry, but his weekly work hours can range from the typical 80 hrs to a more grueling all nighters and weekend work. He also isn’t reaching for the gun.
The 9-5 job gets a lot of shit because you’re “working for the man” and you work in a cubicle, or that the suit & tie is your “uniform” (with the tie being your personal noose). Ew. Conformity. Who. The. F_ck. Cares.
>>My frat just capitulated. Going full bore diversity.
Interesting. What do you mean exactly? Letting in women?
Also, my first comment was incomplete. The second one were my complete thoughts.
Fraternity, frater, brother.
It’s the total capitulation by the people who are supposed to protect us. The brotherhood.
They don’t give a shit about us. They’re looking for the blacks, Muslims, Chinese.
Okay, I still don’t completely understand what you’re trying to say.
Are you saying that they’re seeking a more ethnically diverse class? If you are I don’t see much of the problem with this unless those initiated are opposed to the rituals and the underlying mission of the organization.
From the head honcho:
“. . . XXXs are only interested in the content of your character, not the color of your skin, your religion, your socioeconomic status or sexual orientation.”
This and much, much more.
They’ll have to call fraternities something else. Frater means brother. Tranies and lesbians will be triggered.
Muslims, blacks, etc. will have a whole lot of other “rights” violated. You can count on it.
I will no longer donate, not even to my own chapter. I no longer recognize the group I joined. It has suddenly become something very alien to me.
@ “IA June 3, 2016 at 1:20 pm”
Overall I see little issue on what he said.
The head honcho never said to allow women (regardless of their sexual orientation) and transgenders (actually transgenders – surgery & dress and all) into your fraternity.
The only issue would be initiating a man who thinks he’s a woman, but how would you find out if he has this disorder? It’s a tricky situation.
“Muslims, blacks, etc. will have a whole lot of other “rights” violated. You can count on it.”
It depends on their attitude. Blacks who think the “white man is stepping on his chest” (my own words) probably will join some organization with mostly blacks, or maybe a NPHC fraternity.
From my experience blacks who join NIC fraternities (or local fraternities) aren’t there to cause a ruckus or make things political intentionally. Same thing with Americanized Muslims.
“I will no longer donate, not even to my own chapter. I no longer recognize the group I joined. It has suddenly become something very alien to me.”
In what way? Racial makeup? Political attitudes towards, race, sexuality, and fraternity tradition?
P.S. I’m a non-white who joined a NIC fraternity.
What’s an NIC?
We’ve had a few blacks but they can’t help but drag us down. Never fails. I don’t blame them. They can’t help it. As Obama said at the Howard U. graduation a couple of weeks ago, Be confident in your Blackness! to thunderous applause. Then, Cicely Tyson spoke, and to wild cheering shrieked “He’s done all this for you, for you,” repeated about 10 times.
You’re non-white so you view all this from a different angle. Well, you could be a white hard-core oikophobe, I suppose.
You’ll never identify with the white cross on a Norman Sheild like I do. You might identify with the cross but not the sheild. If you think Muslims will identify with either one you are delusional. I can look at traditional Chinese art with admiration but it could never move me the way reading Homer does. When I see good western architecture I’m reminded of a Greek temple but what does that mean to you? You can appreciate it for sure but it doesn’t move your soul the way it does mine. Why should it? It’s not your family.
If you think I’m being racist then what do you make of Yale students demanding that a course in European literature be REPLACED by one centered on “people of color?” The fact is, GRA, everybody’s racist. We can’t help it. Only gullible human rights-indoctrinated whites believe, or pretend to believe, in the blank slate.
NIC: North-American Interfraternity Conference
>>Well, you could be a white hard-core oikophobe, I suppose.
I don’t believe I am because haven’t destroyed any sacredness of tradition within my fraternity nor do I think racial integration necessarily destroy such things.
It’s all about seeking out young men who buy into the values, the history, and motto of a given fraternity. Of course, not every initiated member fulfills this duty of living up to standards – black or white or in-between.
>>You’ll never identify with the white cross on a Norman Sheild like I do. You might identify with the cross but not the sheild.
We most likely don’t belong to the same fraternity so you’re right.
>>If you think Muslims will identify with either one you are delusional. I can look at traditional Chinese art with admiration but it could never move me the way reading Homer does.
If the Mulsim is hostile to the fraternity’s history and symbols then that would be an issue.
As for the art, you’re comparing a painting to a book. I don’t see how ones race hinders one to uphold the importance of each, and in Homer’s case the themes and narrative found within the pages.
Me listening to Bach is a different experience than me admiring traditional Chinese art. I prefer Bach, but that doesn’t mean I can’t understand the sentiments behind Chinese art. I am neither Chinese nor am I German.
>>When I see good western architecture I’m reminded of a Greek temple but what does that mean to you?
Depends on what period the western architecture is based on. Fine architecture is hard to fine these days; there are only a handful of Brutalist structure I like. Modern architecture can lack soul (and history).
When I think of a Greek temple I think of civilization. I think of Plato & Socrates. I think of the theater. If I had a time machine I’d choose Ancient Greece as my first stop. Too bad the (modern) city of Athens is a piece of shit.
>>You can appreciate it for sure but it doesn’t move your soul the way it does mine. Why should it? It’s not your family.
Given that any two people do not experience art the same way your appeal to your ethnic heritage in establishing that you “get it” more than I do is highly amusing.
Go find another white guy, grab a beer at your favorite microbrew, and ask him “So, since you’re white like me, Homer ‘moves you’ the same way it ‘moves’ me, right?” Or “When I look at a bust of Homer, do you feel the same way as I do?” Good luck with that.
(You sound like a leftist when who appeals to his heritage and/or his sexuality – like a self-involved bisexual, black woman saying, “Hear me roar! I am the spectrum you have put into the stands for too long! It’s my turn to be the quarterback!” All that intersectionality shit.)
>>If you think I’m being racist then what do you make of Yale students demanding that a course in European literature be REPLACED by one centered on “people of color?”
I think it’s a ridiculous demand. Do I think it’s racist? I don’t know. I will say it’s a misguided reaction (why single out the Euro lit. class? Doesn’t Yale have a curriculum that delves into non-white writers & thinkers already?).
I can confidently bet that the list of books the students & faculty that might assigned will not have the same influence than whatever books were assigned in the Euro lit. class. Probably pound for pound as well. I can only guess what books would be assigned and if I’m right then, yes, the curriculum is worst off because of it.
>>The fact is, GRA, everybody’s racist. We can’t help it. Only gullible human rights-indoctrinated whites believe, or pretend to believe, in the blank slate.
If you’re working with the classical definition of racist, that one is to believe that another race is superior to another resulting in the inferior race to be subjugated, then I’d have to disagree. Not all races are equal and not all contributions to humanity are equal, though.
I appreciate you taking the time to formulate your argument.
You have one big problem though (I think you’re saying that there are no or minor cultural differences between races and that magic dirt exists). And that is, if there are no fundemental differences then why did different races produce such wildly different cultural artifacts? Especially when compared to Europeans.
You would think after thousands of years separated human groups would eventually produce similar monuments, images, myths, etc. What we see is just the opposite.
The houses are on wheels as to get around zoning laws.
And, in many states, homes on wheels are personal property and not real estate. So, you can avoid real estate taxes.
Great podcast. I’ve been following the tiny house trend with some interest. It is, as you rightly point out, a symptom of our screwed-up housing system. I think much of the blame can be attributed to mass immigration policies. But try pointing this out to real estate professionals and real estate investors, and they will ignore it. They simply don’t want to hear it. I think tiny house are ridiculous. But I see why they’re popular, and even necessary, in certain hipster circles. I find it very hard to believe anyone would find these structures truly satisfying. Do they lie awake at night regretting their purchase? I bet they do.
I like to categorize these things as reactions to Weimerica.
Just like becoming a “Hipster” selling artisanal whatever, getting a “Tiny house” is a bit of denial or bargaining about one’s own social decline. I’m not not not highly indebted working class living in a trailer, unable to afford children! I’m so much more!
I like the tiny house concept. It’s a good thing if people are getting rid of a lot of unnecessary stuff. I tend to see it as an anti-consumerist movement.
I kind of like it too, but I’m afraid the truth is that it’s trailers for middle class people like trains are busses for middle class people.
Of course that’s what it is. But being debt free and living within one’s means can only be positive.
the guy who’s wife doesn’t want kid needs to JUST WALK ON – NOW.
there is nothing that tells me a woman is damaged as the absence of maternal instinct.
I have 3 adult kids . As I get older and see and experience life, I am more convinced of this. A people age , childless marriages create some “interesting” people.
I agree. That is very legitimate grounds for an annulment, too.
Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf.
Not an argument
glad to see you agree.
Great stuff, there’s a strange buzzing noise in the background though. Maybe it’s just me.
No, something fricking happened at min 19 or so with my export.
Alright, Landry, you triggered me a little. Not a lot, but a little. I’m actually a big fan of the Tiny Houses movement – and of minimalism, and of Maker Faire, and of all those related movements.
Yes, I see your point. But just like there’s nothing wrong with having pets per se, there’s nothing wrong with Tiny Houses per se. It’s all in the motivation behind them and the attachment to them. My fondness for them has less to do with SWPLism and more with Fred Reed-ism. Here’s an appropriate passage from Fred:
“I once lived briefly in an old one-bedroom trailer set in a patch of pine woods near Farmville, Virginia. A brick barbecue came with it, and a large floppy pooch, apparently a mixture of Irish setter and whatever was around. The place was blessedly quiet. Birds and bugs aren’t noise. When it rained I delighted in being almost in the storm, but dry. I think the whole shebang cost the owner five thousand dollars, including a well and septic system.
If you are thinking, “Why…no…I couldn’t possibly live that way,” you are probably right. But if I were doing it now, I would have staggering amounts of pirated music on today’s monstrous memory sticks, a set of very decent speakers for a few hundred doomed green ones, a Kindle or the free computer version for reading books from Amazon if I had the money or Project Gutenberg if I didn’t, and a fairly large flat screen for watching movies donated by uTorrent. Net cost: Under a grand.
Circumstances differ, yes. But you get the idea: Comfort, quiet, music, books, barbecue, undefined dog, storms, friends, for practically nothing. Mutatis mutandis, the principle applies almost everywhere.
It also fits well with Fred’s Bifurcate Law of Economic Independence: If you can’t pay for it, don’t buy it; and if you don’t need it, don’t buy it.”
The full column is here, and well worth reading (as Fred always is): http://fredoneverything.org/time-to-bail-eyeballing-the-fifth-century/
The point is that materialist consumerism is as corrosive to traditional values as feminism or atheism. If there’s anything reactionary about working a job you hate to buy shit you don’t need in order to impress people you don’t like, I don’t see it. If there’s anything reactionary about having a house, or a car, or a television set that’s 2/3 bigger than you need, I don’t see it. I’m not accusing you of defending any of that; I only mean to explain my point of view. We should all downsize as much as we practically can. No, I wouldn’t expect someone with a wife and kids to live in a Tiny House (though I might expect them to live in a house only as large as our grandparents would have found acceptable, as opposed to a grandiose yet cheaply-built McMansion). But anyone who *can* make do with less, should.
So yes, I’m sure that some people who have joined in on the Tiny Houses movement are dopey SWPLs. But doing the right thing for the wrong reasons isn’t the worst thing in the world.
It’s highly satisfying to see SWPLs and hipsters forced to resort living in trailers and mobile homes–oops, sorry, “tiny homes”–when for decades they’ve ridiculed rightists and rednecks for supposedly doing the same. You just can’t make this stuff up.
Welcome to Weimerica.
There’s enormous cross cultural misinterpretation going on here.
Long before today’s hipsters (feminized men) there was a movement to create small, crafted houses. I refer you to Handmade Houses by Art Boericke, A Guide to the Woodbutcher’s Art, 1973. Excuse this rather long excerpt from the preface by Sim Van der Ryn:
“For some years we have heard the extravagant technological promise of housing at low cost. It has never come to pass. The answer to low cost housing, it seems to me, is to make a break with a “standard of living” that makes us slaves to centralized decision-making and control to an economy whose values are the magnitude of production and consumption. The dollar is not a reasonable measure of the quality of life or the quality of place.
“Yet most of us are still children of that dollar, and the institutions we grew up in – we are conditioned to their ways. For most of us have grown up sharing little real experience or work. We have a few rituals that celebrate our unity of body, mind and spirit. We are trying to find our way back into the earth family and there are few guides to show the way.”
It goes on in this vein throughout the book; escaping the machine culture, wage slavery, etc.
It may sound a bit escapist but there might be something that modern culture cannot supply. Anyway, this started in the 60s and 70s.
Buy the book if you can find it.
The book is mostly photos. Very little writing.
Joogle employee lives in a van:
http://www.businessinsider.com/google-employee-lives-in-truck-in-parking-lot-2015-10
That guy’s got the right attitude.
MD, thanks. I’d never heard of Jones. I did listen to the talk on another channel and read a few reviews. It seems a little far-fetched. It wasn’t just Catholics that moved. Not by any means. Also, I could never put together the mechanism of moving in blacks other than various groups like Quakers and a Catholic by the name of Dennis Clark. They did the same crap these types are doing today importing Somalis into Protestant Minneapolis. But, if wealthy whites stayed in the cities this couldn’t have happened and instead US cities would look like European ones where the blacks and Muslims live in the surrounding areas, or banlieues.
Moving Catholics to the suburbs didn’t stop them from having children either. And Catholics surely were part of the post-WWII baby boom.
From my own experience having grown up in a city with almost no blacks in the 50s and 60s I saw nice neighborhoods that were “cleansed” not by blacks but by poorer whites. The reason was simple: supply and demand. Better educated whites wanted to move to the burbs fueling demand there and weakening demand in the older city neighborhoods. There was no grand conspiracy, just the usual status-marking Eloi “adopting” noble savages and gaining merit. Sometimes evil really is banal.
I disagree with much of what Jones has to say, but, in my town, every Catholic ethnic community (and many Protestant ones, though we didn’t have a large Protestant population) was destroyed in the exact manner he described. Even the historically Jewish neighborhood was eventually destroyed when forced busing ruined their high school. Amazingly, 10% of the Catholic high school was Jewish, after the busing started.
More power to anyone who can find a way to escape the debt slavery that fuels the banking plutocrats and the borderline personality types who seem to flock to the real estate industry.
There is a certain arrogance to SWPLs. The mocking of lower-class whites is accepted, but when pushed to cut their expenses they resort to structures that are associated with lower-class whites.
When it comes to road trips, instead of mini-vans & RVs it’s Volkswagen vans (saw a few on the highway during my road trip out West).
Estate wise, instead of a trailer home it’s a “tiny home.”
Instead of a PC it’s a Mac.
There are a few admirable things about these “tiny houses”: the supposed rebellion towards the McMansion, consciousness of buying what you need and throwing out any redundancy (especially when it comes to kitchen utensils), and the appreciation of limited expenses.
I personally wouldn’t live in a “tiny house” but instead seek out a trailer home if I didn’t want a brick & mortar estate.
Do you look like a slob because slob’s might feel bad by comparison? I remember when drinking wine was considered snobbish.
In and of itself having good taste isn’t mocking lower classes. In Americans to an unusual degree there’s a type of reverse snobbery in my opinion. I saw this a lot while living in Paris. Americans had/have a real atitude problem. Left or Right wing, doesn’t matter.
“In Americans to an unusual degree there’s a type of reverse snobbery in my opinion.’
Yes. This exists, but it is a reaction to the just-as-ridiculous pseudo-intellectual, pseudo-aristocratic, social engineering class. The people with no real education and no practical experience, who think they know what is best for everyone. The types of people that George Wallace called “pointy-headed intellectuals.”
Good. Live in a strip mall, eat garbage, dress like a twelve year-old thug with tats and look like a land whale. That’ll teach those pointy-heads a thing or two by golly!!!!!!
Right. Because people are automatons and everything is black and white.
By the way, my poor, ragged Italian-immigrant friends (you would hate them) never thought it was snobbish to drink wine. They drank it by the plastic five-gallon bucket.
Look, if you think I’m dismissing the “finer things in life” which SWPL’s tend to go for you’re wrong. Don’t make this into something it isn’t.
As for your questions, no, I don’t like slobs. My post never implied did.
>>In and of itself having good taste isn’t mocking lower classes.
What does this have to do with what I wrote? What I wrote was “There is a certain arrogance to SWPLs. The mocking of lower-class whites is accepted, but when pushed to cut their expenses they resort to structures that are associated with lower-class whites.”
>>I saw this a lot while living in Paris. Americans had/have a real atitude problem. Left or Right wing, doesn’t matter.
Examples of this reverse snobbery? This isn’t about L v R. Again, don’t make this into something it isn’t/
Keep things chill, fellas.
I dislike SWPLs…a lot. But let’s overrate them. Most are just faddish youngsters. I’ve lived all over America and believe me, there are still more authentic cowboys rednecks than SWPLs, more country music than post-punk slowcore.
When I lived out west, I was surprised at how typical SWPL archetypes were not. I was surprised to find out what I thought were SWPLs were really Republicans who would never dream of voting Democrat, and how many women with short lesbianic hair cuts, were devout Christian wives and mothers with 3-5 kids who met their husbands at a gun show or monster truck rally.
This holds true for upstate New York and Mass. as well.
I never associated Tiny houses with SWPLs, but sort of a hippyish thing. Now, the treehouse thing might be SWPL, but I never thought it was entirely that either.