2 Comments

As we are still in a period of doing election autopsies, I wondered whether Al-Gharbi's -- and other academic analyses -- would add or subtract from the political punditry. For example, were both Harris's and Trump's teams both representative of "symbolic capitalists"? A tweedle-dee/tweedle-dum comparison? Certainly voters saw or believed there were differences that likely weren't understood in such academic frameworks. To me, the political pundits, whether I agreed or not, were more understandable to the political contest. So, if we grant that academic analysis have value, how are they meaningful to the man and woman on the street? To the unfolding political contest?

Expand full comment

Was disappointed in another interview to see al-Gharbi's casual anti-Semitism on display - his offhand comment on the supposed "genocide" in Gaza. I expect bigots and politicians to misuse words like "genocide," or simply not grasp the concept. But al-Gharbi knows what genocide is, presumably understands that whatever else the Israelis are doing, ethnic cleansing of Gaza is not involved in any way, shape or form, and nevertheless tossed that off in his wildly inaccurate description of President Clinton's campaign stop in Michigan in support of Vice President Harris.

That glaring anti-Semitism is now, unfortunately, coloring how I read his book, which I think does the best job of any attempt so far to explain the motivations and behavior of the urban professional elites.

I hope he is both willing and able to reassess his own biases.

Expand full comment