NEED HELP WITH THIS HOMEWORK

Dear Juan S Valencia,

Read the article in Chapter 15 (page 398) in your textbook and the New Yorker article assessing  Arlie Hochschild’s book Strangers IN Their Own Land . Based on the presentations of her research, discuss how you could understand the sweeping political changes that have taken place and are currently taking place since the election of President Trump. Do we need to climb or break down empathy walls? How might you use sociological knowledge and research to start this process?

NOTE: Make sure you answer all parts of the discussion question.

Please reply to a minimum of one of your classmates.

(The answer must be a minimum of 250 words )

Discussion postings are worth 15 percent of your total grade.

· You are required to first post a response to the discussion board prompt and it must be a minimum of 250 words. Citations, titles, copying questions, references, and other identifying information does not count toward word count.

· You are required to use proper grammar and spelling. When using other sources, citations using APA style are required.

· Direct quotes are not permitted in discussion posting, therefore you must paraphrase and cite. In addition, you must post a discussion response to a student's discussion posting.

ARTICLE PAGE 398 BOOK

© The New Press The election of Donald Trump caught many liberals by surprise. They questioned why so many poor and working-class Americans would vote for a Republican who vowed to dismantle government programs enacted to help them such as the Affordable Care Act. Arlie Russell Hochschild spent five years in Louisiana, a strongly conservative “red” state, to learn about what she calls the “Great Paradox”: People who need federal assistance the most are turning away from it and toward market-place solutions to their economic problems. Hochschild found that one of the main reasons for this is the emotions that shape opinions and actions relating to such matters. Political feelings are dividing Americans, many of whom retreat into segregated “emotionally toned enclaves” (or “echo chambers”) and surround themselves with like-minded friends, acquaintances, and political commentators (2016, 6). Examples of such enclaves are found on social media, where friends and followers are likely to share similar beliefs. Most troublesome is the fact that invisible “empathy walls” are being constructed that “can make us feel indifferent or even hostile to those who hold different beliefs” (2016, 5). These empathy walls are particularly pronounced in the case of controversial issues, such as immigration, abortion, and same-sex marriage. Hochschild explains that conservatives believe liberals are trying to force them to feel “happy for the gay newlywed, [and] sad at the plight of the Syrian refugee” (2016, 15). Liberals are seen as reducing conservatives’ lack of requisite feelings in such cases to prejudice or ignorance. To better understand the empathy walls dividing liberals and conservatives, Hochschild interviewed a core group of 40 highly conservative Tea Party advocates. From this group, she selected six people to profile. She became a participant observer of their lives, including attending political rallies, community meetings, and church services with them. Hochschild focused her research on one specific example of the Great Paradox: resistance to government regulation of environmental hazards caused by private companies. Louisiana suffers from some of the worst environmental hazards in the United States, such as air and water pollution, created, in part, by petrochemical corporations. However, it has at the same time some of the most lenient environmental regulations. Hochschild finds that conservatives want a clean environment, but many do not believe government regulation is the best way to achieve it. Some of them view environmental risk as natural or inevitable, while others think it is a gamble one has to take to increase job opportunities. Even people in her study who were forced to relocate because their homes had been swallowed by an enormous sinkhole caused by a drilling company refused to blame the company or to turn to the government for help. Some even blamed government agencies for their lack of oversight instead of the negligent practices of the company. While it is easy to blame the victims of the Great Paradox for contributing to—if not creating—their own hardships, Hochschild warns that this reasoning is too simplistic and reinforces empathy walls. It dismisses structural and cultural reasons why some individuals might oppose “big government” and support companies that promise them jobs. Climbing empathy walls by deliberately interacting with individuals who espouse different beliefs from our own is admittedly difficult when political polarization is high. However, it might help us acknowledge the intense emotions supporting these walls and encourage those on both sides to be more inclusive and trusting.

● edge.sagepub.com/ritzerintro5e Watch Hochschild discuss her book Strangers in Their Own Land on Democracy Now! Learn more about Hochschild’s findings and the individuals she interviewed in an article that appeared in the New Yorker

Ritzer, George; Wiedenhoft Murphy, Wendy. Introduction to Sociology (p. 398). SAGE Publications. Kindle Edition.