Who are the Real Top Dogs and the Real Underdogs?

Abstract

Three predominant explanations have been offered for the success of Donald Trump: first, that increased Republican support was based on a backlash against Democratic centrists and “elites” who had abandoned the working class by advocating neoliberal economic policies; second, that Trump and his supporters used racism, sexism, xenophobia and other “dog whistles” to create a backlash among white voters; and third, that support for Trump was based on misinformation, conspiracy theories, and propaganda promoted by various media and online outlets. While all three interpretations reflect some degree of accuracy, the common threads are that Trump supporters are seen as victims or underdogs, struggling against powerful “top dogs” who pose an existential threat to their livelihoods, culture, and social standing. In this article, we first address this question of underdogs versus top dogs, using the framework presented by William Dugger and other institutionalist economics to describe the consequences of liberal capitalism. We then ask whether these categories of “elite” and “populist” are mutually exclusive and all inclusive. We conclude by offering some thoughts on whether use of this terminology has muddled the basic understanding of the economic transformation that the United States is experiencing at this present time.

Keywords:

• populist
• elite
• Trump

JEL Classification Codes:

• B15
• B52

Notes

1 For the most part, formerly enslaved persons were excluded from obtaining land through the Homestead Act. See Shanks 2005, 33–36.

2 Lind defines his elites or “credentialed overclass” as the educated professionals who are managers or professionals, although he does acknowledge that there is a gap between the very wealthy members of this group and those with degrees who have more modest means. Nonetheless, he sees a bigger distinction between this group and the two groups that, in his framework, comprise the working class. See Lind 2020, 6–13.

3 He includes in his list brokers, bankers, real-estate promoters and developers, engineers, consultants of all kinds, systems analysts, scientists, doctors, publicists, publishers, editors, advertising executives, art directors, moviemakers, entertainers, journalists, television producers and directors, artists, writers, university professors. See Lasch 1994, 42.

4 Ann Jennings and other institutionalist economists expanded on this concept to identify a number of “dualisms” that were applicable to economics. See Jennings (1992 and 1993) and Champlin (1997).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Dell P. Champlin

Dell P. Champlin is at Oregon State University.

Janet T. Knoedler

Janet T. Knoedler is at Bucknell University