Trials and Tribulations of the White Man

The Trials and Tribulations of the Middle Class White Male

One way of studying whiteness is to look at the role of the white man, especially the middle class white man, in American society. The middle class white male is stuck between the lower and upper classes, between poverty and wealth. He aspires to be better than he is but feels lucky that he can be better than those below him. This straddling of the line and confusion of class is what causes many white males to feel victimized. But who is behind this so-called victimization? Fred Pfeil, in his essay "Sympathy for the Devils: Notes on Some White Guys in the Ridiculous Class War," looks at two groups of white men who consider themselves victims. The post-1960's group, whom he terms the New Agers, feels victimized because they cannot locate a root tradition and fear if they try too hard to find themselves there will not be anything there worth finding. The second group, the men in the militia, works hard and gets nothing to show for their endurance. They keep their head down, avoid confrontation, and hope the boss recognizes their efforts. Due to the system they are forced to live and work in, the militia feels victimized. Another example of the victimized middle class white man is Billy James Hargis. Hargis was the leader of the Christian Crusade until TIME magazine wrote an article destroying his reputation. In his autobiography, My Great Mistake, Hargis writes in the voice of a victim but also as a humble white man earning sympathy for the wrongs that have been done to him. Both Pfeil and Hargis write about the middle class white male and his position in society. The texts sympathize with the awkward position the white man is in and explain that these men are not evil, they are victims. Can the same sympathy that has been applied to the "devils" in Pfeil's essay be applied to Hargis? Did the TIME article come from a result of his actions or his class status? Through a close class solidarity reading of Pfeil and Hargis, this essay will explore the question of victimization and resulting sympathy for the middle class white male in American society.

There are many ways to view whiteness; some of the prominent schools are the race traitors, the "white trash" school and the class solidarity school. The race traitors wish to abolish white privileges. The only way to not participate in whiteness is to denounce everything associated with it. The school of white trash scholarship emphasizes the poorness of whites and uses that emphasis to other nonwhite minorities. Class solidarity looks at the working class and links its struggles with other classes. Although Pfeil looks at whiteness with a mixture of these schools he focuses on the class issues, looking at the working class white male and the issues surrounding them. Pfeil focuses on which class the New Agers and militia belong to and how, if they ever recognized who the antagonist was in their lives and tried to right it, it would be a ridiculous class war. Through this view, Pfeil is studying these men in a class solidarity school of whiteness thought. He argues that if the different classes could figure out who they were, where they were in society, and who they were fighting, things would get better. He thinks the militia needs to get rid of their idea of wages of whiteness but does not necessarily subscribe to race traitor because he seems to advocate the New Agers find a wage of whiteness to cling to. He shows the place of militia but not to emphasize their poor state but to show how they fit into the class. By viewing the two groups of white men through their class status, Pfeil is able to identify why these groups seem so disillusioned. Pfeil uses the class solidarity school of thought to sympathize the New Agers and militia which are often seen as racist and misogynist.

Pfeil writes on two distinct groups of white men in his essay "Sympathy for the Devil." The first group, the post-1960's men he terms the New Agers, have lost their identity. They see groups around them embracing traditions and getting back to their roots and the New Agers have realized they do not have a culture to refer back to and their roots are someone else's. The second group, the militia, have worked hard all their life. They have kept their head down and their mouth shut and dealt with low wages and hard work for a variety of reasons. Pfeil empathizes with these men because he grew up with them; these men are his fellow classmates and neighbors. He reveals the logic behind the militia's silence - if the middle class hard working man keeps his mouth shut not only will he keep his job but he will keep the small position of power, mostly in his own household from having that job, that he has grown accustomed to.
Pfeil describes the two groups of men in an honest way not letting his bias reveal itself. He states that before he began his project he thought about the topic in a different manner and afterwards his conceptions have changed. He now identifies himself as these groups and sees himself as walking the line between them. He looks at the groups of men in a cultural and political way, explaining that these movements came out of these spheres. The two groups of white men are struggling to find themselves in a culture that no longer has a clear definition of what a white man should be. Pfeil makes it clear that the two groups are not angry nor are they against women and nonwhite minorities. Instead, the New Agers and the militia are groups of middle class white men struggling to find their place in society in between repressed and oppressed, between white trash and millionaire.

The overarching problem with the two groups of white men is revealed through the class solidarity school of thought. The working class does not understand who the antagonist is. The New Agers avoid looking at their traditions and roots in fear of what they will find. The militia has placed their fears on the governments' presence. They are paranoid and believe that the government will take their land at any time. Much like the characters in The Turner Diaries, the militia fears their guns will be taken away and are prepared to shoot any federal agents who step on their land. Capitalism is the root of their insecurity, antifederalism fuels their rage. Both groups believe the enemy must be external; they must be victimized by something else because they cannot face the fact that it is their peers and themselves that is causing the problem. One of the benefits the militia receives is the "wages of whiteness" which allows them to feel superior to other nonwhite minorities because, if nothing else, the militia still has their whiteness. The militia, by working hard and following the unwritten rule, believes they are playing with the upper class. They live under the impression that they are a part of the hierarchy of power, that instead of contributing to it they are benefiting from it. The reality of this situation is that the upper class white male is oppressing the working class militia.

The same type of class solidarity analysis can be applied to Billy James Hargis. Hargis was lower to middle class when growing up. In his description and from what is understood about his childhood, he was born into the militia style lifestyle. The militia, other than working hard, often serves in the military. Hargis escaped the draft by going to seminary and worked his way up from there. Hargis did not keep to the unwritten rule of the militia. Not only did he avoid military time, he also did not keep his head down and work hard for small wages. Instead he sought refuge in the ministry and became a public voice and prominent figure of the Christian Right. While living the upper class life Hargis still portrayed himself as a "good ol' boy" that had risen up from the depths of whiteness to play with the upper class. Hargis' weight is another issue that cannot be ignored. Hargis is two-sided in what he says and in the image he portrays. His body image shows his gluttony but also shows he is the same as everyone else. His weight proves that he does not try to get in shape; he is working too hard for his religion and pulling himself up to fix his image. He's a good ol' boy that comes from a rural town and wants to help the little people find God. At the same time he is a conniving manipulative con artist who is working his way up the capital ladder. The first side described links him with the militia, the second with the New Agers. Either way Hargis is a middle class white male struggling to find his place in society and receiving sympathy while doing so.

Why must the middle class white man be sympathized? Is he a victim? If so, who is victimizing the white male? In the study of the militia the men are being victimized by an upper class white society. Hargis as well was victimized by TIME magazine, a predominately upper class white male organization. These middle class men who claim to work hard and pull themselves up by the bootstraps are already at a higher place than other classes and races. The middle class white man is not being victimized by people below him but white upper class society. They lash out against other classes and races, victimizing others to make up for their own misplacement, when their real fight is against other white men. Several authors of whiteness studies have focused their attention on the white man as victim. In order to compensate for their actions, the white man argues that he is the victim in the situation and his actions are justified by the abuse he has survived.

A deeper look at Pfeil's class solidarity way of thinking about whiteness will reveal more about the militia and New Agers and, when applied to Hargis, more about the victimization of the middle class white male. The middle class white male struggles to find his place in society, but why? How did the victimization of the middle class white male bring about the destruction of the Christian Crusade? By analyzing Hargis' struggle with class it is easy to see how he achieved success and how it was simultaneously stripped from him. Just like Pfeil walks the line between both groups long enough to analyze them for his essay, Hargis walked the line long enough to gain a spot at the top of the hierarchy before it was taken from him. By analyzing Hargis' class status, the question of the victimized white male can be seen in a new light.

Works Cited

Hill, Mike. Whiteness: A Critical Reader. New York: NYU Press, 1997.