What factors have made life so difficult for large swaths of the US population?

Many Trump voters are from the American middle class who mainly live in suburbs. To understand the background of the political moment that is happening due to the presidential election in the US, the podcast “The United States of Anxiety” claims that logic can be found in the dynamics of the suburbs. Even though, their average household income is above the national mean, and the unemployment rate is very low, many people of the middle class feel that America is on the wrong track. 

Kwame Holmes from the University of Boulders explains how the suburbs have evolved. In the 1950s the disaffection towards desegregation caused a campaign by real estate brokers and politicians, pushing parts of the white population to leave the cities and move to the suburbs driven by fear. White families moved from the cities as they wished that their children would grow up in what they thought were safer places. Hence, a white middleclass was created in the idyllic of the suburbs. The middleclass was mostly supportive towards the desegregation, but protected their kids from any touching points in their suburban racial homogenous environment, as Lawrence Levy of Hofstra University states. Over time, the situation in the suburbs has changed. As Levy claims, people have become frustrated not being able to shield their kids anymore from being innocent of racial injustice, due to modern media and constant access to information.

Household income in the US fell during the recessions of 2001 and 2007, in the podcast though it is remarked that household income continued to fall in between these periods. Therefore, the middleclass suffered badly. The interviewed Mrs. Johnson was in tears when she reported that her property taxes in the suburb have increased so much that she can´t even afford to buy a new stove. She has to use social security payments to pay taxes. This economic downfall changed her life drastically. Mrs. Johnson, although apolitical, reflects the thoughts most people of the white middleclass have of Trump: He is promising to get America on the right track again, because his character is good hearted, he cares for the middle class, and he wants to control immigration. Though, Mrs. Johnson feels bad for refugees, she states that “we got to take care of our own”. She sees the biggest problems at home.

To summarize, the factors and fears that bring a change in the identity of the middle class concerning racism and economic wealth, are strongly connected to the sympathy that Trumps election campaign gained by the middle class. Since the middle class fears that their economic wealth is endangered by large scale processes and crises, such as immigration, refugees, and the financial crisis, Trumps promise to “make America great again” touched a sensitive nerve here.

Aaron's Edit:

Is the best solution to the problem plaguing the US immigration system to export nearly all immigrants and start over?

After Columbus discovered America in 1492 many European settlers came to find their happiness and ability to follow their dreams in the promised land. The settlers kept the native Americans down by the minute they entered America. So in fact the United States consist of immigrants. They also have this global status. Today the US are facing an immigration issue. This is discussed in the podcast "United States of Anxiety" produced by the Nation and WNYC Studios.

The biggest problem of immigration in the US is that they have an enormous number of illegal immigrants. But even Trump which has his roots not in the US makes no distinction between legal and illegal immigrants. He wants to deport them all. Alongside with the number of illegal immigrants goes that the US is facing terrorism. This produces fear for the population. This was his goal during his election to the new President.

But the real problem is that more than 10 million illegal immigrants live in the US. So this reveals how open the borders are. Furthermore illegal immigrants endanger the safety in the view of many Americans. The issue with the security is the major topic of the immigration. It remains to be seen if the US will isolate themselves from the world or if they keep being the promised land to live the American Dream for every one.

Brexit proves that some issues should not be decided by referendum. Agree or disagree?

Democracy involves the vote of the population! Therefore the referendum on the 23rd of June 2017 was a possible way to resolve the political disagreements Great Britain has with the EU. Nevertheless  the result (51,9% to leave the EU) poses that this vote was perhaps not the best solution.

The referendum had many topics: Immigration, Brussel's bureaucracy, Historic xenophobia and of course it was an act of political scheming in Great Britain. But in fact it magnifies the problem of the democracy, because only a "remain" or "leave" did not satisfy the Britons. Many voted at the end to leave, because of fear and disappointment which was easily produced by Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson. This political scheming also overshadowed the content and facts about this campaign, thus the population was unenlightened about the consequences of either "leave" or "remain".

This referendum was a violent reaction to austerity and the economic meltdown of the EU. Great Britain dealed with these issues in a wrong way. They used a thin line to solve their problems. They have not solved their domestic problems yet, but thought to solve their foreign affairs. Furthermore the loud reactions straight after the referendum prove how unsuccessful this political campaign of a failed democracy was and will develop, when they really exit the EU. 

Can traditional journalism survive in a media environment in which consumption happens mostly on social media?

The way people get access to news has changed significantly since the internet appoints our generation. A traditional printed newspaper during breakfast or during the commutation to and from work is rarely seen! Today every newspaper company has a printed paper as well as a digital paper.

Digital media has overtaken printed media. Every minute the news get an update! To get all global news is just a need for a smartphone! The latter has developed to the most fundamental object we can possess. Therefore the profession of a journalist has changed notably. The visual sides, such as the skills for photography or digital design, have become primary.

The development of the internet, for instance the fact that a mobile phone is a small and high-capacity laptop we perennially use, gives us a high flexibility in the way we consume media! The printed media has already loose a lot of reader, but has the chance to keep many with an expansion of their digital media. But at the end I see traditional journalism in terms of newspaper dying.

Aaron's Edit:

Can traditional journalism survive in a media environment in which consumption happens mostly on social media?

The way people get access to news has changed significantly since the (internet appoints our generation) [E,M? - ^ internet's emergence]. A traditional printed newspaper during breakfast or during the (commutation) [W - ^commute]* to and from work is rarely seen [foc - ^ these days]! Today every newspaper company has a printed paper as well as a digital paper.

Digital media has overtaken printed media. Every minute the news (get) [WF, Agr - ^ gets]  an update (!) [P, reg - ^ .] (To get all global news is just a need for a smartphone!) [E, M??, coh - ^ Having instant access to global news is one of many reasons why smartphones have become essential.  The latter (has) [agr - ^ have] developed (to) [prep - ^ into] (the most fundamental object) [E,Agr - some of the most fundamental objects] we can possess. Therefore the profession of (a) [det - ^ the] journalist has changed (notably) [E,W-collocation - ^ considerably]. (The visual sides, such as the skills for) [E,M,foc,coh - ^ Visual skills, such as] photography or digital design, have become primary.

(The development of the internet, for instance the fact that a mobile phone is a small and high-capacity laptop we perennially use, gives us a high flexibility in the way we consume media!) [E,Gr,M,foc, P, coh]† The printed media has already (loose) [WF, Agr - ^ lost] (a lot of) [Reg - ^ many] (reader) [WF,Agr - ^ readers], but has the chance to keep many with an expansion of their digital media [foc - ^ platforms]. But (at) [prep - ^ in] the end [P - ^ ,] I see traditional journalism (in terms of newspaper) [E,coh - ^ such as newspapers as] dying.

[* Commute means an act or an instance of traveling regularly to and from a place, especially between where you live and where you work. That's the noun your looking for.  The only two definitions of commutation that are neither obsolete nor specialist lingo from either electrical physics, linguistics, astronomy, rhetoric, or algebra, are 1) in finance,  a substitution of one form of payment or charge for another, and 2) in law, a change of a legal penalty or punishment to a lesser one.

† This sentence seems out of place. it should be at the beginning of the previous paragraph.]

How prevalent are British and American media in German culture

Every country has its own culture and its own form of media. But British or American media plays a specific role in a lot of country's media environment. Whether you watch Harry Potter, The Simpsons or listen to The Beatles, every person has a variety of associations with British or American media. Moreover, children in Germany grow up with television shows based in Britain or the USA. It is no wonder that English is the first language kids learn at German schools, because they basically encounter English-speaking media since they were born.

In general, German citizens are “divided” when it comes to consuming English or foreign media productions. Some people admire new television shows like Game of Thrones, Downton Abbey or Orange is the new Black, other people draw attention to the importance of German productions. But not only television or movies have a place in German culture. Music, fashion and lifestyle are also influenced by Anglophone media and have a huge impact on (young) people.

Due to the fact, that British or American media is quite similar to German media, the transition between international and national culture is fluent and barely recognizable. Concerning cultural discourse, Germans definitely have an understanding for British and American media in addition to German media. In times of globalization people face a lot of different cultures and media productions which form different and diverse attitudes. Whether you like Anglophone media or not, it might help to understand a specific part of the world.

Aaron's Edit:

Every country has its own culture and its own form of media. But [det - ^ the] British (or) [W - ^ and] American media (plays) [WF, Agr - ^ play] (a specific) [det, Gr, E,W - ^ an important] role in (a lot of) [reg; foc - ^ many other) (country's) [WF, Agr - ^ countries'] media (environment) [WF, Agr - ^ environments]. Whether you watch (Harry Potter) [St - itals] (,) [P;Gr;W - ^ or] (The Simpsons ) [St - itals], or listen to (The Beatles) [St - itals], every person has a variety of associations with British or American media. Moreover, children in Germany grow up with television shows based in Britain or the USA. It is no wonder that English is the first language kids learn at German schools, because they basically encounter English-speaking media (since they were) [E,M;T/Asp - ^ from the time they are] born.

In general, German citizens are “divided” when it comes to consuming English or foreign media productions. Some people admire new television shows like (Game of Thrones) [St - itals], (Downton Abbey) [St - itals] or (Orange is the New Black) [St;Sp - itals;caps], other people draw attention to the importance of German productions. But not only [Gr - ^ do] television or movies have a place in German culture. Music, fashion and lifestyle are also influenced by Anglophone media and have a huge impact on (young) people.


Due to the fact (,) [P] that British or American media is quite similar to German media, the transition between international and national culture is (fluent) [W - ^ fluid] and barely recognizable. Concerning cultural discourse, Germans definitely have an (understanding) [W,M??] for British and American media in addition to German media. In times of globalization[P - ^ ,] people face a lot of different cultures and media productions which form different and diverse attitudes. Whether you like Anglophone media or not, it might help to understand a specific part of the world.

What factors have made life so difficult for large swaths of the US population?

According to a statement from a person who was interviewed in the podcast "the United States of Anxiety" racism does not exist anymore in the US because a black president has been elected. People state thet their country does not have any problems concerning violence against people of color. Just by thinking about the number of violent acts against people of color, comitted by the police, one could disprove that claim.

The truth is that racism still is a very current problem that needs to be fxed. But how do you do that? It's important to recognize the problem's origin, which are several prejudices against people of color. (White) People are afraid of people of color because they assume them to be criminal, that they are uncultivated and that they carry diseases.

Those people who for example "fled DC" (podcast's host) think that their kids are not safe in public schools where they learn together with kids from a different ethnical background. Moving to the suburbs does not help to solve the problem, it only increases the segregation. In conclusion, people need to learn that they are all equal and that they deserve the same rights and respect.

Is the best solution to the problem plaguing the US immigration system to export nearly all immigrants and start over?

In episode 3 of the podcast “United States of Anxiety” produced by the Nation and WNYC Studios, the question arises, if President Donald Trump could be a big “do over button” for the US regarding the immigration issue. During the past election, immigration was one of the crucial themes. The three presidential debates revolved around that topic as well as the media, particularly the social media. People became increasingly emotional when talking about it; it became obvious that they were actually happy to be finally able to share opinions that might have been considered too radical or even racist before Donald Trump set new standards. Some people even support the idea of all immigrants being deported in order to allow the United States to start over again. This possibility, however, is quite certainly not the most suitable way to address the problems.

First, one has to be aware of the consequences that might or will ensue when executing this “plan”. In 2002, 11 % of the total US population had been born outside of the US and those are only the legal immigrants. They are likely to have built a family and to have found jobs, a new home. It seems cruel and almost absurd to expect them to give all that up. Especially, when you keep in mind that obviously, no distinction is made between legal and illegal immigrants. One might understand why people do not want to grant illegal immigrants the right to stay in their country. However, illegal immigrants, too, have created new homes for themselves and generally contribute to the economy, for example by taking on jobs many Americans don’t want.  

Another controversial aspect to this is the hypocrisy of people who demand the deportation of immigrants while being immigrants or at least descendants of immigrants themselves. The US have always been a nation of immigration and flourished and grew because of people entering the young nation and settling down. It is a shame that so much hate is created because of fear, prejudices and fake information spread on the Internet. I believe that instead of fueling this hate and fear and dividing an already struggling nation, efforts should be made to integrate the foreign born people who are already there. Also, as immigration is a problem that origins in the country the immigrants come from, working together with other nations seems to be by far a better solution than hiding behind a wall and denying ones responsibility or, to be more drastic, denying reality.

Aaron's Edit:

In episode 3 of the podcast “United States of Anxiety(”) [P,St - ^ ,"] produced by (the Nation) [St-itals;caps;foc - ^ The Nation magazine] and WNYC Studios, the question arises (, if) [P;W, reg - ^ whether] President Donald Trump could be a big “do over button” for the US regarding the immigration issue. During the past election, immigration was one of the crucial themes. The three presidential debates revolved around that topic as well as the media, particularly the social media. People became increasingly emotional when talking about it; it became obvious that they were actually happy to be finally able to share opinions that might have been considered too radical or even racist before Donald Trump set new standards. Some people even support the idea of all immigrants being deported in order to allow the United States to start over again. This possibility, however, is quite certainly not the most suitable way to address the problems.

First, one has to be aware of the consequences that might or will ensue when executing this “plan (”.) [P,St - ^ ."] In 2002, 11 % of the total US population had been born outside of the US and those are only the legal immigrants. They are likely to have built a family and to have found jobs(,) [P,Gr - ^ and] a new home. It seems cruel and almost absurd to expect them to give all that up. Especially(,) [P] when you keep in mind that [P,Gr - ^ ,]  obviously, no distinction is made between legal and illegal immigrants. One might understand why people do not want to grant illegal immigrants the right to stay in their country. However, illegal immigrants, too, have created new homes for themselves and generally contribute to the economy, for example by taking on jobs many Americans don’t want.

Another controversial aspect to this is the hypocrisy of people who demand the deportation of immigrants while being immigrants or at least descendants of immigrants themselves. The US have always been a nation of immigration and flourished and grew because of people entering the young nation and settling down. It is a shame that so much hate is created because of fear, prejudices and fake information spread on the Internet. I believe that instead of fueling this hate and fear and dividing an already struggling nation, efforts should be made to integrate the (foreign born) [Sp, Gr - ^ foreign-born] people who are already there. Also, as immigration is a problem that (origins) [WF - originates] in the country the immigrants come from, working together with other nations seems to be by far a better solution than hiding behind a wall and denying (ones) [WF,Gr,Sp - one's] responsibility or, to be more drastic, denying reality.