the creed granted imprimatur from thensynagogue of St. Marx. Any delEcienciesnThe Southern Redneck may exhibitnin terms of what C. Wright Millsncalled the “sociological imagination”nis more than compensated for by thenauthors’ deftness at what might bendescribed, with slight apology to Mills,nas the sociological hallucination.nIt is not that the authors are badnpeople, nor bearers of unwelcomennews. Indeed, they are champions ofnthe right, eager to tell us in definitiventerms what the South needs. Thencatch is that the Southerners’ lack ofnadversarial consciousness makes it difficultnto get the Utopian crusade definednand started.nI have no doubt that the authorsnreport ’em as they see ’em, identifyingnsupply-side economics as the cause ofninflation, the “happenings” directednby Huey P. Long as “the most enlightenednand noblest undertaking innSouthern history,” and all. The authorsnlay aside Scripture in favor ofnMarx in arguing that “the world couldnnot be redeemed through man’s beliefnbut rather through the rising up of thenpoor.” They seek salvation throughn”social justice” and “human liberation”nas inspired by the “Russian revolutionarynexperiment” or promoted asna “sacred Christian [sic] movement” innthe South by Miles Horton, JamesnDombrowski, Frank Graham, andnsimilar ilk in the 1930’s.nThe authors may well believe anythingntheir doctrine tells them theynought to believe. But it strains credulitynto believe even they think thatn”rednecks [did] not believe that HerschelnWalker eats with the white playersnon the Georgia team” or that “rednecksndid not know that Walker goes tonclasses with young, white girls in Athens,nGeorgia.” Research “findings” ornexpression of an ideological fetish carriednby the authors? In their doctrinalnportfolio, racism must be pervasive.nTheir religious orthodoxy (Marxistnfundamentalism) demands it.nIt would probably be unnecessarynlack of charity to suggest that thenperpetuators of such distortions mustneither be: (a) charlatans; or (b) trainednignoropaths (not quite the same thingnas a sociopath) who project their ownndogmas onto the subjects supposedlynbeing described. Perhaps the authorsnare not truly responsible for their ownnacts and assessments. As trained sociologists,nthey may well be eunuchs innmatters of judgment.nIt must be conceded that Roebucknand Hickson have set forth the basis fornan enchanting party game. Read anline, and ask others if they think suchnis characteristic of a redneck. Or ask anredneck. Or play solitaire, and see hownyou score out. Are you fortunatenenough that your wife is impressed bynMarabel Morgan? Yahoooooooo—it’sna gotcha! The authors claim Morgan’snThe Total Woman is regarded by rednecknwomen as a “godsend” for salvagingntheir marriages. Do you have animosityntoward Jerry Falwell? Betterndevelop some quick, or it’s a gotcha.nThe authors claim, “The redneck’snsolution to his problem is to side withnthe Moral Majority and leaders such asnJerry Falwell.”nAre you fearful, frustrated, alienated,nhysterical, and hyperventilatingn”in light of the current trend … asnevidenced by reactionary politics”? Ifnnot, you are likely to be one of then”hunting, fishing, drinking, socializing”ntypes enmeshed in a small, closeknitn”poor white subculture that hasnendured since antebellum times.” Asnsuch, you are a lout, a derivative of anrigid, marginal, politically isolatedngroup in a semi-traditional society “articulatednto a class system based uponnmaterialism, traditionalism, paternalism,nracism, and religiosity … a re­nGreen Thoughts inna Green ShadenKarel Capek is best known for hisnwhimsical nightmares of 20th centurynlife, RVR and The War Withnthe Newts—early warnings againstnthe depersonalization and loss ofnautonomy so characteristic of thenmodern state. He was also the authornof gentiy satiric tales that seemnto show the decency of ordinarynmen. Leopold Tyrmand was fond ofnquoting from Capek’s littie fables,nand before his death he ordered anreview copy of The Gardener’s Yearn(Madison: University of WisconsinnPress), a superb set of works andndays in which any gardener will benREVISIONSnnnmarkable culture not conducive tonclass consciousness, economic wellbeing,nor upward social mobility.”nTrue belief requires its demonology;nknights must have dragons. The authorsnfind President Reagan an unacceptablynnonrapacious proponent ofn”new welfare policies [that] will causenmore human suffering in the Southnthan any other federal action since thenCivil War”; a veritable genocidist, portendirlgnthreat of return to “a primitivelynoriented criminal justice system,nweakened labor unions, and the loss ofnsome civil rights [that is, civil riots]nmovement gains.”nThe authors wax hysterical denouncingnan alleged alignment ofnKKK, Moral Majority, white middleclass,nsmall pensioners, small businessmen,nlower-echelon professionals,ntradesmen, small farmers, rural dwellersn(nomenclature theirs), and thenroadhouse set with baseball caps advertisingnCoors: it all adds up to “a brandnof conservative populism reminiscentnof that preached by George Wallacen… on the upsurge in the South.”nThe resultant horrors are specified asn”significant victories against churchnand state [no, the authors did notnmean in Louisville, Nebraska, wherenChristian education was criminalized],nabortion for women, pornography,’liberalncongressmen, certainnfreedom of the press rights.” The timesnare evil, “The little Southern liberal-nable to recognize himself:n… a real gardener is not anman who cultivates flowers;nhe is a man who cultivatesnthe soil. He is a creaturenwho digs himself into thenearth. … He builds hisnmonument in a heap ofncompost. If he came intonthe Garden of Eden henwould sniff excitedly andnsay: “Good Lord, whatnhumus!”nCapek’s genial conservatism wasnwatered in his little garden innPrague, and his little book is thenperfect gift for the gardener or hisndisgruntied spouse.nJULY 1986/29n