PDF Summary:White Poverty, by William J. Barber II and Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove

Poverty in America affects far more people than official statistics suggest, and the outdated methods used to measure it obscure the reality that millions of Americans—across all races—struggle economically. In White Poverty, William J. Barber II and Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove examine how systemic racism and economic inequality work together to keep poor people divided and powerless. They argue that politicians and elites use racial divisions to prevent poor Black and white Americans from recognizing their shared economic struggles and uniting for change.

The authors explore how voter suppression, misleading poverty metrics, and divisive rhetoric maintain the status quo. They also discuss the potential of "moral fusion coalitions"—alliances across racial and economic lines—to challenge these systems and create meaningful political change. Drawing on historical examples and recent organizing efforts, they show how mobilizing economically disadvantaged voters can shift political outcomes and create policies that benefit everyone.

(continued)...

Barber and Wilson-Hartgrove explain that the method for gauging poverty hasn't been updated, even though living expenses have increased exponentially in the last sixty years. Since the '60s, the price of a gallon of milk or a dozen eggs has multiplied about four times, whereas the average rent has risen more than sixteen-fold. This outdated measure makes it seem like poverty only affects a tiny group of those who haven't benefitted from the country's economic growth.

(Shortform note: While the original method for gauging poverty hasn't been updated, there are newer, alternative methods for gauging poverty. In Measuring Poverty, Constance F. Citro and Robert T. Michael argue that the official poverty measure should be replaced by a new measure that is explicitly based on contemporary data and regularly revised. They recommend setting poverty thresholds using recent Consumer Expenditure Survey data on food, clothing, shelter, and utilities, adjusting for family size and housing costs, and updating annually to reflect changes in expenditures and prices.)

In reality, the economic system is failing the majority of people, and disparities in income and wealth are higher now than at almost any other time in the history of the United States. Over 19 million renters in America spend upwards of 30 percent of their constrained incomes on housing, 600,000 individuals lack homes, and many millions more teeter on the brink of homelessness, frequently managing past-due bills in attempts to stave off eviction.

Scarcity and Systemic Failure

In Scarcity, Sendhil Mullainathan and Eldar Shafir argue that when people live with persistent financial scarcity, even small shocks—like a minor illness or an unexpected bill—can trigger a cascade of unpaid obligations and crises. This pattern isn’t about individual failure or bad choices but about how an environment structured around constant scarcity systematically narrows attention, constrains options, and keeps people perpetually on the edge of disaster. When millions of people live with rent-driven scarcity and almost no financial “slack,” their shared exposure to cascading unpaid bills, eviction, and homelessness points to a built-in vulnerability of the economic order rather than random bad luck.

Ideological Barriers to Addressing Poverty

Barber and Wilson-Hartgrove argue that voter suppression laws are an ideological barrier to addressing poverty, as they disproportionately affect poor people, including poor white people. These laws include voter roll cleansing, voter ID mandates, and gerrymandering, which make it harder for them to vote. Poor white Americans are the biggest demographic needing broader access to voting and the largest group that could benefit from policies like a living wage, safeguarding union rights, and universally accessible healthcare. These are initiatives that most Americans report they desire.

Counterpoint: Election Integrity Measures

In Our Broken Elections, John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky argue that election-integrity measures such as requiring voters to show identification at the polls and systematically updating registration lists to remove the names of people who have died, moved, or otherwise become ineligible are race- and class-neutral safeguards that protect the value of every lawful ballot. They claim that these measures are supported by broad majorities of Americans across the political spectrum and have not been shown to reduce overall voter participation where they have been enacted.

Moral Fusion and the Path to Reconstruction

Next, we’ll discuss how moral fusion coalitions can combat poverty and societal divisiveness, and the transformative potential of a fusion-based movement.

Establishing and Maintaining Moral Fusion Coalitions

The authors explain that alliances between different groups have historically brought about significant social and governmental change. These are alliances between races that unite people across racial and economic lines to fight for justice and equality. After the Civil War, for example, fusion coalitions of Black and white people in the South gained control of state governments and enacted measures to increase fairness for all Southerners. They built public schools, broadened voting rights, and reformed criminal justice. In the 1960s, these coalitions fought for civil and economic justice, securing legislation on civil rights, voting, and initiatives to address poverty.

Barber and Wilson-Hartgrove say these coalitions have always drawn on the ethical pledges in the Constitution and the principles of our traditions. They've called us to unite and fight for a better America.

The Power of Multiracial, Cross-Class Coalitions

Social-movement scholars have studied the power of multiracial, cross-class coalitions in driving social change. These coalitions unite people from different racial and economic backgrounds to fight for justice and equality. Research shows that these coalitions are most effective when they frame their goals around shared grievances. By highlighting common struggles, organizers can bridge divides and build solidarity across racial and economic lines. This approach taps into the constitutional promises of justice and equality, creating a unifying message that resonates with diverse groups. The success of these coalitions depends on their ability to overcome historical divisions and build trust among members. This requires ongoing dialogue, mutual respect, and a commitment to addressing the unique challenges faced by each group. When done effectively, multiracial, cross-class coalitions can drive significant social and political change.

The authors add that a small percentage of active supporters can drive a successful social movement. They cite Erica Chenoweth from Harvard University, who says that if a campaign garners the active backing of approximately 3.5% of a population, it will meet its objectives. The reason is that movements influence people well outside their direct sphere. By quickly involving a small percentage of the public, a moral fusion movement can transform the political landscape for all.

The 3.5% Rule Is No Longer Reliable

Erica Chenoweth and Zoe Marks have noted that in recent years, many large-scale nonviolent uprisings with broad, active participation have nevertheless failed to achieve their central demands. They argue that authoritarian regimes have adapted by building extensive surveillance systems, using preemptive and targeted repression, criminalizing dissent, and coordinating violent crackdowns. These tactics have made it much harder for movements to succeed, so that no specific proportion of the population can be treated as a guaranteed threshold for success.

Next, we’ll explore the potential of mobilizing impoverished voters.

Mobilizing the Slumbering Electorate

The authors argue that motivating impoverished voters can significantly impact election outcomes. For example, in 2018, 10% more voters turning out helped the Democrats regain the majority in the U.S. House. In 2019, the Kentucky Poor People's Campaign collaborated with other groups to prepare individuals of all races to speak to fellow economically disadvantaged people about the election's significance. They organized gatherings in their houses and at community centers, and they texted and called people who campaigns usually ignore because they aren't registered or haven't participated in past elections. They avoided discussing political affiliations or politicians. They discussed empowering poor individuals via a campaign that advocated for policies to benefit everyone and electing candidates who support those policies.

(Shortform note: The Kentucky Poor People’s Campaign’s efforts to mobilize impoverished voters in 2019 are part of a long tradition of grassroots organizing to empower marginalized communities. In 1964, the Mississippi Freedom Summer project aimed to register Black voters and challenge the state’s exclusionary political system. In Freedom Summer, Doug McAdam explains that the creation of the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party was a crucial innovation because it provided a way for poor, disenfranchised Black residents to directly challenge the legitimacy of the state’s segregationist Democratic Party delegation at the national convention. This historical context highlights the ongoing struggle to ensure that all citizens, regardless of economic status, have a voice in the democratic process.)

In 2020, the campaign for poor people applied what they'd seen in Kentucky across the country. They urged presidential candidates to communicate with poor individuals and low-wage earners, focusing on problems that endanger the lives of the impoverished.

(Shortform note: The campaign for poor people’s 2020 strategy of urging presidential candidates to engage with poor and low-wage individuals may have inadvertently weakened the movement. By focusing on electoral politics, the campaign risked diverting energy away from building the kind of disruptive power that has historically forced elites to enact deep change.)

The Transformative Potential of a Fusion Movement

Barber and Wilson-Hartgrove argue that a fusion movement can challenge the false belief that poverty only affects Black people. This myth prevents people from seeing the reality of poverty in America, allowing politicians to claim that the system is effective for most people and that the economy will eventually benefit everyone. It also separates Americans along lines of identity politics and culture, preventing the formation of a political coalition that can alter perceptions of poverty and what actions we can take. The misconception that only Black people desire change leads numerous poor white people to believe the system works for them and their values. It also makes them vulnerable to political figures who point fingers at people of other races who share their predicament.

The Challenges of Unity

While a fusion movement can unite people across racial and class lines, it can also have unintended consequences. In The Trouble with Unity, Cristina Beltrán argues that projects organized around a rhetoric of unity are always in danger of transforming a community’s internal differences into a problem to be managed or erased, so that plurality and dissent become stigmatized as disloyalty instead of being recognized as vital forms of democratic contestation. This means that while a fusion movement can help people see the reality of poverty in America, it can also inadvertently silence the unique experiences of different communities. By focusing on a single narrative of poverty, the movement may overlook the specific challenges faced by various groups, such as the intersection of race, gender, and class. This can lead to a one-size-fits-all approach that fails to address the nuanced needs of diverse populations.