I don’t get what you’re saying. Those aren’t the same thing, at all.
I agree with your rant. My point is that the original writer is phrasing this as a dichotomy. It’s not. The economic issue leads logically to the cultural issue.
Let’s put it another way. Does anyone really believe, if the working class people in Whoknowswheresville, Middle America, were all rich and driving Beemers, that their concern about illegal immigration, refugees, and cultural dilution would be a strong and as strident as it currently is? To make them top of mind issues in a national Presidential election?
Of course it would not be. They may continue to express concerns about those problems, as conservatives tend to gravitate towards strong borders and controlled immigration in general. But they would have been down the list somewhat as the issues most concerning these voters.
If I have poor economic prospects, the first question I ask myself is “why is that”? Well, they have poor economic prospects BECAUSE OF (speaking perception here) illegal immigration, unwanted legal immigration (refugee programs) and globalistic practices which facilitate the movement of working class jobs to low-wage countries.
All of those perceptions lead directly to concerns about immigration, and it’s an easy step to jump from an economic concern to a cultural concern. My point is that the economic concern isn’t there, the cultural concern either never materializes, or never materializes with the strength that it has.
Make more sense now?