Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
What Ever Happened to the Party of the People?
Listen, Liberal
For a generation, Democratic politicians have talked of “hope” as though it were their unique selling proposition, a secret ingredient they had that no other major-party brand could offer.
Today those same Democrats express annoyance at the suggestion that anyone could really have taken them seriously on this hope business. It is hard to govern, they say; you can’t get everything you want from politics. Ordinary citizens are beyond disillusioned, though. It has been nine years since the last recession began, and whether the country is in a recovery or a slump or even a galloping bull market makes no difference to them anymore.
...
According to official measurements, the last few years have been a time of brisk prosperity, with unemployment down and the stock market up. Productivity advances all the time. For those who work for a living, however, nothing seems to improve. Wages do not grow. Median income is still well below where it was in 2007. Workers’ share of the gross national product (as opposed to the share taken by investors) hit a record low in 2011—and then it stayed there right through the recovery. It is there to this day; economists now regard its collapse as a quasi-permanent development.
...
What Happened at the Turning Point
That these things are happening under the watch of the Democrats, the political party that was once such a militant defender of workers and the middle class, makes the triumph of inequality that much more startling.
more at the link
For a generation, Democratic politicians have talked of “hope” as though it were their unique selling proposition, a secret ingredient they had that no other major-party brand could offer.
Today those same Democrats express annoyance at the suggestion that anyone could really have taken them seriously on this hope business. It is hard to govern, they say; you can’t get everything you want from politics. Ordinary citizens are beyond disillusioned, though. It has been nine years since the last recession began, and whether the country is in a recovery or a slump or even a galloping bull market makes no difference to them anymore.
...
According to official measurements, the last few years have been a time of brisk prosperity, with unemployment down and the stock market up. Productivity advances all the time. For those who work for a living, however, nothing seems to improve. Wages do not grow. Median income is still well below where it was in 2007. Workers’ share of the gross national product (as opposed to the share taken by investors) hit a record low in 2011—and then it stayed there right through the recovery. It is there to this day; economists now regard its collapse as a quasi-permanent development.
...
What Happened at the Turning Point
That these things are happening under the watch of the Democrats, the political party that was once such a militant defender of workers and the middle class, makes the triumph of inequality that much more startling.
more at the link
And...
Scenes from the wreckage of the Democratic party.
“At some point,” Frank tells the Huffington Post, “[the Democrats] decided that they weren’t all that interested in the concerns of working people anymore.” Rather, Frank says, they became fixated on “the concerns of the professional class, people with advanced degrees, people at the very top of our economic society.”
Essentially, the Democratic party lives in a meritocratic bubble, where credentials, advanced degrees, media savviness, and — above all — wealth, are treated as de facto evidence of authority and expertise. This is how the Democratic party has rationalized participating in the school reform movement: to meritocrats, it makes perfect sense to believe that a successful CEO would know more about how to run a school system than actual teachers.
And once you’ve made it into this coterie of elites, it becomes all too easy to forgive them for their occasional transgressions. The failures of Theranos don’t stick to Holmes (indeed, the media continued to fawn over Holmes after the Wall Street Journal blew up her spot). If anything, these setbacks are temporary embarrassments on the way to success. Class recognizes class.
more at the link
“At some point,” Frank tells the Huffington Post, “[the Democrats] decided that they weren’t all that interested in the concerns of working people anymore.” Rather, Frank says, they became fixated on “the concerns of the professional class, people with advanced degrees, people at the very top of our economic society.”
Essentially, the Democratic party lives in a meritocratic bubble, where credentials, advanced degrees, media savviness, and — above all — wealth, are treated as de facto evidence of authority and expertise. This is how the Democratic party has rationalized participating in the school reform movement: to meritocrats, it makes perfect sense to believe that a successful CEO would know more about how to run a school system than actual teachers.
And once you’ve made it into this coterie of elites, it becomes all too easy to forgive them for their occasional transgressions. The failures of Theranos don’t stick to Holmes (indeed, the media continued to fawn over Holmes after the Wall Street Journal blew up her spot). If anything, these setbacks are temporary embarrassments on the way to success. Class recognizes class.
more at the link
15 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
And a STRONG one at that!
And welcome!
