1
   

Reform or Revolution?

 
 
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 04:23 pm
I had the opportunity the other day to watch a most enlightening program broadcast by UCTV. The one-hour program was called "How Unequal Can America Get Before We Snap?" presented by President Clinton's former labor secretary Robert Reich.

"Inequality of income, wealth, and opportunity in America is wider now than it's been since the 1920s, and by some measures since the late 19th century. Yet the nation seems unable or unwilling to do much of anything to reverse these trends. What happens if we allow the trends to continue? Will they "naturally" reverse themselves? Or will we get to a point where disparities are so wide that we finally find the political will to take action? Alternatively, will the disparities themselves grow so wide as to discourage action, by fostering resignation among the losers and indifference among the winners? And if the latter, where will it all lead?" SOURCE: Goldman School of Public Policy UC, Berkley

The presentation made excellent use of economic graphs to demonstrate how large of a gap has developed between the upper class and the middle class (not to mention the lower class) with regards to income, wealth, and opportunity in the United States between the years 1962 to the present. The trends are alarming to say the least. The speaker correctly points to birthright as the beginning of the disparity that allows for advantages in everything from diet and healthcare to education and connections. Being born into a middle-class family myself, I have truly benefited from my birthright in terms of these advantages right from the starting gate. Some people would argue that many a poor person has risen up by their "own boot straps" but I would argue that in today's society, most (not all) poor people can only rise up with a good pair of athletic shoes or a willingness to sell drugs. Otherwise they have to remain content with working in the service industry for comparatively lower wages than their upper-class counterparts. Mr. Reich further points out that one of the elements keeping our society glued together is the belief or perception by the lower class that opportunity in this country still exists and that if one is willing to work hard, they can be successful.

The speaker talks of two potential outcomes for this growing disparity. He uses the metaphor of the rubber band to illustrate his point. Our society will either "snap back" with a series of reforms supported by all three classes and the government to regain a sense of fairness when it comes to income, wealth, and opportunity in the United States. This has occurred at least once before in the history of our country during a time referred to as the progressive movement. The other potential outcome is for our society to "snap break" whereby this country exists with two entirely different societies. The problem with the latter outcome is that it often leads to the arrival of a demagogue who plays upon the emotions of the middle and lower classes all for the hidden intention of personal gain. We have seen this all too often in history with the likes of Napoleon, Mussolini, Hitler, Lenin etcetera. Mr. Reich suggests somehow that the upper class are not a group with malicious intent but rather are nothing more than a naive self-indulgent class of people who don't know any better. Here I beg to differ. I believe the upper class is guilty of a careless disregard for their fellow countrymen. They have the arrogance to believe they are superior and deserving of extravagance regardless of how they attained it and regardless of how it affects the rest of society. Once again, history shows us what happened to those monarchs who behaved the same way. Do I think there will be a violent revolution in this country? I hope not. Do I prefer a new progressive movement over even a peaceful revolution? Absolutely. My fear however, is that we are already rapidly approaching the point of "critical mass" beyond which there is no turning back. The question today before the American people is what are YOU prepared to do?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 934 • Replies: 14
No top replies

 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jun, 2005 05:05 pm
Before I'd do anythiing I'd ask Mr. Reich for one or two additonal charts.

I'd ask him to reserach who the top 10% of wealth holders in this country are over a period of time (40 years or so) and I'd ask him to graph out how many of those people stay in that upper class from year to year and how many drop out and are replaced with someone new.

I suspect he'd find that the people in that top group change fairly dramaticlly. If that were the case then it would show that, since those moving into the upper class must come from either the poor or middle class, that they are equeally naive and, if you are correct, they are equeally arrogant.

As a result, I'd predict that nothing would be done.
0 Replies
 
Mills75
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Jun, 2005 02:49 pm
Fishin':Actually, class in America has always been pretty stable, though people born into the lower middle and working classes face a pretty good chance of winding up poor(er). The class we're born into predicts what class we'll wind up in about 80% of the time. Thus if you're born working class, there's an 80% chance you'll die working class; if you're born to upper class, then you'll probably die a member of the upper class. (Sources: too many to list; just about any intro. to sociology textbook will verify this; The New York Times ran a series dealing with class in America in May and one of the segments dealt with class mobility--the piece doesn't supply the 80% figure, but does show that class membership is very stable).

JOEBIALEK: Like you I hope for a new and powerful progressive movement to counter the alarming increase in social inequality. I don't know if revolution will occur if one doesn't materialize, however. The ruling powers or, as sociologist C. Wright Mills termed them, the power elite have become very good at mass manipulation through the media and I can't think of a time within the last 100 years when false consciousness has been as prevalent among the masses as it is now.
0 Replies
 
diagknowz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Jun, 2005 05:51 pm
" a new and powerful progressive movement to counter the alarming increase in social inequality"

Oh, yes, by all means: s.th. like, perhaps the Brown Shirt or Red Shirt revolutions in Germany, Russian and China. I can't wait.
0 Replies
 
Mills75
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Jun, 2005 01:01 am
Me neither, comrade, me neither.

Actually, diagknowz, I was thinking more in terms of what we saw under FDR during the 1930s, but I appreciate your effective demonstration of the sort of defeatist reactionary attitudes that are helping maintain the status quo of injustice and against which we must constantly be on guard.
0 Replies
 
diagknowz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Jun, 2005 02:19 pm
The "New Deal" was bad enough; it has been facilitating the progressive collectivization of the U.S. thru the back door. When will people realize that "inequality" has a lot deeper roots than merely the political?
0 Replies
 
Mills75
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Jun, 2005 05:05 pm
Luckily, the designers and supporters of the New Deal and other labor and market reforms of the early 20th century realized that the roots of inequality were economic as well as political. Indentured to the unregulated institutions and factories of laissez-faire capitalism, the masses were wage slaves whose collective fate was largely determined by the tyrants of industry--men whose own fortunes were acquired more as the result of luck (either their own or some ancestor's whose fortune they inherited) than any personal merit. These wage slaves were nothing more than cogs in the machine of industry to be discarded once they were broken or worn out from over use.

Thanks to the New Deal and some earlier reforms, the wage slaves were temporarily freed from bondage; they were able to expect a wage they could live on and a degree of personal fulfillment. They were no longer left out in the cold once they were too old or too broken for labor. They could reasonably dream that their children, with hard work and ingenuity, would have a chance for a better life than they had.

Unfortunately, much of the New Deal has been reversed. Labor has largely been robbed of its power to protect its own; Social Security is no longer the safety net it once was; middle class, working class, and poor parents can no longer reasonably expect their children to "do better" than they did regardless of how hard they work; and power and wealth are concentrated in the hands of the privileged few to an extent rarely witnessed in history. Once again we find ourselves being fitted for the shackles of wage slavery.
0 Replies
 
Acquiunk
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Jun, 2005 05:44 pm
TO THE WALL!!!…um.. well.. maybe Starbucks.. its late… I need a coffee… [size=7]you know…[/size]
0 Replies
 
Mills75
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Jun, 2005 07:57 pm
Acquiunk wrote:
TO THE WALL!!!…um.. well.. maybe Starbucks.. its late… I need a coffee… [size=7]you know…[/size]
mmm....Starbucks...sweet elixir of life... Smile
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Jun, 2005 09:15 am
Bookmark; and helpful link to previous (if perhaps unfortunately titled) discussion:

Class - America's dirty little secret?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Jun, 2005 09:16 am
It also (towards the end) has a link to a study that showed up the actual decrease in social mobility in America since the seventies.
0 Replies
 
diagknowz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Jun, 2005 05:17 pm
Sigh, when I wrote "political," I was including the economic.

What I'm talking about is PERSONAL and CULTURAL roots, viz. lack of motivation, bad upbringing, couchpotato (hence health problems), etc., etc.

The other puzzle for me is if inequality is such a HUGE problem, as you would have it, why do people throng here by the millions?
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Jun, 2005 05:26 pm
One thing is inequality between the classes here in the US.

Another thing is inequality between the populations of different nations.

So, we have it better here than in a lot of other nations. That does not negate the claim that there is class inequality here.
0 Replies
 
Mills75
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Jun, 2005 07:55 pm
diagknowz wrote:
Sigh, when I wrote "political," I was including the economic.
Thanks for the clarification (for future reference, the term 'political' does not normally infer the inclusion of economics).

Quote:
What I'm talking about is PERSONAL and CULTURAL roots, viz. lack of motivation, bad upbringing, couchpotato (hence health problems), etc., etc.
The notion that these are the root causes of social inequality has been rejected by most serious social researchers. These are more influenced by the social structure than influencing the social structure.

Quote:
The other puzzle for me is if inequality is such a HUGE problem, as you would have it, why do people throng here by the millions?
The fact that the poor of the wealthiest nation on the planet are better off than the poor of peripheral and third world nations is certainly something to be bragged about; however, it doesn't excuse the vastly unequal distribution of wealth and political power we have here.
0 Replies
 
JOEBIALEK
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Jul, 2005 07:22 pm
replies
good points...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Reform or Revolution?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/03/2024 at 09:43:25