The other America: Poverty in the United States

America is no longer interested in the poverty question. The general attitude is, "Screw 'em." That's why the Republicans can dismantle social programs with little protest, and why so many Democrats timidly follow along.

Michael Harrington's "America Can"
Published on Friday, March 31, 2000 in the Washington Post
Michael Harrington's "America Can" Reflects An Optimism About America's Social Possibilities That Needs To Be Rekindled
by EJ Dionne Jr

We Americans keep saying we're looking for courage, authenticity and principle in politics. Yet we're very tough on public figures who display such traits.

People who are too principled are typically written off as impractical dreamers. Courage is seen as recklessness, and authenticity as stubbornness and inflexibility. In politics, we can't always get what we want because we're not sure we really want it.

Few public figures were more alive to this problem than the late Michael Harrington, whose life is done justice in a just-released biography, "The Other American" (PublicAffairs Press). Harrington, a socialist in a country not much taken with socialism, spoke often about the tensions confronting those who knew their ideas might be deemed impractical by the majority, but still sought to be politically effective.

The uncomfortable choice, Harrington said, was between "integrity and impotence, flexibility and betrayal." If you cling to your ideas with too much integrity, you may render yourself impotent. But if you display too much flexibility, you might betray what you value most.

The new book by historian Maurice Isserman can be ranked as a serious political event because Harrington, who died in 1989, was the most important and creative figure on the American left in the last half-century. Harrington never achieved political power, but he maintained a moral integrity that gave him influence over those who did.

He's most famous for his 1962 book on poverty, "The Other America," credited with spurring John F. Kennedy (and, by extension, Lyndon B. Johnson) to push for a war on poverty. He's honored as a socialist who always opposed dictatorships, including communist dictatorships that he thought discredited the very ideas to which he devoted his life.

And he inspired thousands still active in the world of politics and ideas. They keep alive his impatience with that most insidious of rationalizations for social indifference: the claim that nothing practical can ever be done to improve upon the way things are.

The problem with socialism itself, defined in the old-fashioned sense as government ownership of major industries, was well-expressed by the libertarian economist Friedrich Hayek: If the government owns everything, it owns the means to all our ends. Harrington understood the problem this posed for freedom and was constantly reinventing the socialist idea to accommodate what markets did well.

His greatest impatience was with capitalism's tendency to privatize success while socializing failure. Private firms do well by producing what the market will buy, while government is charged with handling the social costs left behind. Because government is stuck dealing with some of the hardest problems, it is often blamed for being ineffective.

But to reexamine Harrington's legacy, as Isserman does well, is to see an independent-minded thinker willing to confront difficulties many of his comrades preferred to avoid.

Long before it was hip to talk about the power of independent civic groups or "faith-based organizations," Harrington urged "nongovernmental agencies and individuals to involve themselves in the organization of the poor." Those outside government could be free of the "restrictions" that confronted those inside. Harrington believed in government, but without illusions.

He refused to join many on his side of politics in dismissing Daniel Patrick Moynihan's warnings about the dangers posed to the black community by the rise of the single-parent family. Harrington saw this as a real problem, but he also linked it with "unemployment and underemployment." Progressives, he thought, should care about unemployment and the state of the family at the same time.

And he foresaw earlier than many that "the technological revolution" would transform society and politics. The left, he insisted, needed to come to terms with the new middle-class busy being born.

Harrington's formula linking commitment to practical politics was a call for "visionary gradualism"--hold to your vision for the long run, but accept that in a democracy change is always a gradual and imperfect enterprise. Harrington was filled with affection for the United States, which (it's a paradox to some) made him a more effective radical. "He really loved this country," Dina Leventhal, a Harrington-inspired activist, told Isserman, "and thought you had to love this country to be a radical, to be a socialist and to want to change it." Harrington wanted one of the issues campaigns he organized in the mid-1970s to be called "America Can." The slogan failed, Isserman points out, because it sounded too much like the name of a container manufacturer.

But "America Can" reflects an optimism about America's social possibilities that needs to be rekindled. While Harrington offers limited guidance to the politician seeking election, he was a model for what courage, principle and authenticity could achieve. That's why his life is worth celebrating.

The Other American : The Life of Michael Harrington
The Other American : The Life of Michael Harrington
Maurice Isserman
Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

As Isserman notes, along with Silent Spring and The Feminine Mystique, Michael Harrington's The Other America stood out in the early 1960s as a beacon illuminating a vital, neglected part of America's political landscape. Ironically, although his vocation was as a movement-builder, his book alone sparked no movement; it did swiftly result in policy--President Johnson's War on Poverty--though without the focus or level of funding found in European welfare states that Harrington, a former Catholic Worker turned socialist, argued was necessary.

Decades later, several European socialist leaders reputedly believed that had he been European, he would have been a prime minister. But since he wasn't, his life was lived in surroundings too small for his gifts. Sectarian politics swallowed much of his energy in the 1950s, leaving organizational commitments and battle scars that crippled his potential to play a leading role in shaping the political movements of the 1960s.

Remarkably, Harrington bounced back to achieve great success in the 1970s, with the Democratic Agenda movement, which crafted significant progressive planks in the Democratic Party platform. Isserman (If I Had a Hammer), a noted historian of the American Left, does an excellent job of drawing the reader in with Harrington's family background and early life, but there's too little exploration of his writing and of the conservative forces arrayed against him in the '70s and '80s for readers to fully appreciate the sweep and sophistication of his intellectual vision or his capacity to adapt. Still, this is a valuable and intriguing look at a major figure of the American left of enduring influence.

From Library Journal

Michael Harrington (1928-89), easily the most prominent non-Stalinist American Marxist of the post-World War II era, achieved his fame with The Other America in 1962. That book influenced Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty and provided a powerful subtext to Robert Kennedy's 1968 presidential campaign. In this study, Isserman (Hamilton Coll.)--a historian of the American Left and author of If I Had a Hammer and (with Michael Kazin) America Divided--depicts the Socialist Party Harrington helped lead in the early Sixties as not that different in its bureaucratic obsessions from the Communist Party he so despised.

After the divisions of the Vietnam era, Harrington became a bridge builder among remnants of the American Left. He died of cancer with Reaganism the dominant political force. While Isserman has produced a deep intellectual biography, the mature Harrington eluded him. Surprisingly thorough on his Irish Catholic youth in St. Louis and the ease with which Harrington impressed folks in Fifties Greenwich Village, at Yale, and at the University of Chicago, Isserman conveys rather little about the family man and popular campus speaker. Despite this impression of incompleteness, this book is highly recommended for academic and public libraries. ---Scott H. Silverman, Bryn Mawr Coll. Lib., PA

Eeek. You said "Common Good." Don't you know those are dirty words nowadays?

DrewDad


No, I don't know that. Why are they politically incorrect

BBB

"Common" is OK.

"Good" is OK.

"Common Good" means you're a Communist, Socialist, or (worst of all) a Liberal.

I thought you were paying attention to what the righties on the board have been saying.

DredDad


I'm busted! I should have known the radical right wing would tag anyone who puts the good of citizens ahead of their business and religious interests must be at least a communist. My bad!

BBB

Im curious as to just what the "common good" is? Who decides? BumbleBeeBoogie and DrewDad? A gang of politicians in distant Washington D.C.?

By what authority can one man decide what is good for another? Political power? Majority rule?

How do you figure?

Doesn't take much work. Think of the poorest people in a nation and ask how should they live? If the poorest people in a nation can gain access to decent health care, education, avoid starvation or malnourishment, regardless of their lack of income or level of income then you have identified the common good.

No-one's suggesting Malcolm Forbes should be stopped from ordering another money-green Lamborghini Contach, just suggesting that those who weren't lucky enough to pick rich parents to be born to should have a decent, if frugal, life.

Instigate


I'm a strong advocate for the Cooperative Movement"
http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/c1/cooperat.asp

BBB

Cooperative Movement: example of Common Good
The following is an example of working for the Common Good. I rose through the ranks via election to the Board of Directors. ---BBB

THE COOPERATIVE MOVEMENT
AN EXAMPLE OF WORKING FOR THE COMMON GOOD
By BumbleBeeBoogie

Examples of the Cooperative Movement go far back in British history to the laboring Trade Guilds. They are also historic in the Scandinavian countries and still thrive there. In the U.S. most cooperatives started during the Great Depression, but some were established earlier than that.

There are generally two types of cooperatives (hereinafter referred to as Co-op): Consumer (retail level) and Producer. The producer Co-ops can include agricultural producers (such as Sunkist citrus growers), utility companies, especially in rural areas. There are thousands of small producer co-ops around the U.S. that are combinations of both types. Examples are bakeries, etc. Then there are service coops such as childcare cooperatives, where parents of enrollees are required to donate some supervision time each month.

As you can see, there are many varieties of Co-ops, all for the Common Good.

In U.S. Consumer Cooperatives, the structure is a nonprofit corporation under each state's laws. Members of the public are entitled to purchase one, and only one, share, which is usually very inexpensive. I paid $5 for my Co-op share. Each shareholder is entitled to one vote in the corporation. The shareholders annually elect a board of directors from its membership to establish co-op policies and to oversee its fiduciary responsibility for the Common Good.

The cooperative, through its board, may hire staff to run the operation; establish various committees of volunteer shareholder members.

At the end of each fiscal year, the Board establishes a cash rebate percentage rate, which is based on the earnings of the corporation. This rebate is calculated on the total amount spent by each shareholder's purchases during the fiscal year.

This limitation of one share, one vote per member protects the Co-op from domination by any particular party for the Common Good. Members may coalesce into advocacy groups within the co-op to lend weight to their policy change initiative, if they wish. But it can only be accomplished by democratic open and/or secret ballot vote for the Common Good. And, unlike some private corporations, everything a co-op does is public information because of its nonprofit status. And, contrary to some myths about co-ops, they do pay taxes on a nonprofit corporation basis.

In Producer Co-ops, the structure and process is much the same. The main difference is that the producers have joined together to leverage or protect their product's viability. In the case of rural utility co-ops, it often was to create a benefit that the area's population and/or local government didn't have the financial capability to establish the utility. By cooperating for the Common Good, many rural areas were electrified for the first time.

My personal experience with cooperatives: In the 1930s, in the depth of the Great Depression, the Finnish Community in the San Francisco California East Bay Area got together, pooled their meager financial resources, and formed a Consumer Cooperative similar to what the immigrants had known in Finland.

It started in member's garages where its members bought products in bulk to save money. Examples were large blocks of cheese, which were then cut into family sized chucks and sold at nearly wholesale prices to the Co-op's members.

Gradually, the Co-op expanded into fresh produce from farmers, who welcomed the market for the fruits and vegetables that would otherwise rotted in their fields. Realizing more space was needed, the member rented a tiny warehouse on University Avenue in Berkeley. Canned goods then began to appear later. The tiny co-op lacked adequate refrigeration, so it took a long time for perishable goods, such as meats and fresh milk, to be sold.

Gradually, the tiny warehouse expanded to add a tiny retail store. Its members volunteered their time to drive to bulk-product sources and bring them back to the store. Other members donated their time to help members receive their products (no money to hire staff). Everyone pulled together during a tough time for the Common Good.

During World War II in the 1940s, the little Co-op grew in response to the great need. With good management it was finally able to hire, it prospered and garnered the admiration and respect of the surrounding communities. It had finally been able to hire a small staff, but volunteers still took an active part in the day-to-day operations for the Common Good.

The little store grew into two, then three stores. One of the new stores was in the poorer neighborhoods for the Common Good even though the two other stores had to subsidize it for a number of years.

In the 1950s, as I began my family, I became aware of the Consumer Co-ops. I joined the grocery co-op first. I later joined its Credit Union in 1956, and I'm still a member. I became an active volunteer in the co-op when it opened a store in the suburban town in which I lived at that time.

During the 1960s and 1970s, the Co-op grew into the following for the Common Good: 7 grocery stores with one wholesale warehouse; 3 credit union offices; 2 book stores; 3 garage and/or gas service stations; 3 full-service pharmacies; access source to the Kaiser HMO Health Plan; 2 hardware/garden stores; a travel service; childcare co-op; in-store branch post office; in-store child care facilities to make it easier for parents to shop; and full-time staff Home Economists and the expertise they could provide to consumers---in the stores; and even book writing and publishing. UCLA students at the Berkeley campus organized a student co-op and built housing. There are probably others that I've momentarily forgotten.

In addition to all of this, the most valuable Common Good assets of the co-op was its members, some of the greatest people I've ever known. So many volunteers gave so much to the cause and it proved that one or two people could make a difference in people's lives. There were so many local heroes.

A small example is that our home economists discovered that the makers of a well-known biscuit mix product had secretly removed the vitamin and mineral nutrient supplements from its biscuit mix to save money and increase their profits. We exposed their action and they had to restore the nutrients after the home economists took on the corporation.

Another example is my own small contribution. It started one day as a result of my frustration while shopping in the cereal section of the co-op. Manufacturers deliberately avoid standardized packaging sizes and content weight so that consumers have a hard time determining the better buy. I had an idea. I asked a friend (John Hopkins) who knew how to use a slide rule to help me compute the "price per pound" of the products. We would walk the store sections while I called out the product's weight and price. John would compute the cost-per pound, which I would write on a tab and post it on the shelf. We then spent the next year's weekends computing the entire store (remember, no computers at that time) and posting the information on the shelves next to the product prices. The product manufacturers hated what we were doing and some of them with their own staff product stockers would remove our information tabs every time they came into the store to stock shelves.

Then an amazing thing happened. The customers loved the price per pound information. Other neighborhood grocery stores heard about what we were doing and started copying us. We finally got a computer system and the hand posting came to an end. We were very grateful.

But the most amazing part of this story is that I was asked to testify before the California Legislature on a Bill to require that all grocery stores post accurate, up to date "price per pound" information on their shelves for their products. It was a tough fight, with the retail and wholesale producer industries fighting us every step of the way. I had to go back to the legislature a couple of times to block some of the big grocery chains from putting and end to the law when its "sunshine" effective period was to end. But, with the help of California's Labor Movement, we beat them each time. The law is permanent in California and---amazingly, it spread nationwide.

So, friends, when you go grocery shopping and you see the "price-per-pound" information on the shelves to help you get the better buy, you know that one or two people CAN make a difference. And my friend John and I went to all that effort for THE COMMON GOOD.

Pinko!

News From Behind The Facade
Opinion: News From Behind The Facade
John Pilger
Bush Watch
9/28/05

...The Facade was how we described the dividing line between the America of real life - of a poverty so profound that slavery was still a presence and a rapacious state power that waged war against its own citizens, as it did against black and brown-skinned people in faraway countries - and the America that spawned the greed of corporatism and invented public relations as a means of social control; the "American Dream" and the "American Way of Life" began as advertising slogans.

The wilful neglect of the Bush regime before and after hurricane Katrina offered a rare glimpse behind The Facade. The poor were no longer invisible; the bodies floating in contaminated water, the survivors threatened with police shotguns, the distinct obesity of American poverty - all of it mocked the forests of advertising billboards and relentless television commercials and news sound-bites (average length 9.9 seconds) that glorify the "dream" of wealth and power. A word long expropriated and debased - reality - found its true meaning, if briefly.

As if by accident, the American media, which is the legitimising arm of corporate public relations, reported the truth. For a few days, a selective group of liberal newspaper readers were told that poverty had risen an amazing 17 per cent under Bush; that an African-American baby born within a mile of the White House had less chance of surviving its first year than an urban baby in India; that the United States was now ranked 43rd in the world in infant mortality, 84th for measles immunisation and 89th for polio; that the world's richest oil company, ExxonMobil, would make 30 billion dollars in profits this year, having received a huge slice of the 14.5 billion dollars in "tax breaks" which Bush's new energy bill guarantees his elite cronies.

In his two elections, Bush has received most of his "corporate contributions" - the euphemism for bribes totalling 61.5 million dollars - from oil and gas companies. The bloody conquest of Iraq, the world's second biggest source of oil, will be their prize: their loot....

Interview: Bush Has Put Us All In The Superdome
By Chris Floyd
9/28/05

The Bush Faction are not people who are going to be moved by soaring words into changing their position. There's no point in "speaking truth to power" with them. They are utter cynics. They know what the truth is; they know very well what they are doing to American society. And they don't give a damn. It's what they came to Washington to do. If they could be moved by appeals to reason, compassion, principle, logic or genuine patriotism, they wouldn't be where they are in the first place. Anyone among them who might respond to anything like that has already been weeded out long ago. I wouldn't waste my breath on any of them....

The game is so rigged now that it's hard to see what would make a difference to those in power. Mass demonstrations do have an effect, although it's harder now because the media invariably ignores or under-reports them. I think the thing to do is just keep on plugging. Keep marching, keep organizing campaigns, keep trying in every possible way to get the truth out to as many people as possible. Because push is going to come to shove in America sooner or later - probably sooner.

The rapacious policies of the Bush Faction - and the whole 30-year right-wing juggernaut - are starting to hit home in a big way. They waged a war of decimation against the poor, and they won, while the middle-class looked the other way. But now it's their turn. The elitist policies are now devouring the middle class too. They're skating on the thinnest ice right now, living on debt, stretched to the margins. When economic crisis hits - perhaps as soon as this winter, with gasoline and home fuel prices skyrocketing - they're going to find that the safety net has been ripped to shreds, that the candy store has been given away to a few fat cats around the corner. They're going to find that the whole country has been turned into the Superdome and they've been left to fend for themselves. It's not going to be pretty.