Thomas Frank: Dems have gone from the party of the New Deal to a party defending mass inequality
from In These Times:
.....(snip).....
The book is about how the Democratic Party turned its back on working people and now pursues policies that actually increase inequality. What are the policies or ideological commitments in the Democratic Party that make you think this?
The first piece of evidence is what’s happened since the financial crisis. This is the great story of our time. Inequality has actually gotten worse since then, which is a remarkable thing. This is under a Democratic president who we were assured (or warned) was the most liberal or radical president we would ever see. Yet inequality has gotten worse, and the gains since the financial crisis, since the recovery began, have gone entirely to the top 10 percent of the income distribution.
This is not only because of those evil Republicans, but because Obama played it the way he wanted to. Even when he had a majority in both houses of Congress and could choose whoever he wanted to be in his administration, he consistently made policies that favored the top 10 percent over everybody else. He helped out Wall Street in an enormous way when they were entirely at his mercy.
He could have done anything he wanted with them, in the way that Franklin Roosevelt did in the ‘30s. But he chose not to.
.....(snip).....
A lot of progressives that I talk to are pretty familiar with the idea that the Democratic Party is no longer protecting the interests of workers, but it’s pretty common for us to blame it on mainly the power of money in politics. But you start the book in chapter one by arguing there’s actually something much deeper going on. Can you say something about that?
Money in politics is a big part of the story, but social class goes deeper than that. The Democrats have basically made their commitment [to white-collar professionals] already before money and politics became such a big deal. It worked out well for them because of money in politics. So when they chose essentially the top 10 percent of the income distribution as their most important constituents, that is the story of money.
It wasn’t apparent at the time in the ‘70s and ‘80s when they made that choice. But over the years, it has become clear that that was a smart choice in terms of their ability to raise money. Organized labor, of course, is no slouch in terms of money. They have a lot of clout in dollar terms. However, they contribute and contribute to the Democrats and they almost never get their way—they don’t get, say, the Employee Free Choice Act, or Bill Clinton passes NAFTA. They do have a lot of money, but their money doesn’t count.
All of this happened because of the civil war within the Democratic Party. They fought with each other all the time in the ‘70s and the ‘80s. One side hadn’t completely captured the party until Bill Clinton came along in the ‘90s. That was a moment of victory for them. ................(more)
http://inthesetimes.com/article/19084/listen-liberal-thomas-frank-democratic-party-elites-inequality
= new reply since forum marked as read
Last edited Fri Apr 29, 2016, 03:43 PM - Edit history (2)
GUESTS for Bill Maher Show, Fri. April 29: Wayne Pacelle, Thomas Frank, Rob Reiner, Mark Leibovich, Kellyanne Conway.
>More Show Info: http://www.real-time-with-bill-maher-blog.com/
In his sharp appraisal of the current political scene, Thomas Frank, founding editor of The Baffler and former columnist for The Wall Street Journal and Harper’s, notes that though Democrats have held the White House for the majority of the last twenty-four years, there’s been little commensurate achievement on many social justice issues. With the same common sense and mastery of argument and evidence he wielded in books including Pity the Billionaire, The Wrecking Crew, and What’s the Matter with Kansas?, Frank takes Democrats to task and warns the party to shake its complacency or prepare to be voted out.
In 'Listen Liberal, Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People?' (2016) Frank's newest book, the political writer outlines the transformation of the Democratic Party of the New Deal and the Big Tent, to a party of the professional class. Recently Frank has appeared on TV and radio shows of Thom Hartmann and Sam Seder to discuss 'Listen Liberal' and held book talks in Kansas City, Seattle and other places.
Kansas City, MO Library Book Talk, http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017358989
Elliott Bay Bookstore, Seattle Talk, http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017360353
The Big Picture, Thom Hartmann Show, http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1017&pid=340617
Majority Report with Sam Seder, http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017361838
In These Times, April 26, 2016, "Thomas Frank on How Democrats Went From Being 'The Party of the People' to the Party of Rich Elites", Democrats have gone from the party of the New Deal to a party that is defending mass inequality.
The Democratic Party was once the party of the New Deal and the ally of organized labor. But by the time of Bill Clinton's presidency, it had become the enemy of New Deal programs like welfare and Social Security and the champion of free trade deals. What explains this apparent reversal? Thomas Frank—best known for his analysis of the Republican Party base in What's the Matter with Kansas?—attempts to answer this question in his latest book, Listen Liberal: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People? According to Frank, popular explanations which blame corporate lobby groups and the growing power of money in politics are insufficient.
Frank instead points to a decision by Democratic Party elites in the 1970s to marginalize labor unions and transform from the party of the working class to the party of the professional class. In so doing, the Democratic Party radically changed the way it understood social problems and how to solve them, trading in the principle of solidarity for the principle of competitive individualism and meritocracy. The end result is that the party which created the New Deal and helped create the middle class has now become “the party of mass inequality.” Read More: http://inthesetimes.com/article/19084/listen-liberal-thomas-frank-democratic-party-elites-inequality
Last edited Fri Apr 29, 2016, 12:56 PM - Edit history (1)
Thomas Frank won't have a lot of time tonight on Bill Maher, but the Mid-Show Interview will provide viewers with an introduction to his newest book, 'LISTEN, LIBERAL: Or, Whatever Happened to the 'Party of the People?' (2016).
In one book talk Tommy stated an astounding stroke of fate: in Jan. 1998 Pres. BILL CLINTON referenced privatization of SOCIAL SECURITY at the State of the Union address, but soon after the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke out.
Clinton had worked with NEWT GINGRICH at White House meetings in 1997 to privatize the popular, successful social program for the elderly and those unable to work that was created in the 1930s Depression by FDR's New Deal.
pushed changes around 1937-38 that caused a dip too. Agree FDR was the finest (wouldn't know it by some here, sorry to say).Yet there must be another good executive leader coming, I so hope.
intro. for 'Listen, Liberal' will reach many, and help interest and inform people, even the clueless. My hope anyway. Thomas is just a real funny, clever guy, you don't see that much in people trained in history and journalism. I so enjoy seeing him speak and interact with people. Must have been a real fun person in HS and college..
Learned yesterday that I missed his book talk at a nearby venue earlier in April, a place I'm very familiar with. 
What Tommy has written of, the transformation of the Party of the People, the New Deal and the Big tent, to the Party of the Top 10% Elites has much to do I think with this disturbing change to 30+ Red State governance.
DWS was made head of the DNC in 2009 when Dems. had the majority and the White House. So WTH is THIS? And are the days numbered, thank you Tim Canova!!
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/1390437-income-inequality-the-reasons-the-consequences/
The percent of total income earned by the 1% hit its historic high at 24% in 1928 just before the stock market crash and the onset of the Great Depression. It fell to 15.5% by 1932 even before FDR was inaugurated because of the Great Depression.
Then income inequality rose for the first 4 years of FDR's presidency by a little less than 4% peaking at 19.3% in 1936. While the economy was recovering and the middle class was doing better than in the 1920's the rich gained more than I would have expected in those first 4 years of FDR. After 1936 income inequality started a long and fairly steady decline thanks to New Deal policies until 1978 when its low of under 9% of income going to the top 1%.
The onset of the Great Recession saw income inequality go down (largely due to the dive in the stock market and its effect on the 1%) more than 5% from 23% in 2007 to 18% in 2009 of total income going to the top 1%. Coming out of the Great Recession income inequality increased by a little over 4% in the first 4 years of Obama's presidency from 18.1% to 22.5%.
I suspect that most of this improvement in income inequality going into recessions/depressions is caused by declines in the values of stocks owned by the 1%. And the initial increase in income inequality coming out of recessions/depressions is caused by increases in the value of those stocks. The real value of the New Deal was that it continued to lower income inequality for decades after 1936 when there were no great depressions or great recessions. And then, of course, we largely abandoned New Deal policies.
Right?
Perhaps people should read Frank's book before pontificating on what it says...
I think Frank is correct in his assessment of the Democratic Party...
How about the "Yuppie Party"?
Maybe FDR/Labor Democrats could start a "Peoples' Party."
