During the Great Depression, my grandfather, a native of Missouri, traveled from state to state for work. In 1937 he drove himself and his family from Kansas to California to get a job, which he did. He made it to California with Kansas air in the tires. This is significant for two reasons. One, tires rarely lasted that long back then. And two, it was the highlight of the entire venture because that's how low expectations were.
Similarly low expectations are commonplace among the millions now looking for any job and any place to live. Unlike those who worked diligently to survive the Great Depression, the under- and unemployed today have also to contend with forking over an ever greater percentage of meager incomes to taxes while those few who incurred all this trouble in the first place cry foul at the idea of having to pay any taxes at all, much less as much as corporations paid just a couple of decades ago.
There is a reason there are a record number of college dropouts and graduates with a record amount of debt; there's a reason for the record number of home foreclosures; there's a reason why so many people are out of work - and none of it is because they did anything different than their parents and grandparents. It's because the system in place now is not the system that was in place when their elders went to school, bought homes, secured work, or even opened a bank account.
Well-to-do politicians and corporate leaders over age 40 love to tout their hard work, college degrees (or their success sans degree), home ownership, and having held multiple jobs to get where they are today. What they don't tout is how much easier it was, rather, how much less constraining it was for them to get all of that done. Many didn't graduate with debt because tuitions weren't through the roof and/or their parents could afford to pay their tuitions. Those who did borrow didn't graduate with more interest on the debt than the debt itself, and the majority were able to pay off those loans in a timely manner because there were jobs available. Home ownership did not include the massive and convoluted debacle of fine print that has come to define the now-common predatory contracts. Holding three jobs was actually doable when today's corporate leaders and hopeful/incumbent politicians were working their way up. To get those jobs they did not have to endure credit checks and "personality" tests (for which there are cheat codes), nor did they already have to have a job to get one. Even the banks, forever regarded as a necessary evil, were legally confined and could not bilk millions out of billions.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - roger nowosielski
Great job.
2 - John Lake
We might consider a Romney/Cain pairing. In the disastrous event of their being elected, Romney would spend government money from lawd knows where on battleships, submarines, and missile systems, while Cain (most don’t remember “Uncle Tom”, who whipped the slaves and bawled, “yes, mahster!”) berates the multitudes for their failures and explains they will enjoy paying more taxes if they understand the tax system. He will continue to suggest used clothing as a universal option. People seem to like him. Maybe they just don’t understand the man.
Thanks to Cain many of us are now aware of the hidden tax syndrome. One fellow produces the metal bolts for the propeller assembly: when the lower prop area boys buy the screws, they pay the tax. The upper prop boys buy the lower prop assembly, and pay the tax. This goes on form stem to stern, and all the taxes go to buy the battle ships. It’s all disconcerting but with that amount of record keeping, there’s little that couldn’t be proved. In a wise world, the government would make the parts and the ships. In a more real world, it’ll probably be done overseas.
3 - Clavos
In a wise world, the government would make the parts and the ships.
In which case, they would probably not float...
4 - Jon Sobel
One of the most cogent commentaries on OWS and today's political dynamic I've read in ages. Thanks, Diana.
5 - Heloise
Here's who the real Uncle Tom was about, a virtual black hero Josiah Henson. Is it because people don't know history or is it just easy to play the Uncle Tom card?
I am not sure why his name is pilloried now:
"Uncle Tom's Cabin Historic Site commemorates the life of Reverend Josiah Henson. Recognized for his contributions to the abolition movement and for his work in the Underground Railroad, he rose to international fame after Harriet Beecher Stowe acknowledged his memoirs as a source for her 1852 anti-slavery novel, Uncle Tom’s Cabin. It was Henson's life experiences that inspired Ms. Stowe's creation of the character Uncle Tom in her 1852 outcry against slavery." from Uncle Tom. org site.
Whenever most blacks talk about "bad blacks" they call it plantation politics because slaves often ratted other slaves out or were the overseers themselves. Is that what you mean? Slaves or black men who sold out other blacks. Because Uncle Tom was actually a liberator.
Heloise8
6 - Heloise
good article for sure. one sign "The right and left agree END THE FED." That seems to sum up a lot of the angst. And loans that are as high as eagle sh*t and no job in sight.
People just want to know. But this is what I envisioned when Bush was not impeached for his wars. That takeover of the gov by the many against the few would be the way to go. So in my mind this OWS is about 7 years too late. Better late than never.
7 - diana hartman
Race (and racial history) has nothing to do with the claims Cain and his ilk make about the have-nots.
8 - Heloise
diana that comment was directed at John Lake not you sorry if you didn't get it.
9 - diana hartman
Thank you for the clarification, Heloise :)
10 - roger nowosielski
An optimistic picture, Diana. Where are the feminists, the gays and the African-Americans? Why don't we hear from any of them by way of show of support?
What OWS has done so far is admirable, but for how long can they maintain the revolutionary fervor while left to their own devices?
11 - diana hartman
I don't know, Roger. That would be a question to ask them. And I don't know how long they can maintain, either. I would ask you, though, what do you mean with "left to their own devices"? Do you mean presence, money, etc?
12 - roger nowosielski
Unaided, minimal coverage by MSM, the crowds are still small. You need bodies, lots of bodies, to build and sustain a momentum. There'll be always dedicated individuals, but it's the masses that must be energized or it will peter out.
In the sixties we had an explosive situation triggered by the draft (affecting many in the anti-war protest in a direct and immediate way) and the Civil Rights struggle, the Black Panthers, SDS. Entire communities were energized, and the campuses were the centers of revolutionary activity and thought as well and offered protection. These elements are missing.
Taking to the streets, especially in a peaceful manner, is a different proposition, calling for a great deal of patience and perseverance.
13 - John Lake
I don’t recall reading the Harriet Beecher Stowe classic “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” (or “Life Among the Lowly”), but a quick check with the Urban Dictionary produces this definition of “Uncle Tom”: “A black man who will do anything to stay in good standing with ‘the white man’ including betray his own people.”
The point of my comment was that Cain disdains the new poor working class, and the impoverished, which owing to centuries of discrimination in education, hiring and housing, includes many blacks. Cain would eliminate entitlements, tax the less able to pay, and recommend used items.
Some may have missed Cains decision to release all the terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay in exchange for one American prisoner. He hemmed and hawed, looked at the ground, looked away, and said, "well, maybe."
They ignore this sort of thing, call the man likable. I don't see it. And the last candidate that sang was General Dempsey who was being considered for a major military position. I was repulsed by him too.
14 - Dr Dreadful
It's not so much that the economic climate has changed over the last 20 years: that smacks of an excuse. A sufficiently determined person can navigate the modern pitfalls Diana enumerates just as surely as any "self-made" individual, just by a different route.
What galls me about people like Herman Cain is their attitude of "If I could, anyone can".
No.
We each have unique talents. Mr Cain's enabled him to build a business empire. Most of us would get nowhere with that kind of endeavour because we just don't have the inbuilt aptitude for it.
There are folks who can pull down 80k a year by hanging around freeway off ramps with a cardboard sign. I bet you that if I tried that, I wouldn't make a cent.
If Mr Cain set out to be a world champion athlete, he wouldn't succeed no matter how hard he worked.
Funny that you don't hear the likes of Michael Phelps or Tom Brady complacently tossing off comments about how anyone can become a swimming champion or a star quarterback if they only work at it hard enough. They know that their gifts are rare and they have the humility to be conscious of it.
15 - John Lake
Late breaking: Cain changing 9-9-9 to 9-0-9 !
He has made sweeping changes, at no doubt the urging of advisers. Another case of flip-flop is an understatement. In any case, good; big improvement.
16 - diana hartman
Dr. D, Poignant comment. Having lived, worked, gone to college, etc through the years leading up to the present crisis (I don't claim to be the only by any stretch), I maintain the climate has changed.
What you point out about Cain is true; painfully true, but lost on a lot of people. I wrote about that as well, and many of the commenters did not believe me.
17 - roger nowosielski
@14
First paragraph -- well, it has for the "average" man. The jobs aren't there, and those you can get pay much less.
Does the average American want to get filthy rich? That's debatable. I would think all they want is a modicum of comfort, that's all.
Besides, values change. What you may have wanted years ago no longer figures on your list of priorities.
I think it would be a mistake to reduce the main motivation on the part of the OWS protesters to mere self-concern. There is certain identification at work with the less privileged segments of the American society, those less privileged than themselves -- an idealism of sorts, if you like. "We are the 99 percent" kind of captures that and fires the movement.
18 - diana hartman
Roger, the protests and movements you speak of did in fact start very small with relatively few involved and with minimal outside support. How small a movement or protest is or how disorganized it is in the beginning is not a precursor to its success. If such were the criteria, the French Revolution would've collapsed by the second year.
My own hometown's contribution to the Civil Rights Movement is generally unrecognized and unheard of to this day even though it was one of the first and was the stencil, if you will, for following sit-ins.
19 - roger nowosielski
I'm all with you, Diana, hoping for the best and keeping my fingers crossed.
Are you still in Germany? Has it affected your perspective?
20 - roger nowosielski
Good link. Had no idea it started in 58.
21 - Baritone
I think what happens with the OWS movement will depend largely upon what happens after the weather gets nasty, and the majority of the protesters return home. Not everything can be accomplished in the street. The success or failure of the movement may hinge on what happens behind closed doors, if you will. Will the movement perhaps hybernate over the winter and then come back stronger in the spring?
Of course, with this movement as with those of the so called "Arab Spring" is a different and significant dynamic: The internet, cell phones, twitter, etc. Things can happen in a relative instant pretty much worldwide, which wasn't possible in the days of the civil rights and anti-war movements of the 50s, 60s and 70s.
We expect these type of movements to have a focus and a small core of leaders. That may not happen this time around.
The tea baggers claimed that they had no leaders, that it was all grass roots, but that was bullshit. To this day there are a very small handful of very rich puppet masters directing that movement. That may ultimately may be found to be true of the OWS movement, but I don't think that's the case at this point in time. There is something more organic about how OWS started and how it has evolved over the past few weeks. That could prove to be an advantage to them in that there is really no one person or group that can effectively be singled out for attack. How this will play out is anybody's guess right now.
22 - Arch Conservative
"There is something more organic about how OWS started and how it has evolved over the past few weeks."
Yes Big Union showing up certainly says "organic." As does the fact that the "movement" is called "occupy wall street" yet most of the polls being taken of the protestors reveal that they support Barack Obama, the man who received more funding from Wall Street than any other person who ran in the 2008 presidential election.
What we're seeing on display is the "professional left." The perpetually aggrieved, the professional protestors, the most ardent supporters of big brother statism, the poster children for dependency and the total dissolution of the notions of personal accountability and merit. The buzz words being thrown around at these protest are "economic justice" "social justice," and "total debt forgiveness." These are not terms used by a large and diverse representation of the varying sociopolitical and economic vantage points that exist within this nation at this point in time. Rather they are code words used by the far left.
Whenever I hear one of the occupy protestors claiming to represent the other 99% I have to laugh. I am in that 99% and they certainly do not represent my views nor the views of anyone that I know personally. It brings to mind the thuggish unions that have thrown in with this "movement." Every time some union jackhole is on TV running his mouth he's almost certain to claim that unions represent the middle class despite the fact that unions currently make up 6.9% of the total private sector workforce in this nation. That is not even one out of every ten workers in the private sector yet the unions "represent the middle class?" If one were to factor in the people that are only in unions because their job requires it and who would gladly leave the union if they felt that they could do so and not be harassed by some Tony Soprano wannabe union thug then it would more likely be 6% or lower of union membership in the private sector.
The crony capitalism, croporatism or whatever other label you want to apply to situation we currently have whereby big business and big government take care of each other to the detriment to every single person that is not a member of this most elite of country clubs is very real and very distressing. The military industrial complex/globalist new world order agenda that is supported whole heartedly by both of our major political parties is tearing at the soul of a once great nation.
This problem, while as obvious and immediate as Hillary Clinton is unattractive, is not likely to be solved by a bunch of petulant leftists standing in the street demanding their asses be wiped for them 1000 different ways.
Criticize the tea party all you want but it seems to me that is a movement which is made up of adults as opposed to the whiney, inept manchildren that makeup OWS.
23 - roger nowosielski
"... I am in that 99% and they certainly do not represent my views nor the views of anyone that I know personally."
You're wrong, Arch. You're in a class all by yourself. As to the people you know personally, I can't help that.
I think you should re-direct your anger along more constructive endeavors rather than be bashing imaginary enemies or those on BC who don't think like you (though you said it functions for you like a safety valve).
You said OWS is not a solution to the kind of problems you enumerate. What is the solution, then? I don't believe you yourself know because you haven't even hinted at one. So forgive me if I interpret your comment as nothing but than outburst.
24 - Arch Conservative
Of course I don't know the solution Roger. Never claimed that I did. However I don't have to know the solution to know when I see something else that is obviously not the solution.
I guess I'd do less "bashing" as you put it if others on BC would stop claiming that my concerns of are the exact same concerns of others who I don't particularly care for and if others wold be a little more honest with who they are and what they want.
25 - roger nowosielski
Obviously, more of "liberalism" or a stronger Democrat party is not as solution, Arch, and those who believe otherwise -- I need not mention names -- are confused, not dishonest. So you're ahead of the game on that score. But you also realize that the party opposite is not a solution either, or if you don't you should.
It's the entire paradigm that stinks, Arch, and the sooner we get rid of it, the better. What OWS is doing thus far is bypassing our so-called "democratic process" by saying, "We don't need you, fuckers, because you're irrelevant." In that sense, it's value thus far is mainly symbolic, and that's a beginning.
No one knows what exactly will emerge as a result, but I sure as hell would rather see some serious shit disturbing on a massive scale than be participating, like a good citizen, in a system I know doesn't work.