"What's Left of the Left"? Krugman's frustrating crusade.

Man, I'm so behind in my reading!  I just saw this: "What’s Left of the Left -Paul Krugman’s lonely crusade" by Benjamin Wallace-Wells, published a month ago. It is so true - and so fucking depressing!  The article revolves around a meeting President Obama had with six liberal economists last December that didn't go well, thus the author writes:

For a century, liberals have been chasing the same organizing idea: to perfect the welfare state—the soaringly aspirational, deeply flawed apparatus of Social Security, public health insurance, and progressive taxation designed to guarantee a secure middle class—and to extend its protections to every American. A year ago, after Obama’s health-care reforms became law, that project looked closer to completion. Now we are debating the terms of its erosion—with Republican proposals to cut the benefits of Medicare and Medicaid, conservative efforts to repeal protections for labor unions, and an emerging Washington consensus that the costs of a broad welfare state may be beyond what Americans will willingly pay. The White House meeting this past December, viewed in retrospect, seemed to mark the end of the expansive first part of Obama’s administration and the beginning of an austere second phase. Krugman, departing, found himself left in the position that every purist fears, holding blueprints for impossible buildings.

Here's what struck me in this paragraph: "[there's] an emerging Washington consensus that the costs of a broad welfare state may be beyond what Americans will willingly pay." 

As I've written before, the America I grew up in was willing to pay for a broad welfare state because we realized that we all benefit when everyone is safe and secure.  We understood that most people have financial problems at some point in their lives and we understood that there are good people at the bottom who just need a boost to become productive members of society. Any help we give now is usually repaid down the road by a growing middle class that pays taxes and buys goods, which keeps the economy healthy.

Then along came the Republicans who wispered in everyone's ear, "Hey sucker, those niggras in the cities are living well off of your tax dollars, color TVs, Cadillacs, steaks, free medical care.  While you're struggling to pay the bills they're ripping you off!!"  It worked. 

So the Republicans have continued to whisper in those same ears that not only "the blacks," but also union members, illegal immigrants, government workers, and teachers are also ripping them off.

In just 3 decades the Republicans have turned us into a bitter, mean-spirited country that wants to impoverish everyone except themselves (aka "hardworking American patriots"), the military, and the very wealthy (because they "create jobs").  If that isn't bad enough, we brag to anyone who will listen about what a compassionate, generous country we are!

This is a great article.  Read the whole thing if you have time.

--Trakker

Comments

[Andy]

Starting with Reagan, but continuing all the way to the Obama administration, the government has been cutting taxes and decreasing regulations while borrowing money and increasing spending. All of these provide a short term economic boost, but can have devastating effects in the future. Like an addict seeking the high, business and voters have been chasing it for years.

It is clearly not a viable long-term economic model, but perhaps we are, like the junkie, doomed to hit rock-bottom before realizing this.

Have you read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine?"

[Trakker]

I have Shock Doctrine on my Kindle but have read only a little because it depresses me. Of course so does reading Paul Krugman and Glenn Greenwald and about 20 other writers. I need to read it.

Are we doomed to hit rock bottom before we wake up? I thought after 8 years of the Bush Administration we had hit rock bottom, but it appears the right is just getting serious about impoverishing the entire middle class.