Class War Politics by Paul Krugman
Class War Politics
By PAUL KRUGMAN
June 19, 2006
In case you haven’t noticed, modern American politics is marked by vicious partisanship, with the great bulk of the viciousness coming from the right. It’s clear that the Republican plan for the 2006 election is, once again, to question Democrats’ patriotism.
But do Republican leaders truly believe that they are serious about fighting terrorism, while Democrats aren’t? When the speaker of the House declares that “we in this Congress must show the same steely resolve as those men and women on United Flight 93,” is that really the way he sees himself? (Dennis Hastert, Man of Steel!) Of course not.
So what’s our bitter partisan divide really about? In two words: class warfare. That’s the lesson of an important new book, “Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches,” by Nolan McCarty of Princeton University, Keith Poole of the University of California, San Diego, and Howard Rosenthal of New York University.
“Polarized America” is a technical book written for political scientists. But it’s essential reading for anyone who wants to understand what’s happening to America.
What the book shows, using a sophisticated analysis of Congressional votes and other data, is that for the past century, political polarization and economic inequality have moved hand in hand. Politics during the Gilded Age, an era of huge income gaps, was a nasty business — as nasty as it is today. The era of bipartisanship, which lasted for roughly a generation after World War II, corresponded to the high tide of America’s middle class. That high tide began receding in the late 1970’s, as middle-class incomes grew slowly at best while incomes at the top soared; and as income gaps widened, a deep partisan divide re-emerged.
Both the decline of partisanship after World War II and its return in recent decades mainly reflected the changing position of the Republican Party on economic issues.
Before the 1940’s, the Republican Party relied financially on the support of a wealthy elite, and most Republican politicians firmly defended that elite’s privileges. But the rich became a lot poorer during and after World War II, while the middle class prospered. And many Republicans accommodated themselves to the new situation, accepting the legitimacy and desirability of institutions that helped limit economic inequality, such as a strongly progressive tax system. (The top rate during the Eisenhower years was 91 percent.)
When the elite once again pulled away from the middle class, however, Republicans turned their back on the legacy of Dwight Eisenhower and returned to a focus on the interests of the wealthy. Tax cuts at the top — including repeal of the estate tax — became the party’s highest priority.
But if the real source of today’s bitter partisanship is a Republican move to the right on economic issues, why have the last three elections been dominated by talk of terrorism, with a bit of religion on the side? Because a party whose economic policies favor a narrow elite needs to focus the public’s attention elsewhere. And there’s no better way to do that than accusing the other party of being unpatriotic and godless.
Thus in 2004, President Bush basically ran as America’s defender against gay married terrorists. He waited until after the election to reveal that what he really wanted to do was privatize Social Security.
Pre-New Deal G.O.P. operatives followed the same strategy. Republican politicians won elections by “waving the bloody shirt” — invoking the memory of the Civil War — long after the G.O.P. had ceased to be the party of Lincoln and become the party of robber barons instead. Al Smith, the 1928 Democratic presidential candidate, was defeated in part by a smear campaign — burning crosses and all — that exploited the heartland’s prejudice against Catholics.
So what should we do about all this? I won’t offer the Democrats advice right now, except to say that tough talk on national security and affirmations of personal faith won’t help: the other side will smear you anyway.
But I would like to offer some advice to my fellow pundits: face reality. There are some commentators who long for the bipartisan days of yore, and flock eagerly to any politician who looks “centrist.” But there isn’t any center in modern American politics. And the center won’t return until we have a new New Deal, and rebuild our middle class.
This entry was posted on Monday, June 19th, 2006 at 10:09 AM and filed under Articles. Follow comments here with the RSS 2.0 feed. Skip to the end and leave a response. Trackbacks are closed.
12 Responses to “Class War Politics by Paul Krugman”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
All of it so sadly true. And on the money, so to say. In a peripheral way I see this everyday. The world I grew up in is gone and divided and the rich and poor are receding from each other. To me there are no political parties.
Posted on 19-Jun-06 at 10:17 am | PermalinkHmmmm, the writer clearly has available to him an option on his television set that I would love to have! When Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid talk the audio on his television obviously turns off or turns ’sweet’….oh, would I love THAT!! They lead a merry band of vicious partisans….image having a television that would eliminate their outrageous blather!
Posted on 19-Jun-06 at 10:31 am | PermalinkMichael:
This is one of those pieces that I find unspeakably depressing (like reading almost anything by Chomsky) because it speaks of something so deeply flawed in our system — in our species, really — that it reminds me of how little our votes matter…
Posted on 19-Jun-06 at 10:49 am | PermalinkThe Democrats have been out of power so long that they’ve lost their minds, projecting their own disonnect with the Americn people — not to mention their modus operandi of choice, all-smears-all-the-time — onto their friends on the other side of the aisle.
Posted on 19-Jun-06 at 11:03 am | PermalinkCan we have a moratorium on books being published by politicians, journalists, and political pundits? Most of these partisan diatribes are just a waste of paper.
Posted on 19-Jun-06 at 2:55 pm | PermalinkKrugman is right on.
Posted on 19-Jun-06 at 5:41 pm | PermalinkWe have swung so far to Corporate America. Fouled our own nests,’so to speak’.
“Too late, America, too late.”
To one of your readers; please don’t confuse the issues with a counter-projection afront.
When dispicable people like Cheney, Rove, and Bush, whom have never served in a battle field pretend to know what the troops need to hear, that is arrogance and shame on their parts.
To project the administrations awful history of Bush’s AWOL (absent without leave) service record and call Murtha a coward is projecting someone else’s guilt on the Dems from the Rove’s talking points for ALL Neocons to regurGItate.
In some military circles (Military Justice Courts), absence during War time (Vietnam period), especially when an airman is supposed to be at their duty station is an act of treason and punishable by death. Much harsher than AWOL.
To project the ‘cut and run’ from Rove’s lips to the Dems is because Rove had made phony exemption claims (college 6 credits?) so as to not serve during Vietnam.
Other ‘projections’ of guilt are greed, stealing, being a liar, gay-bashing and sex out of wed-lock.
To say that the Dems only do these things by not acknowledging that their own NeoCons are more guilty is an act of running from their own demise, guilt, and history is hypocritical and shameful.
Many closet gays that happen within the ranks of the Neocon’s are also using projection as an ‘Unchristian act’ and ‘Of the Devil’, but the many neocon gay bashers (WHO ARE FILLED WITH HATE), do not know how to handle their own guilt and hatred as gays themselves.
What ass-holes – taking away marriage for lesbians and gays. What should have been done – is to promote CIVIL UNIONS – yes, the Dems screwed up that one royally.
So folks; watch out for ‘projections’ unto others. Very clever ploy from Sissy Willis – so be on the look out for clones that ONLY reply with Rove’s strange, unhuman talking points.
Go into Rove’s and Bush’s life and you will see a history of psychosis.
DOWN WITH THE CLONES!!!!
LONG LIVE THE PROGRESSIVES!!!
Posted on 19-Jun-06 at 6:22 pm | PermalinkMr. Krugman had written an excellent article.
Why didn’t Dems put in their actions to impeach Bush for the destruction of America? Apathy is the answer.
Dems may be “lost” and couldn’t revive the past wrongful actions Bush had caused.
There are too much damages that may be too late to change for the better life for the young generations to come.
Michael, why don’t you run for Prez? I find you one of the beautiful souls on this Earth. Even though I never met you, on the other hand, I read a lot of your bios and Reute’s generousity for animals.
Posted on 19-Jun-06 at 11:01 pm | PermalinkAgain, where is the group that will start another party, see past 5-8 articles and messages, Dem. or Rep. are owned by the same system, Howard Hughes said he “never lost an election”, he supported both as it served his business purpose(s)!
Posted on 19-Jun-06 at 11:03 pm | PermalinkMichael v
Well, for the record this is Avanti sending from Mr. Eyster’s Mac. Not to be construed as anyone else’s opinion: I agree with the dismissal of clones. But if yu think orchestrally, the score must simply be tweaked to improve the conditions of themusic as a whole; and if one thinks homeopathiclly, then the poisons within must be treated with small doses of the antidotal toxins. Perhaps it is time for Robbie Gass and On Wings of Song to levitate the Pentagon again. And perhaps the Bush/Cheney/Rice team should be transported to the middle of a battlefield (or a jungle filled with tigers and left to triage and forge/fend for themselves. Survival of the fittest indeed.
Posted on 20-Jun-06 at 4:06 am | PermalinkWe must help all beings to return to their hearts; the mind is like a cave of bats. It is only with the heart that one can see rightly {(St. Exupery)(sp?)}~Alisa Farina/Avanti Clear Light Consortium
Hooray!!! to Alisa Farina/Avanti for her wonderful writeup. I too think it possible for the triage to get a life together and leave the American people and World alone.
Posted on 20-Jun-06 at 2:43 pm | PermalinkLyle
Posting this for Bette who is having problems:
The Krugman article is interesting, but two points. First the programs initiated by Roosevelt and Johnson started the ball rolling toward the social welfare society we have today. Second until we start to educate our children to live in today’s world, solve problems, and become educated, informed voters (and to vote), there won’t be much headway. With a poorly educated population there’ll be more and more who fall for the line of the extreme Christian fundamentalists and that’s scary. I always wince when I hear comments about tax breaks for the rich. It’s the top bracket of tax payers who pay for the massive entitlement programs for the poor!
Posted on 21-Jun-06 at 6:15 pm | Permalink