What would it take to truly develop a class consciousness in America?

[LostInAnomie]

It should be obvious to anyone following the current economic news that we have been in a class warfare for decades. It just happens that it is a one sided affair where the rich are against the middle and lower classes. The rich have a well developed class consciousness. They are organized, they are motivated, and they are active.

The middle and lower classes are divided. They have no organization behind them. They share no common goals. They are easily bought off or distracted. In most cases they don't realize that they are being crushed by the upper class.

What would it take to finally unite the middle and lower classes into forming a true class consciousness where they vote for their own self interests and fight their own exploitation?

[dysfunctional press]

1. a free and honest media, unfettered from corporate servitude might be a good start.

as well as bringing back mandated civics classes, starting by jr. high at the latest.

[NC_Nurse]

2. Amen.

[billyoc]

3. Hoo, boy. Well, you'd have to remove the "American Dream(tm)" from the national discourse.

There are a few other things that you'd need to do, but that would be first.

So let me know when you've gotten *that* done, and I'll list the rest of the steps. :rofl:

[DaveJ]

4. An Iota of political awareness?

No huge adjustments are needed, we just need to be aware of our capabilities. Just a few laws, I think, especially on corporations, who really are open to more regulation believe it or not. Make a law against punishing people for overtime. A law against firing without a cause. More laws against discrimination, besides age, race or sex, but also against other factors that people let slip by.

A law that says workers should get as much a share of a company's profit as shareholders.

And I think it should be easier to get home loans for individuals -- one should not have to have a super duper credit rating to get an essential need like that. There are a lot of things that can be done by a Democratically controlled government.

People just need to be aware that they are the ones in control.

[willing dwarf]

5. We need a vision of solidarity

That's what made MLK's civil rights movement such a threat to the powers that be. Solidarity..."The People, United, Will never be Divided" is a truly terrifying to the power class.

Unfortuantely, the privilege of the middle class has meant that when the rubber meets the road, when the anti riot police or bulldozers or tanks come to tear down the protest encampments, the people who have something to loose will usually run away. It's only the people who have something to gain and little to loose who are willing to stage sit-ins, to stand up in front of tanks and bulldozers.

I suppose we will only be really united when we've lost more than we have left to loose, and when we have more to gain by unity than we have to loose in our present state. Perhaps the world energy and food crises will push us to that point?

[arcadian]

6. Shift all defense spending to Education, HHS and HUD

That would be a good start.

[awoke_in_2003]

12. Wouldn't even need to take all of it

we do have to maintain a DEFENSE (emphasized to make the distinction between protection and pre-emptiveness). If we halved our military expenditures, we would still have a strong defense, and ALOT of money to pour into social programs. Will never happen, though. A well fed, housed, and educated populace might start to question why the gov't does what it does.

[razors edge]

15. Who exactly do we need to defend against?

The Germans at the hight of WWII couldn't touch us, the Japanese fired a few torpedoes at an amusement park (no I am not talking about the movie 1941)

Who do we need a standing army to defend against?

Are the North Koreans looking to invade? Iranians? Have I missed something here?

If the nukes to kill everything on earth aren't enough to deter an attack I want a refund on the five trillion we spent building that deterrent.

[awoke_in_2003]

17. Put the reduced military to good use

by providing some border security and actually inspecting cargo before it comes into the county. It would be a cakewalk for someone to bring a device across our border in the south, or to park on in Boston harbor. We inspect less than 10% of all cargo coming in.

[razors edge]

20. That is a good use for them.

I served in the Marines twenty five years ago, Japan, Philippines, Hawaii, and I now see the waste of funds involved in all of it.

[Captain Angry]

7. The definition of rich.

I think it's extremely interesting who considers themselves rich and how far above that level the wealth actually resides.

While poor people are fighting each other, the people who THINK they're rich are trying to create some distance, but don't realize they're not rich either.

It's already been mentioned, but the media sure isn't helping anybody.

It's incredible that people think somebody's getting ahead on federal assistance when only people making a few thousand a year are the ones who are eligible.

It's incredible that people making $100,000 a year think they're rich when the tax-cuts are only helping the people making a million a year.

It's incredible that people think there are immigrants coming to "take their job" when they're not the ones in the fields or the construction site in the first place.

It's incredible that people get mad at India for outsourcing when it was the American CEO of the American company whose management team sent the jobs there in the first place.

[SheilaT]

8. A full understanding of

history and economics would be needed.

One real problem in this country is that a very large majority self-identify as purely middle class, including a significant number who are either above or below that line. More importantly, most people seem to honestly think that they have a good shot at reaching the upper ten or even five percent. They do not comprehend how truly rarefied the upper income levels are.

Here's a link to the Wikipedia article on this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States

I know that Wiki has its flaws, but this is a pretty good overview.

[ColbertWatcher]

9. Play offense; call the GOP out before another Depression happens.

Get some facts out first.

Approximately every 20 years between 1780 and 1930, the U.S. has experienced a major nation-wide "bank crisis" or one sort or another.

Bank panic of 1797 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1797)

The Panic of 1797 was a depression of the commerce markets that began in the Bank of England in 1797 and had developing disflationary repercussions in the financial, commercial, and real estate markets of the coastal United States and the Caribbean through the turn of the century. Britain's economy was hurt, as Britain was fighting France in the French Revolutionary Wars. By 1800, the crisis had resulted in the imprisonment of many American debtors including the famed financier of the revolution Robert Morris, resulting in the U.S. Congress passing the Bankruptcy Act of 1800, which basically ended this panic; the Bankruptcy Act of 1800 would later be repealled after its three-year duration expired in 1803.<1>

Panic of 1819 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1819)

The Panic of 1819 was the first major financial crisis in the United States, after the depression of the late 1780s (which led directly to the establishment of the dollar and, perhaps indirectly, to the calls for a Constitutional Convention).<1> It featured widespread foreclosures, bank failures, unemployment, and a slump in agriculture and manufacturing. It marked the end of the economic expansion that had followed the War of 1812. However, things would change for the US economy after the Second Bank of the United States was founded in 1816<2>; the bank was created in response to the vast spread of bank notes across United States by private banks, due to inflation brought on by the debt the nation was in after the war of 1812 ended<3>.

Panic of 1837 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1837)

The Panic of 1837 was a panic in the United States built on a speculative fever. The bubble burst on May 10, 1837 in New York City, when every bank stopped payment in specie (gold and silver coinage). The Panic was followed by a five-year depression, with the failure of banks and record high unemployment levels.

Panic of 1857 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1857)

The Panic of 1857 was a sudden downturn in the economy of the United States that occurred in 1857. A general recession first emerged late in 1856, but the successive failure of banks and businesses that characterized the panic began in mid-1857. As the overall economic downturn was brief, and the recovery strong, lasting impact was limited. However, more than 5,000 American businesses failed within a year, and unemployment was accompanied by protest meetings in urban areas. Eventually the panic and depression spread to Europe, South America and the Far East. No recovery was evident in the United States for a year and a half, and the full impact did not dissipate until the American Civil War.

Panic of 1873 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1873)

The Panic of 1873 was a severe nationwide economic depression in the United States that lasted until 1877. It was precipitated by the bankruptcy of the Philadelphia banking firm Jay Cooke and Company on September 18, 1873 along with the meltdown on May 9, 1873 of the Vienna Stock Exchange in Austria (the so-called Gründerkrach or “founders' crash”). It was one of a series of economic crises in the 19th and early 20th centuries.

Panic of 1893 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1893)

The Panic of 1893 was a serious economic depression in the United States that began in 1893. This panic was an extension of the Panic of 1873, and like that earlier crash, was caused by railroad overbuilding and shaky railroad financing which set off a series of bank failures. Compounding market overbuilding and a railroad bubble was a run on the gold supply and a policy of using both gold and silver metals as a peg for the US Dollar value. The Panic of 1893 was the worst economic crisis to hit the nation in its history to that point and, some argue, worse than the Great Depression of the 1930s.<1>

Panic of 1907 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1907)

The Panic of 1907, also known as the 1907 Bankers' Panic, was a financial crisis in the United States. The stock market fell nearly 50% from its peak in 1906, the economy was in recession, and there were numerous runs on banks and trust companies. Its primary cause was a retraction of loans by some banks that began in New York and soon spread across the nation, leading to the closings of banks and businesses. The 1907 panic was the fourth panic in 34 years.

Great Depression (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Depression)

The Great Depression was a dramatic, worldwide economic downturn beginning in some countries as early as 1928.<1> The beginning of the Great Depression in the United States is associated with the stock market crash on October 29, 1929, known as Black Tuesday, and the end is associated with the onset of the war economy of World War II, beginning around 1939.

Forget all the politics, just remind people that our country experienced bank failures and crises every 20 years until FDR and the New Deal created a safety net for regular citizens.

Prior to that, the solutions were for banks and businesses only.


Since then?

The GOP has given us

The Savings and Loan Crisis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savings_and_Loan_Crisis)

The U.S. Savings and Loan crisis of the 1980s and 1990s was the failure of 747 savings and loan associations (S&Ls) in the United States. The ultimate cost of the crisis is estimated to have totaled around USD$160.1 billion, about $124.6 billion of which was directly paid for by the U.S. government -- that is, the U.S. taxpayer, either directly or through charges on their savings and loan accounts-- <1>, which contributed to the large budget deficits of the early 1990s.

Enron (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron_scandal)

The Enron scandal was a financial scandal involving Enron Corporation (NYSE ticker symbol: ENE) and its accounting firm Arthur Andersen, that was revealed in late 2001. After a series of revelations involving irregular accounting procedures bordering on fraud, perpetrated throughout the 1990s, it left Enron on the verge of undergoing the largest bankruptcy in history by mid-November 2001.

Of course I've left some off, but you get the idea.

[SoCalDem]

10. When it's against the law for employers to offer medical insurance

That will do it..

[razors edge]

11. Joe Bageant, Secretary of Eduation.

Revenge of the Mutt People

http://www.joebageant.com/joe/2006/01/revenge_of_the_.html

For example, according to the Wall Street Journal, Asians constitute about 2% of the population but make up over 20% of Harvard graduates. About one third of Harvard graduates identify themselves as Jewish. Together Jews and Asians make up about half of Harvard graduates. Subtract these, plus the 15% minority quota and that leaves maybe 40% of openings for the 75 or 80% of white Americans who are not Jewish, Asian, Latino or black or whatever. Now throw in the skew of northeastern WASPs at elite universities and we are left with maybe 20% of openings for 60% of white Americans. It presents a sorry damned picture of liberal East Coast WASPs and Jews and minorities getting all the prime educational gravy. The neocon leadership is right when they tell working white Americans the system has been stacked against them by an unseen hand, though they never mention that their own kids are among the silver spooners rowing around in the Ivy League gravy boat.

I know I’ll get clobbered by Jewish and black critics for pointing this out. But liberal refusal to see white people as also being diverse, and seeing that some of them indeed need their own sort of affirmative action is exactly the kind of thing that helped the neocons lead these working white people buy the nose. Education is everything. You know it and I know it. And what the white working classes don’t know because lack of education has hurt you and me and them.

So why in the hell don’t we help this group of people into college and into the institutions that are elite springboards to careers in law and politics? Why not have affirmative action for Appalachian kids from the Ohio Basin or from the Deep South or anyplace else where tens of millions of kids grow up in houses containing not a single book, except possibly the Bible. Why don’t we do these things? Part of the reason is that this stubborn proud people does not whine beg or threaten its way to access to education, employment or anything else. And part of it is because we unquestioningly accept a system that calls greed and self-interest drive, thus letting the prosperous professional and business classes pretend there is no disparity around them for which they might just be partially responsible, even as they pay the maid and the gardener who lack health insurance a pittance -- or see that their mechanic’s bill reads, “repare of fuul injection, $105.” And because liberals have driven secularism into the ground and broken it off, and need to actually adhere to some religious values -- real ones -- even if we don’t feel particularly inclined toward religion. (Psst! Everybody else in America DOES feel inclined toward it.)

So we will either see that Americans, religious or not, get educated equally so they won’t be suckered by political and religious hucksters. If not, then we must accept that uneducated people interpret politics in an uninformed and emotional manner, and accept the consequences. America can no longer withstand the political naiveté of this ignored white class. Middle class American liberals cannot have it both ways. It has come down to the simplest and most profound element of democracy: Fairness. Someday middle class American liberals will have to cop to fraternity and justice and the fact that we are our brother’s keeper, whether we like it or not. They’re going to have to sit down and actually speak to these people they consider ugly, overweight, ill educated and in poor taste. At some point down the road all the Montessori schools and Ivy League degrees in the world are not going to save your children and grandchildren from what our intellectual peasantry, whether born of neglect or purposefully maintained, is capable of supporting politically. We’ve all seen the gritty black and white newsreels from the 1930s.



Joe gives a hard look at the situation, and as usual he pisses in the liberal punchbowl. But you can't bring up the discussion without realizing that we all have a hand in this.

[mitchum]

13. First, you need to remove the myth of "America" from America

[Forkboy]

14. Maybe the best answer of all.

[1]

16. that would require that the majority of americans suddenly decide...

that they will always be minimum wage workers. serving "the man"!

which tells me, LostInAnomie, that you do not understand the "american dream".

now, don't get all harsh on me for my above statement, my friend, my pal LostInAnomie. hear me out.


many that do play the "american dream" game do succeed. they do. successful. millionaires. that is an undeniable fact. rags to riches stories are the most popular in this or any other country.

have you every played the lottery? ever bought a ticket? ever? people have dreams. through hard work or lottery luck they will achieve the good life.

its just one step away from where they are now.

[DaveJ]

18. I can't speak for LostInAnomie, but I don't need the "American Dream" explained to me.

That's sarcasm right? Either work hard or play the lottery?? I can guarantee you that the lottery is not a path to the American dream. You can't be serious.

As far as working hard goes, the whole point is that folks work hard all the time, as hard as they ever have, with no path to obtaining the life that was once obtainable by a single breadwinner who is faithful to his employer, who could not only afford a home with a white picket fence, but new furniture, a whirlpool washer, a car, send his kids to college, take his family on vacation, pay for his kids weddings, and retire on his company pension.

Of course it still happens -- but not the same way anymore. Not in the 'American' way as we've known it. I'm clearly trying. I don't expect any business to make me rich. (Rich, these days, means just owning a home and knowing that retirement is possible.) But even if I succeed in that goal, I would not call it the "American Dream" but just me becoming rich.

So, the path to becoming financially wealthy is still possible, for some who are really lucky or can execute some clever scheme, one might say, but that does not mean it is still the American Dream. It is more similar to the way people get rich in any other Banana Republic.

[1]

19. "but I don't need the "American Dream" explained to me."

i think you do, bud.

apparently you have not achieved this. some of us have. because this endeavor has failed you (or you it), you think its not possible for anyone else?

it is.

impossible for you? maybe.

but don't be so quick to write it off for others...

[Romulox]

21. Jesus. Another new "progressive" voice here on Center/Right underground.

Lemme guess: you are one of those "ex" Republicans that are going to save the Democratic Party, huh?

:eyes:

[crispini]

23. That's just your ignorance talking.

Learn something.

Mobility between income brackets is lower than it ever has been in this country in decades. The vast majority of people will live and die in the same "class" they were born in. Or lower. It's quite true, though, that people are held in thrall by the false identification of themselves with "the rich." In this, I think we are very badly served by the "so-called" American dream.

I have an American dream too, and it's that every single person in this country, despite their income level, will be able to eat and have health care.

[KillCapitalism]

22. It would probably take another Great Depression.

Which may happen sometime here in the near future.

Once a lot of the middle class falls into poverty, I doubt they will envy the rich and will probably start getting really resentlful of them. In the Great Depression of the 30's the country was very class conscious because almost everyone was hurting. That led to the New Deal policies which enacted safety nets for basically all of us. I think Americans were still somewhat class conscious until Reagan came along 27 years ago, that's when greed started to move back into "gilded age" territory. Anyway, like I said, another depression will certainly humble people.

[DailyGrind51]

24. People without health insurance or pensions watch vapid useless

unbelievably rich celebrities on television and aren't driven crazy? Limbaugh, et.al. had one mission, to pit the "have-littles" against the "have-nothings" so that the "haves" could have more!

[The2ndWheel]

25. Not wanting what the wealthy have

What the wealthy have is only considered wealth because we buy into it. Stop playing their game. Stop working for them. Stop buying their products. Stop voting in their elections.

All that goes against a mass society though, and would result is far too much diversity. So much so that nothing would get done. But that would be the whole point in actually changing the way we live.

Another thing, as long as there are two different classes, a "middle" and a "lower", how can they unite? As long as there is a middle class, by definition there has to be a lower class. You'd have go along the lines of a 2nd class to the wealthy 1st class. I'm thinking the middle class would have to give more to the lower class(because we know the wealthy one won't), and form more of a united class, so that the people who are in the lower class know that they're not just the political play toy of the wealthy and middle classes. Then that 2nd class can take on a wealthy 1st class with more power behind it. I know, I know, it sounds extremely easy.

Like I said, we have to stop playing their game. If you play by their rules, you don't win.

[conspirator]

26. The first step is stop calling conspiracy theorists, freaks. It's obvious that is not in the

interest of rich people to solve the problems of the majority, and that they conspire to keep us down.
The way corporations move back and forth, from country to country, exploiting people and resources, breaking laws without punishment, seems to indicate that in fact that rulers of each country are very organised and together in a worldwide conspiracy. Pretty much in the same way that despot regimes in europe worked before the french revolution.