I would like an historian to weigh in on the specifics of how progressive changes occurred in the past. Why guess which way the wind will blow when you could at least have a model.

With the American people no longer optimistic about how our system of government works, we could actually be heading towards a real national or Constitutional crisis armed uprising / rebellion / revolution.

fixed that for you

Sounds like ideal conditions for Fascism.

I can’t tell exactly from the graph, but it looks like the recent decline in optimism started with W.’s second term–the coup that was 2000 didn’t phase most folks?

Considering the poor sense of community in US culture along with the high level of fear, I’m betting on crisis. Plus, crisis seems to be the MO lately for those with power and money.

This has been the plans by the right wing for a long time. Get people to become dismayed by “democracy” so they no longer actively participate in it.

come on now I think national crisis is already a pretty strong term.

That will never happen. The people in this country are too stupid lazy and indifferent and full of themselves to care that much. Plus we have allowed the government to rule by fear. So any thoughts to that will be quashed.

Yeah, I think fascism when I see that chart. To expect a different outcome would be to think that the American people aren’t largely stupid. Unfortunately, they are and incorrigibly so.

We live in an image based culture that emphasizes feelings over facts. The rest of the script pretty much writes itself.

That, and anyone that uses the word “reform” in American politics is completely clueless. By definition “reform” is only possible in a system that generally works but could use improvements. Our system is a zombie.
Talking about reform is little more than political masturbation.

It would seem that now would be a good time for the progressive community to start thinking about previously seemingly impossible big structural changes they want. It seems like we are going to be living in interesting times.

Yup. We’d better do it now as we all know the Cons have had the plans for implementing fascism on the drawing board for decades and keep updating them as events warrant.

We the Wealthy of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union that Works for Us, establish a Form of Justice that Benefits Us, and insure domestic Tranquility…

The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

We had a similar situation in 1932. Fortunately for us, we also had a very real choice: FDR.

Apples and Oranges

Optimism remained relatively steady for several decades–until the last few years. Since then, faith in our system of government has been almost cut in half, from 44 percent in the first month of 2008, to just 26 percent now.

But the system of government is not the same system of government as it was in the ’70s. There has been a steady decline in the confidence of the “system” (except for a brief blip upwards in the ’90s) as the government has changed from one of “by the people” to “by the corporation”.

The American people haven’t had a good choice since the 60s and, thanks to the rise of the Vampire Squid, haven’t had any real choice at all since the 80s.

the American People in 2008 thought they were voting for FDR type of Dems, and got a bunch of Trojan Horse Dems who love Reagan

this type of con game, led to a lot of Americans doubting our current govt.

it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that the USA govt has been hijack by a few rich people

for example
the rich get tax cuts
and the poor get tax increases

only in the USA you have a deficit crisis and the rich get a tax cut, and poor get their services cut

Obama and other national dems beg for Union and Progressive votes, neither helped or gave support to the Unions and Progressives under attack in Wisconsin

If we lived by our laws there would be no problem with the gov’t. If the Supremes were not rightwing we would have no problem. If greed was not ruling the day, we would have no problem. IT’S ALL ABOUT MONEY!

Trojan Horse Democrats.

Nice ring to it. I like it.

Who organizes data points like that?

Time intervals between 5 months and 13 years are spaced identical. Pretty easy to change the slope of a graph if you can spread or contract the numbers.

The progressive reforms that occurred during the administration of FDL came after several generations of rapacious, unregulated capitalism (think robber barons) and the cycles of extreme boom and bust that go with it. The conditions of many US citizens became so poor and the lack of regulation of capitalism got so bad that they began affecting rich folks. That’s when things started to change with FDR’s financial policies toward creating a consumer-based economy (folks get jobs in factories producing cars and washing machines and then go spend their paychecks on same) and public works projects. Then we found out that a permanent state of war doesn’t hurt either.

The difference today, I think, is that the US doesn’t make much anymore. The economic pillar that was the consumer economy is now lacking its domestic production base and is beginning to crumble. And we shifted to a financed-based economy while keeping the state of permanent war, a typical final stage for empires on the wane. The folks with power and money can move their operations abroad in a way that they couldn’t in the 1920s or 1930s. I suspect this reality is what is behind cutting public education: who needs well educated domestic workers? In other words, I don’t see a decline in the quality of life for many working and middle class US citizens affecting the rich enough for them to enact reforms like those that happened 3 generations ago. When many of the biggest US companies are worth more than the GDP of even several European countries, the symbiotic relationship between the haves and have nots is at risk. However, historically it is precisely when that symbiosis falls apart that revolutions and reform usually take place.

A new Revolution? Maybe that’s what Bachman is talking about. Start this one in New Hampshire.

Our competing shamans are being unmasked at a rapid rate. The trick is to pick a new one that has some greater grasp on reality than the “competition and wealth for all,” the energy “too cheap to meter,” and “geoengineering crowds”.

I do think this is a time of opportunity but as always where there is uncertainty fascism with its promises of order and competence is the hazard,

I’m willing to work on solutions, but I have little faith in the “American people,” who, imo, have been lazy, self-satisfied, very entitled, know-nothings who are easily satisfied with the latest shiney object of distraction. Right now events in Japan have managed – amazingly – to distract just the teensiest bit from the ever-popular & much more entertaining travails of the latest Hollywood drug addict train wreck. Yet I note that my local “nooz” paper has *several articles* about Charlie Sheen & Lindsay Lohan.

Do I expect my “fellow” citizens to do much of anything, no matter how bad it gets? Not really, sad to say. I think things in the USA have to get a d*mn sight worse – like really really really bad – before the peeps wake up and do “something.”

Pass the clicker! Enough of Japan! Mooooaaaarrrr Charlie Sheen!!!

The big drop in optimism occurs only in the last 3 years, since 2008.

If the years were spaced out evenly, as you would have it, it would look like there wasn’t much change in “optimistic” sentiment until, whoops, from 2008 to the present, “optimistic” sentiment just drops off a cliff. It would appear on the graph as a straight line down.

here and here

and I seem to recall an earnest young man named Jon something writing here on the history of rural progressive campaigns :D

I’m familiar with the history you relate.

I’m looking for more details on how it actually happened. How did the poor, downtrodden get organized despite the fact that they were shot on by Pinkerton thugs hired by the superrich, etc.

What I need is a good book on the subject. I’ve been looking for one for years, but the right one hasn’t fallen into my lap yet.

I’ve done extensive reading on bios of supperrich, and even found some books that cover a broader swath of the environment in the Gilded Age. But still not enough anatomy to give me a real feel for it.

One could argue that FDR was actually one of the worst things that ever happened to the U.S. Instead of destroying an evil system he saved it. This was a necessary precondition for the corporate state that exists today.

Back then they did have a real choice. But they also had other real choices and went with the guy that saved the system. Americans haven’t gotten any smarter.

I suspect this reality is what is behind cutting public education: who needs well educated domestic workers?

Yep. Exactly. Not so long ago, US business really needed educated workers, but they simply don’t anymore. Then the wealthy don’t “feel like” paying for public education. Why should they? They’ve got enough money to pay for their own needs. Screw everyone else.

The progressive reforms that occurred during the administration of FDL came after several generations of rapacious, unregulated capitalism (think robber barons) and the cycles of extreme boom and bust that go with it. The conditions of many US citizens became so poor and the lack of regulation of capitalism got so bad that they began affecting rich folks.

Also Yep. The current boom & bust cycles haven’t resulted – YET – in significantly worsening the standard of living for ENOUGH citizens to make most citizens sit up & “do” something. Right now, enough of a majority of the population has at least “just enough” to hang on to their lifestyle.

A LOT of citizens are willfully *ignorant* about what’s going on; don’t really give a sh*t about their neighbors who’ve lost jobs & houses. Doesn’t personally affect them, so who cares? More Charlie Sheen, please.

Hate to say it but things haven’t gotten “bad enough” yet.

The problem with facism beckoning is that a *significant* portion of the population – mostly conservative but some trad-Dems – have been “softened up” to believe that the kind of “stability” that facism offers is a “good thing” and should be what is in place.

Who organizes data points like that?

How about these data points?

One could argue that FDR was actually one of the worst things that ever happened to the U.S. Instead of destroying an evil system he saved it. This was a necessary precondition for the corporate state that exists today.

This statement is far more true of Bill Clinton and Barry Obama than of FDR, unless you think that FDR should be blamed for not turning the United States into a Communist “utopia” in America.

I agree.

Plus with no data points from ’83 to ’96 I guess we’re supposed to think those 13 years were a straight line?

“….from 2008 to the present, …. It would appear on the graph as a straight line down.”

So the right is dismayed that we elected a black socialist from Kenya and the left is dismayed that they voted for FDR and got the second coming of Ronald Reagan.

Optimism at an all time low makes perfect sense to me.

America had a hard time with monopolistic railroads and such early in our industrial revolution. Congress enacted many laws intended to bust up monopolies, but somehow they only applied to busting up unions. The Sherman Act was like this, intended to bust up monopolies and cartels, but was applied to Eugene Debs in the Pullman strike calling unions “cartels of labor”. Many years later the Clayton Act was passed spelling out many legal union activities.

The point is we should try. We get annoyed at “sellouts” but if we quit trying we definitely lose. Just be ready for any suggested legislation to be twisted to cross-purposes.

I’m looking for more details on how it actually happened. How did the poor, downtrodden get organized despite the fact that they were shot on by Pinkerton thugs hired by the superrich, etc.

Unions, particularly the CIO and IWW.

Just read the review of the book at your first link. That might be helpful. I wish there were a negative review, though. I often learn more from them, and even if I don’t believe what they say, they alert me to potential biases in the book.

Actually, and this is an important distinction, it has been then plans of the moneyed establishment to create a situation where the only “participation” is voting in elections that they ultimately control. Much of the confusion and irritation directed at government is for good reason. Though most people do not realize it and/or do not want to admit it, we do not live in a functioning democracy (representative republic) in any positive sense of that term. Here is a better description of the political system we are actually living under:

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism

Inverted Totalitarianism and Managed Democracy

There are three main ways in which inverted totalitarianism is the inverted form of classical totalitarianism. First, whereas in Nazi Germany the state dominated economic actors, in inverted totalitarianism corporations and their lobbying dominate the Superpower, with the government acting as the servant of large corporations. This isn’t considered corruption, but “normal”. Second, while the Nazi regime aimed at the constant political mobilization of the population, with its Nuremberg rallies, Hitler Youth, and so on, inverted totalitarianism aims for the mass of the population to be in a persistent state of political apathy. The only type of political activity expected or desired from the citizenry is voting. Low electoral turnouts are favorably received as an indication that the bulk of the population has given up hope that the government will ever help them. Third, while the Nazis openly mocked democracy, Superpower maintains the conceit that it is the model of democracy for the whole world: Wolin writes:

Inverted totalitarianism reverses things. It is all politics all of the time but a politics largely untempered by the political. Party squabbles are occasionally on public display, and there is a frantic and continuous politics among factions of the party, interest groups, competing corporate powers, and rival media concerns. And there is, of course, the culminating moment of national elections when the attention of the nation is required to make a choice of personalities rather than a choice between alternatives. What is absent is the political, the commitment to finding where the common good lies amidst the welter of well-financed, highly organized, single-minded interests rabidly seeking governmental favors and overwhelming the practices of representative government and public administration by a sea of cash.

Wolin calls this form of democracy, which is sanitized of the political, managed democracy. Managed democracy is “a political form in which governments are legitimated by elections that they have learned to control”. Under managed democracy, the electorate is prevented from having a significant impact on policies adopted by the state through the continuous employment of public relations techniques.

I absolutely agree with the post author that we should be discussing, collaborating and coming to a consensus as to what systemic changes, especially wrt the electoral system, we want to see. But we should have been doing that for years and, once we think we have decided upon a number of changes that we think will ultimately marginalize the current corporate oligarchy, we should not be waiting around for some crisis to demand said changes.

Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. — Frederick Douglass

Once we have have our list, written up into easy to understand, passable bill form, we are going to have to actively demand it be passed.

Coulda been a roller coaster, too.

Gotta good book on how unions actually got organized? That’s one I’m looking for.

[There may be] an opening for huge and relatively sudden changes, similar to the era of 1910 to 1920 when four important constitutional amendments were adopted.

I appreciate Jon’s optimism for such change, but most likely such changes to the Constitution would make things worse rather than better, given the influence of the Vampire Squid et al and the losers and sellouts who have infested the Democratic Party.

normally I’d tell ya to skim through “customer reviews” but given Ms Piven has been Glenn Beck’s favorite pinata this past year, lord only knows what kind of gibberish you’d encounter

fyi – was introduced to her work via John Pilger and Adolph Reed

So the right is dismayed that we elected a black socialist from Kenya

Faux News bullshit.

and the left is dismayed that they voted for FDR and got the second coming of Ronald Reagan.

The eff’ing TRUTH.

I also meant to post this from the review

Piven believes that even within domination, the underdog’s power lies in the fact that the elite really needs her or him.

Don’t think the supperrich need anyone but servants anymore. Not even farmers are needed in the age of industrial ag. Only a few subsistence crop pickers from time to time.

Yes, as soon as I started reading the review, I recognized the name. She was guest on democracynow recently. And you’re right about neg reviews that Glen Beck might plant. Hasn’t done it so far, which is pretty amazing. But I think I could pick those out from a more thoughtful negative review, which would contain more than talking points. Like examples that don’t fit Piven’s model, for example.

The Twentieth Century, Howard Zinn

John Hinshaw and Paul LeBlanc (ed.), U.S. labor in the twentieth century : studies in working-class struggles and insurgency, Amherst, NY : Humanity Books, 2000

Lenny Flank (ed), IWW: A Documentary History, Red and Black Publishers, St Petersburg, Florida, 2007

For starters. *g*

Good point! The ABC/WP coverage of this assumes that “the system” is static, same as it ever was. The increasing influence of corporate bribery and television has changed the game, if not fundamentally at least by a significant degree.

Thanks.

Interesting.

I use Manchurian Conservatives

I think the “good people” at Madison’s M & I bank may have a bone to pick with you :D

Considering Reagan to Bush I to Clinton, I suspect you’re right.

The IWW book also has a Kindle edition.

those godless socialists have their provocateurs all over the place in WI right now :D

First, I’d like to hear your criteria for defining “Progressive”. The 2010 HCR debate was THE single issue where an overwhelming majority of ALL Americans strongly supported a Progressive approach to substantially reform a critically important issue for our country. 2010 HCR was a once-in-thirty-year opportunity for Democrats to correct terrible wrongs. The only obstacle was, we had NO ONE to fight for it!
It’s ludicrous to refer to ANY Democratic Senator who voted for Obama’s HCR a “Progressive”. By my definition, ANY Progressive would have drawn a line in the sand to fix our HC system, just as Max Baucus, Ben Nelson & Joe Lieberman, drew lines in the sand to make sure real HCR was never publicly debated.
So, why does FDL continue to ask, what can Progressives do? Who are these “Progressives”? I certainly hope you’re not referring to the House Dems who caved to our President’s agenda after one second of media captured bravado. That wouldn’t deserve discussion.

This statement is far more true of Bill Clinton and Barry Obama than of FDR, unless you think that FDR should be blamed for not turning the United States into a Communist “utopia” in America.

Lol, liberals are silly. It’s cute how you think that the economic system should be preserved to a degree.

There is a lot of intellectual space between “Communist utopia” and “he/we shouldn’t have saved capitalism”.

At the end of the day, as much as the New Deal may have done for the average American, it did much, much more for the rich. Any outcome that doesn’t end in death or life imprisonment of the rich doesn’t do justice to everyone else. FDR was one of them just as much as Clinton or Barry is.

If I was retired and didn’t have a houseload of tigers I’d be there too. Great opportunity to recruit for the IWW.

First, you’re blaming FDR for the scale of abuses in the first decade of the 21st century that no one then could have predicted.

Second, you do realize that we live in a complex society and need an economic system that can sustain hundreds of millions in this one country alone, right? What type of economic system would make your non-silly-self happy?

Your points are dull.

Manchurian Conservative Dinocrats is more accurate, but Trojan Horse Democrats has a better ring to it.

The confidence drop off can’t come as a surprise to anybody outside the DC bubble. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that government is now of the rich, by the rich and especially for the rich. Exclusively. Fuck the 99ers, (we have to give rich people tax cuts), screw the people dependent on medicare, medicaid and social security, we have to give rich people tax cuts), forget utility and rent help for the poor, (we have to shelter those corporations from any tax burden at all), forget jobs programs, sane energy policy and single payer health care, (we have to keep fighting warz ’cause the MIC is too big to fail™). Even the teabaggers see it, they are just too stupid to see who and what is actually responsible for it.

Points don’t have to be exciting to be true. If you’re looking for cheap thrills go to an amusement park.

“Vichycrats”. One word, simple, says it all.

Another way to look at it is that most of us in the US are the products of arguably the worst system of public education in the industrialized world: a system concerned far more with social efficiency and reproduction than with turning out thinking, creative, problem-solving adults. And that system has only gotten worse recently with NCLB. What does it say about a culture that spends more on soldiers, cops and prison guards than on teachers?

Additionally, constant war, the paralyzing fear that of necessity goes with it, and having our TVs on more than any other nation with the possible exception of Berlusconi’s Italy doesn’t help either.

But they tell the TRUTH!

I think it thinks it is there already…

Also accurate, but I think the term Trojan Horse is more familiar than this reference to Nazi collaborators during WWII.

Trying to make a play on words. Points are generally sharp.

My apologies for being too general. Military history not labor history is what I’ve studied. However, a friend of mine is a labor historian. I’ll give him a ring now and see if he has any recommendations.

Trojan Horse implies gaining entry by stealth. Vichycrats implies a willing collaboration with the ruling powers. Which fits best?

M’eh. You use your word, I’ll use mine. :)

Mayhaps they have to be for you. I prefer a simple message, understandable by all.

Jon Walker

This could create an opening for huge and relatively sudden changes, similar to the era of 1910 to 1920 when four important constitutional amendments were adopted

I have been unexpectedly bubbling with optimism at this thought for weeks now – forgive the broadness, but given their political history, it makes perfect sense that this would first manifest itself in Wisconsin

now, Jon and Firedogs, please don’t misinterpret my question as to me thinking some great top down org is gonna come in and ‘save’ us all – but I am intently curious as to what National Labor is doing in the wake of WI Uprising – this little dfh happens to think Wisconsin is the best thing to happen to Labor in 30 years and I’d like to think they are going to make some serious political hay with it – does anyone know what they are doing in response ?

I really don’t understand how the economy worked back then.

I know the details of the consumer led economy of the post-WWII period intimately, but am a complete moron on how a large economy can work without being led by domestic consumers.

I also know a fair amount about export-led economic development. That could well have been what characterized the Gilded Age. But, of course, would no longer work for the U.S. that runs large trade deficits.

Trojan Horse might have been more apt a few years ago but these days it only fits if you count your dupes hiding their heads in the sand as “stealth”. :)

I agree that Vichycrats is more accurate, but is it a reference that most would get?

What the Greeks did by building the Trojan Horse was use deceit to get what they otherwise could not: entry into the walled city and access to all its wealth by making it look like they were making a friendly offering rather than offering destruction and ruin.

It’s called The Obama Effect. Here’s the formula:

Massive bailouts + Tax cuts for the rich + Austerity = Discontent with government

This poll, is severely missing a demographic breakdown. There are a huge number of people who are unhappy with the system of government because they feel that the government is too intrusive, doing to much to help the deadbeat brown people, that it should only work for the “Real America” of Palin and the Christian religious white right. To assume that all of the disenchantment is on our side and therefore change will be influenced by the progresives is not looking at the situation realistically.

I’ve yet to see anybody ask what it meant since it started being used here.

First, you’re blaming FDR for the scale of abuses in the first decade of the 21st century that no one then could have predicted.

Second, you do realize that we live in a complex society and need an economic system that can sustain hundreds of millions in this one country alone, right? What type of economic system would make your non-silly-self happy?

No, I’m not blaming FDR for anything except his choice to preserve capitalism. You’re off the rails right now.

I’m saying he was one of them. He was not a people’s champion. He is not a progressive hero. He’s a rich guy that did everything he could to preserve the economic status quo and protect all his rich friends from the pitchforks and flames. He co-opted the people. Sound familiar?

I don’t know about the economic system. It’s not my call. Something broadly socialist that prohibits large accumulations of private capital. Luckily, it’s not up to me alone to decide.

I suppose the FDL crowd is far better informed than the average American. I’m sure none of the trolls knew what it meant (not that I’m all that worried about whether the trolls get it, as many are probably paid not to get it.)

ok with that

Something broadly socialist that prohibits large accumulations of private capital.

You are aware of the New Deal and its achievements, right? If you don’t get what FDR accomplished, I’d say not.

If they don’t get it, there’s always teh wikipedia or google. “Vichy” will come right up and then it’s not hard to put that together with “crats”.

The alternative at the time was the utopian communism of Lenin and Trotsky and we all know how that turned out. Utopian ideology of any flavour is bound to fail, just as Ricardian capitalism is failing.

Utopian ideology of any flavour is bound to fail…

Roger that. When people all start being identical, with identical needs, identical likes, identical dislikes, identical illnesses, identical talents, etc, then come and talk to me about a Utopian ideology. Until then, they are all just so much unworkable bullshit.

For now, I’d just settle for a few solid prosecutions and convictions of some of the worst criminals on Wall Street.

That would get optimism about the US system of government back up again.

To fix the political system means to fix the electoral system. We need a “Democracy Amendment” to the US constitution. This amendment could, among other things,

- mandate micro districts for the House (1 house member represents 30,000 Americans, no more), thereby turning House races into neighborhood campaigns and eliminating the need for large amounts of money and TV advertising.

- require the approval voting system to be used for all single-winner election including the presidency (voter marks every candidate “approve” or “disapprove” and candidate with highest approval wins). No more spoiler effect, no more lesser of two evils, no more electoral college nonsense.

- change the Senate to be elected in a national proportional election every 4 years, with instant primary (you vote for party X- you also vote for which candidates of party X you want to have the seats, through approve/disapprove method).

- mandate public funding for all elections and limit total private campaign contributions to 100 times the hourly minimum wage per year.

- establish an inalienable right of US citizens to vote and to have that vote counted correctly. (With the intent being to get rid of or at least minimize the opportunities for voter suppression and election stealing).

That would get optimism about the US system of government back up again.

Not for me. Of course I want to see some prosecutions but I also want to see some real regulation and some real relief for the poor and middle class. They’ve alsked us to shoulder this blown up economy while encouraging the fatcats to blow it up some more.

I’m aware of what FDR accomplished. He didn’t accomplish the right things. There’s no use fighting about this – you’re not going to stop being an apologist for the gilded class.

Hey, I did write “for now.” Prosecutions of the worst Wall Street criminals would be a great first step toward restoring confidence and fixing the system. It would go a long way toward giving regulation some teeth.

Frankly, if the fatcats want to continue abusing the system way beyond reason, then I’d rather see it blow up.

I’m an apologist for the gilded class?

Not.

There’s no use fighting about this because you haven’t said anything other than what you’d like to see torn down.

Oh yeah, second the Frances Fox Piven.

“A LOT of citizens are willfully *ignorant* about what’s going on; don’t really give a sh*t about their neighbors who’ve lost jobs & houses.”

Indeed. Another difference between today and the ’20s-’30s is the lack of community, the sense of collective good and interconnectedness that results from a society increasingly atomized and isolated by fear, greater mobility and TV, among a few other things. Fear is the biggest. And Fascism does sound OK if its control mechanisms can create the semblance of security, order and “something solid” (see Berman’s “All that Is Solid Melts into Air: The Experience of Modernity”).

These just in from the labor historian. Let me know if you’ve read them already and I’ll ask for another batch.

Calvin Winslow, ed. Waterfront Workers: New Perspectives on Race and Class, Urbana: Univ. of Illinois Press, 1998. Includes an essay on Italian-American longshoremen in the New York Longshoremen’s Strike of 1907; Discussions of role of IWW in Philadelphia dockworkers’ lives from 1913 to 1922.

Emma Florence Langdon, Cripple Creek Strike: a History of Industrial Wars in Colorado, 1903-05, Great Western Publishing Co., 1905. Book written by IWW activist as a contemporary account of labor clashes in CO.

Dana Frank, Purchasing Power: Consumer Organizing, Gender, and the Seattle Labor Movement, 1919-29, Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1994.

Haven’t read any. Thanks very much for the list.

I’m an autodidact, i.e., someone who learns on her own & hated school, although I have an ADB. The benefit is that my head doesn’t get stuffed with the propaganda that the rulers want you to believe. The disadvantage is that it is sometimes hard to find just the books you’re looking for when you start a new subject.

I agree with all of these. In addition to what Margaret said about some real relief for those of us who haven’t had jobs or have had them sporadically at best, I’d add the following:

1) Caps on CEO income (assuming you don’t want to go with something more radical).

2) Address the fact that the Supreme Court has, throughout most of America’s history, been a grotesquely antidemocratic institution. Really, the Citizens’ United/Bush vs. Gore/anti-New Deal court has been the norm throughout America’s history, not the court of Brown vs. Board of Education.

3) State that Americans have rights to labor organizing, civil rights protection, quality education, and medical care explicitly.

4) As related to the original point about things getting worse if the problem is addressed through the current mechanisms for Constitutional change, change the mechanisms for both amendments and Constitutional conventions proper so that way they are a lot closer to the American population, with directly elected delegates instead of indirect state legislatures/members of Congress making the decisions.

Thanks for this post. A small addition:
http://www.spinelessbooks.com/unknown/burroughs.htm

“someone who learns on her own”
Is there another kind of educated person? :) It’s the only way. And as you say, half the battle is just fighting off the accepted bullshit, rules, myths and convention.

Yeah, well as an ABD you know that propaganda, the status quo, and the Right Answer usually throw trump in academia. And yes, sometimes it is hard to find the right book or research because of the exclusive nature, the scholasticism, of the Experts. Quite a few of them are even under the impression that unless their books are inaccessible to all but others in their field, they are not serious works. In the field of history, if a book becomes popular (the horror) or makes it to a best seller list, it usually becomes an object of scorn.

Have you read any John Ralston Saul, especially “The Doubter’s Companion” and “The Unconscious Civilization”?

I asked my friend about a good economic history covering the US economy prior to dominance by consumerism, say 1870s to 1920s. I’ll post when he emails back.

Another of his recommendations on labor: Making a New Deal: Industrial Workers in Chicago, 1919-1939 by Lizabeth Cohen

Some more titles.

From the email from my friend: “You might try Martin J. Sklar’s “Corporate Reconstruction of American Capitalism, 1890-1916.” There is a synthesis of history of politics and the law of the era with the synonymous emergence of corporate capitalism. A few warnings about this one, though: it is jargon-laden, from an elite p.o.v., and centers mostly on the so-called “Progressive Era” (TR, Taft, Wilson). It therefore might be too limited, and definitely this author comes off as an apologist for corporate liberalism.”

Scott Martelle, “Blood War: Ludlow Massacre and Class War in the American West,” Rutgers Univ., 2008

Melvyn Dubovsky, “We Shall Be All: A History of Industrial Workers of the World,” NY, Quadrangle, 1974

I’m late to this thread, which is in my domain of expertise. I think the situation is hopeless. Emigrate while you can.