Two depressions, three political groupings?
For two decades writers dubbed the 1914-1918 war “The Great War” or “The World War.” Then they had to call it “World War I.” For over half a century writers have called the 1930s economic wallow “The Great Depression.” I pray that we won’t have to start calling it “Great Depression I,” but political pressures can turn a sharp but short recession into a long-lasting depression, as they did during the 1930s (see Amity Shlaes’ terrific history, The Forgotten Man).
Michael Barone, the brilliant analyst of American politics, examines here why Barack Obama is beating John McCain in Pennsylvania: It’s essentially the poor plus affluent suburban folks—angered by the decline in the value of their homes and stocks—against the rest of the state. Barone concludes with this note: “The irony here is that voters motivated by anger at the decline in their wealth seem about to elect a president who has promised to embark on wealth-destroying policies.” It’s illogical that voters will choose the person who could turn a recession into Great Depression II, but this election may be the most faith-based in American history, with faith in Obama winning the day.
One other note: The alliance of rich and poor against the middle might not be as unusual as it seems. During the Great Depression reporters joked that folks in the “working class” were Democrats, the middle class Republicans, and the upper class Socialists.




Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!








Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top13 Comments to “Two depressions, three political groupings?”
Very politically correct Mr. Olasky. It is not an alliance of rich and poor.
It is black people voting for Obama because he is black.
It is white people voting for Obama because it is an easy way to feel noble.
These people made their decision long before the bailout fiasco.
Report comment to moderator
What we need are the Socialist policies of Sarah Palin’s Alaska. Alaska taxes oil companies and redistributes the wealth to every man, woman, and child, whether they work or not. This year a family of 4 will receive a check for over $13,000.00 under her socialist scheme.
Under a Palin-McCain administration, we could tax every industry like this and redistribute the wealth like Alaska. None of us would ever have to work again, and the more children you have, the more money you get.
Report comment to moderator
#1 Endless loop
#2 Endless loop
But wait, there’s more!
Report comment to moderator
It saddens me to see demogogues gin up the old class envy talk. Conrad Hilton amassed great wealth. I suspect Paris’ kids and grandkids will be waitresses or bldg custodians. Or as the saying went, some families go from overalls to tuxedos and then back to overalls. Playing class against class will work in this country (”He’s gonna put the shaft to THEM, but we’ll be safe”)
A de-politicized flat tax or national sales tax coupled with term limits and putting more issues to voters via referenda.. that would kill the Class Envy Demogogue monster once and for all
Report comment to moderator
I’m not a blog writer, but I registered just to celebrate sawgunner!! You get it and I’m so glad to know there are more of us out there. WaHooooooo!
Report comment to moderator
Here’s a side topic.
When Sarah Palin was aked whether she voted for Ted Stevens, her reply:
“I am also exercising my right to privacy and I don’t have to tell anyone who I voted for, nobody does, and that’s really cool about America, also.”
My opinion: If she’s waiting for the appeals process to work itself out, then say so. And maybe she should “recuse” herself from casting a vote in that race. But what purpose does voting and then keeping it secret serve?
If she votes against Stevens, then that’s an easy ethical decision. He’s a convicted felon. Granted, he will seek an appeal. But the current verdict is guilty. Not voting for him could be seen as admirable. Romans 13: obey and respect the just laws of the land. Stevens appears NOT to have done so, so don’t give him your vote.
But if she still voted for him, then explain it.
Instead, she took the path of a typical politician. She followed the “patterns of this world.” She covered her political a$$ in Alaska. Ted Stevens is powerful, and perhaps the sort of power Stevens’ wields is more appealing to Palin than other sorts of power.
http://gawker.com/5076063/rogue-palin-wont-say-who-she-voted-for
Report comment to moderator
“The irony here is that voters motivated by anger at the decline in their wealth seem about to elect a president who has promised to embark on wealth-destroying policies.”
The best ads in the campaign were 401K statements. College-educated Whites estimate that the likelihood of obtaining or maintaining an adjusted gross income above $250K any time soon was not worth the risk that the economy would do to them what it has done to people earning less than medium income. Growth doesn’t lift all boats. These upper-middles who voted decisively for W. understand McCain’s warnings against socialism. No matter how proud they may be of their achievements, many also understand that government has a role in fostering and protecting wealth while the market seems to be applying for government disability checks.
Aside from self-interested calculation, the wealthy sense that being warm and feeling warm are not the same. Harry Gill was perfectly justified in objecting to Goody Blake taking fuel from his winter hedges. Nevertheless, the night he caught her and made her drop his kindling on the ground was the last night he ever felt warm again (a true story, reported by Wm. Wordsworth).
Report comment to moderator
Douglas – Why is it anyone’s business who she voted for? When rude people who have no political axe to grind with me ask me, I tell them it’s none of their business how I voted, and I have nothing to hide. That’s why we have a secret ballot here in the US. If she wants to volunteer the information, that’s her business, but no one should be rude enough to ask, and no one should think that she should be compelled to reveal it either.
Report comment to moderator
Politicians aren’t supposed to have secret positions.
Report comment to moderator
#9 Scroop Moth
Politicians aren’t supposed to have secret positions.
Absolutely right. Especially when it comes to politicians from their own states who have been recently convicted of a felony.
Report comment to moderator
Olasky looks at this election with too narrow a horizon. Shortly after he takes office, Obama will observe the 200th anniversary of the birth of Abraham Lincoln. Towards the end of his term, Obama will observe the 150th anniversary of the firing on Ft. Sumter. In the grand speeches he is sure to give on these occasions, Obama might tell us that Lincoln resolved an incompatible difference between the way Northerners and Southerners viewed the federal government. Obama will recommend a further reconciliation.
Olasky’s right that economic theory was the chief argument of the campaign. Obama promoted progressive ideas and policies with increasing clarity, if not recklessness when he promised to “spread the wealth,” as if there were no difference between income and assets. McCain, on the other hand, called Obama a socialist and “redistributor.” I can’t recall an election framed this explicitly. What makes it all the more amazing is that college-educated White people significantly agreed with Obama.
We won’t analyze on this blog the effects of progressive policies on economic growth — professionals will. Fortunately, we don’t need to, because America has told Obama, “Yes, you may.”
Report comment to moderator
Barone writes:
“The irony here is that voters motivated by anger at the decline in their wealth seem about to elect a president who has promised to embark on wealth-destroying policies.”
The irony disappears when one understands the role of the MSM in this election. Voter anger was manipulated by the Democrats and their MSM propaganda machine in order to divert attention from the chief culprits in this debacle: the Community Reinvestment Act, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac, all of which are Democrat pets, presided over by Barney Frank (D) and Christopher Dodd (D).
There is no irony, just deceived and ignorant voters.
Olasky writes:
”During the Great Depression reporters joked that folks in the “working class” were Democrats, the middle class Republicans, and the upper class Socialists.”
It is not much different today. Using the MSM, upper class Democrats keep their lower class Democrats in a state of anger and constant dependency. The party elite buy the greedy votes of their lower class goats with money stolen from the middle class. This is always the way of Marxism/Socialism. But the really big profiteers are the ones at the top—people like the Kennedys, Clintons, etc., and now the Obamas.
Move over if you don’t want to be trampled, the stampede for the feeding troughs will begin in earnest after January 20th.
Report comment to moderator
Good food for thought in these early, post-election days…
Shane Claiborne: Christianity Transcends National Borders/Nationalism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXSj0ZUHTJg
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!