Fighting Back in America's 30-Year Class War

by: Jim Hightower  |  Creators Syndicate

Fighting Back in America's 30-Year Class War
David Brooks. (Photo: Getty Images)

    David Brooks was upset. You can tell when this conservative and rather-professorial columnist for The New York Times gets upset, because his words almost sag with disappointment - you can practically hear the tsk-tsks and the heavy sighs in each paragraph. When most commentators on the right see things that offend them, they get snarling mad; Brooks gets sad.

    What saddened Brother Brooks this time was Barack Obama's budget. In a recent column, he noted that the $3.6 trillion total is "gargantuan" (we columnists are paid to make keen observations like that), but what really upset him was that the tax burden to finance universal health care, energy independence and other big initiatives in Obama's budget "is predicated on a class divide."

    With heavy sighs, Brooks expressed great despair that "no new burdens will fall on 95 percent of the American people," adding with a tsk-tsk that "all the costs will be borne by the rich and all benefits redistributed downward."

    Leaving aside the fact that such things as health-care coverage for every American and a booming green energy economy will benefit the rich as well as the rest of us, Brooks' column was echoing a prevalent theme in all of the right's attacks on Obama's economic proposals: Class War! Indeed, the Times' columnist even suggested (sadly) that Obama's budget was fundamentally un-American: "The U.S. has never been a society riven by class resentment," he sniffed.

    Whoa, professor, get a grip! Better yet, get a good history book (Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States" would be an eye-opening place to start). While our schools, media and politicians rarely mention it, America's history is replete with class rebellions against various moneyed elites who act as though they're the top dogs and ordinary folks are just a bunch of fire hydrants.

    Check out the Tenant Uprisings of 1766, Shay's Rebellion in the 1780s, the Workingmen's Movement of the 1830s ... on into the post-Civil War populist movement that confronted the robber barons, the bloody labor battles at Haymarket and Homestead in the late 1800s, Coxey's Army in 1894, the Bonus March of 1932, the Penny Auctions by farmers in the 1920s and '30s, the rise of the CIO in the Depression years ... and right into modern-day fights involving environmental justice, fair trade, women's pay, workplace safety, tenant rights, janitors, farmworkers, union-busting, bank redlining, consumer gouging, clean elections and so forth.

    If Brooks & Co. are so isolated as to imagine that our citizenry harbors no class resentment, they should go to any Chat & Chew Cafe across the land and listen to the locals express their innermost feelings about today's greedheaded Wall Streeters who wrecked our economy for their own enrichment. There is a fury in the countryside toward these plutocratic purse-snatchers who are being allowed to keep their exalted executive positions, draw fat paychecks and get trillions of dollars in bailout money from common taxpayers. People don't merely resent them, they yearn for the legalization of tar-and-feathering!

    Yet, Brooks and his political brethren are now bemoaning the plight of the plutocrats, assailing the "redistributionists" who talk of spreading America's wealth. In his column, Brooks cried out for a conservative vision of "a nation in which we're all in it together - in which burdens are shared broadly, rather than simply inflicted on a small minority."

    Do we look like we have suckerwrappers around our heads? Where were these tender-hearted champions of sharing throughout the last 30 years, when that same "small minority" was absolutely giddy with redistributionist fervor - redistributing upward, that is?

    With the full support of their political hirelings from both parties, this minority created tax dodges, trade scams, corporate subsidies, deregulation fantasies, financial hustles, de-unionization schemes, bankruptcy loopholes and other mechanisms that turned government into a redistributionist bulldozer, shoving wealth from the workaday majority into their own pockets.

    Brooks might have missed this 30-year class war, but most folks have been right in the thick of it and are not the least bit squeamish about supporting a national effort to right those wrongs. After all, even a dog knows the difference between being stumbled over - and being kicked.

All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.





     

»




Comments

This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.



Gotta love Hightower... Ya

Gotta love Hightower... Ya where was Brooks when the rich were taking the increases in worker productivity and stuffing their pockets with it while returning nothing to the workers? In 1960 a household only needed one breadwinner, now most need two and still struggle. Where was Brooks when big business was shipping all our industry overseas in the biggest defeat of the working man ever in this class war, forcing wages down for "We the People", leaving the working people to battle for jobs by taking less, much like the fruit and vegetable pickers did as described in "The Grapes of Wrath"?. What does Brooks think of the monopoly over wage that now is collectively held by the rich international businesses while our government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich entirely gutted the potency of labor law and the NLRB? It will be tough on those rich folks, only having 4 yachts instead of 5, only having 8 homes instead of 10 (like John McCain), and having the working class' children get enough nutrition to grow up healthy and be able to see a doctor from time to time. I'm overwhelmed in my sympathy for Brooks and those he supports.


Way to go Jim! It's too bad

Way to go Jim! It's too bad you can't get on the Lehrer Report and take this korporatist on mano-a-mano. Now that could increase PBS's ratings! I might even pledge.


I pledge allegiance to the

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Corporations for which it stands. One Nation underpaid, easily divisible, with intolerance and injustice for some.


There was a telling exchange

There was a telling exchange during the 2004 Presidential debates. Bush assured listeners that government programs being put forward by the Democrats would result in higher taxes for the majority of citizens because, he inferred, the rich don't pay taxes. They "have accountants" to exploit loopholes and leave the taxpaying to everyone else. An accurate, if rarely stated analysis - which gave his opponent a huge opportunity for debate points with an attack on such biased tax practices. I don't think I've ever witnessed such a blatant opening in any debate. Kerry, as with so much else, let it go right by him.


Why are we not all members

Why are we not all members of the IWW? Because the rich man's well-funded spokespeople appeal to the worst in us, our self-aggrandizement? Isn't this the whole basis of our vaunted economy? Atomized individuals, discouraged from working together, seated at our own little desk, behind some counter, speaking and acting only as directed? "U.S. Leaders have striven with much success to repress (1) the emergence of competing forms of production (socialist, collectivist, communitarian); and (2) competing capital formations (prosperous autonomous capitalist economies, or mixed ones, in emerging nations, and with FTAA and GATS, all public sector services except police and military in all capitalist countries. The goal is the Third Worldization of the entire world, including Europe and North America, a world in which capital rules supreme with no public sector services; no labor unions to speak of; no prosperous, literate, effectively organized working class with rising expectations; no pension funds or environmental, consumer, and occupational protections, or medical plans, or any of the other insufferable things that cut into profit rates." (Michael Parenti)


Once more, the right wing,

Once more, the right wing, which has engaged in a vicious class war for lo, these many years, engages in its favourite psychic defence mechanism- projection. Time to call them out on it.


The upper classes get upset

The upper classes get upset when they are being treated like the working classes of this country. The killing of 3000 people, many of the making above average incomes, in the collapse of the Trade Towers was a considered a national tragedy while the deaths of 3000 soldiers in Iraq in a war based on lies is somehow much less important as the members of Congress are not in contact with the low income men and women serving in the military or running into their parents either in the corridors of power or at the local country club. There is the same different standard between millions of working class families losing their homes, either due to predatory lending practices or just losing their jobs and their medical insurance, and all the media attention given to the victims of Bernie Maddoff where the price for entry was $100,000 or more and the people affected has to sell one of their multimillion dollar homes and start drinking cheaper champagne. All those earning less than $300K a year, who have not realized the taking from the poor and middle classes to give to the rich that has been accelerating since Ronald Reagan made Calvinism cool, is also part of the problem when they vote for a McCain or cheer a Rush Limbaugh.


Great article. This should

Great article. This should be on PBS! Never have liked Brooks, because he's a paradox. Meaning, sometimes he says smart things, and sometimes he says/writes stupid things. To deny there is a class structure in this country, is one of the stupid things, on his part.


The nonsense in Brooks'

The nonsense in Brooks' column enraged me when it was first printed and it just did it again. 1. "All the costs will be borne by the rich and all benefits redistributed downward" Look, girlyboy. The lower 95% will still be paying taxes and carrying more than their fair share of the burden. And the rich will also get access to the same medical care. 2. "The budget is predicated on a class divide." And just what were Bush's budgets and policies predicated on? He moved money from the working class to the idle rich. He changed government policy to move as much money as possible into the pockets of his fellow plutocrats via privatization and no bid contracts. Mr. Brooks, you are becoming less and less relevant.


I refuse to pledge

I refuse to pledge allegiance to anything! Not to a flag, not to a country, not to a religion or a belief. I question authority on everything, and since I am naturalized French, I have learned that this is normal in my country of choice. But then, I am also a Socialist (perhaps that explains it all). Just this old Chief's 2¢


The revolution is on, but a

The revolution is on, but a different sort of revolution. We start with local foods, sold in local shops by local folks; we don't by the brands of those who oppose us; we don't shop at the way-stations to the city dump AKA Walmart, Target, etc; needing less, we spend more on local crafts and manufacture; we watch less television; we visit more with neighbors and friends; we've more reflective contemplating the causes of our dismay and happiness; we learn from our children and our parents and grandparents; we are sympathetic to those we don't understand; we strive to understand our places in the world beyond the nonsense offered up by Fox News and the Wall Street Journal;and, most of all, we take the time to know ourselves.


I cannot help but wonder

I cannot help but wonder where Mr Hightower found my old answering machine from the Reagan-Bush 1980`s... that message said; "Ever feel like a fire hydrant & the only building around for miles was constructed of stone and it was the dog pound"


Brooks hasn't been right

Brooks hasn't been right about anything since he hung out with Nancy Reagan.


I wonder what would happen

I wonder what would happen if everyone who is outraged (finally) would simply refuse to file their taxes this year? Or if we the people could organize a national general strike?? Hmmm...


Meanwhile, AIG just

Meanwhile, AIG just announced yet another $165 million of our tax dollars would be doled out as executive bonuses to keep "the best and the brightest".


Yes, indeed. Jim Hightower

Yes, indeed. Jim Hightower should be on NPR and the Lehrer Report and take these " korporatist on mano-a-mano." Now that SURELY could increase PBS's ratings! It would certainly increase my pledges. I'd be dying to get home in time to watch Jim among the "safe gang" that PBS has coddled for years. And while we're at it, how about adding Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky once in a while? I'm the common [wo]man. Don't I deserve to be represented too?


Go back and look at the

Go back and look at the origins of democracy and you will find that the Athenians put the short-lived system in place as a way to keep the aristocracy in check. No professional politicians. Now we call this "radical democracy." It has always been about class and always will be.


Why do people even buy the

Why do people even buy the Times, or the WSJ, or any of the advertisement-stuffed monolithic-syndicate papers anyway? You can get all the news you can handle online at the local library. (Comics, too.)

Grow food, trade with neighbors, hold block garage sales, use public resources. Screw brand names and phony advertisements. Let them eat cake.



If Brooks is in the Boston

If Brooks is in the Boston area next week, he is invited to my tea party.


Bravo!!! How about tackling

Bravo!!! How about tackling healthcare by having our elected representatives join the common folks, rejecting their Federal health system that I have heard whispered every so often and be in the same boat as the voters. thanks


There he goes again! Ol'

There he goes again! Ol' Jim Hightower out there by his lonesome fighting the class war. Come on, Jim, you know that 95% of us are all one big happy "working class" glad for the ongoing privilege of having the top 5% batten off of us and let their leavings trickle down on us. Now that's sacrificing for your country!


Don't piss down my back and

Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining Mr. Brooks (and a tip of the hat to Josey Wales)!


Wow — I like that bit

Wow — I like that bit about a nation in which "burdens are shared broadly, rather than simply inflicted on a small minority." Make you think, doesn't it? The burden Brooks is talking about is that of crime: robbery, fraud, ect. But why restrict this splendid proposal to white-collar crime? Let's open all the prisons and broadly share the consequences of murder, rape, ect., instead of simply inflicting them on a small minority, the guilty! The parallel is exact.


I am always so amused when

I am always so amused when conservatives (usually with a religious or moral tone in their voices) talk about the shame of redistributed wealth. That concept comes directly out of the Christian Bible: Much will be required from everyone to whom much has been given. But even more will be demanded from the one to whom much has been entrusted. (Luke 12:48) Everybody on the right wants us to be a Christian nation. Except when it comes to having a President who actually governs with Christian values...


The chief 'Bobo in Paradise'

The chief 'Bobo in Paradise' does it again! Mr. Brooks needs to get some new intellectual glasses. Remember the trickle down economics of the past thirty years? Any plumber could have told him that the pee trap was clogged and the nation's wealth wasn't making it down to the workroom floor. President Obama got a new plumber, who wasn't on the take, to run a snake through and start the trickle. Isn't this what the conservatives meant to happen in the first place? Or were they just blowing smoke up your skirts to get your votes?


Too bad that so many of

Too bad that so many of those same people are also blaming: (1) those who are overweight & smoke; (2) those welfare cheats; (3) immigrants: with sometimes no distinction made between legal immigrants, illegal immigrants & refugees; (4) uppity women, etc. There's plenty of time & money being spent to divide people on non-economic grounds and I'd bet it's partly by the wealthy (see Peterson and his desire, funded by millions of his own & other rich jerks, to see the US Social Security program, disappear/be privatized). No different than what happened in the south after the Civil war to prevent blacks & poor whites from utilizing their combined voting & economic strength.


To Zookeeper - We watch less

To Zookeeper - We watch less television? Yes - The other day a guy told me over the counter in a shop that 'it' was "as good as the ones on TV". Duh! I believe the first ingredient in the recipe for happiness is need control. To that measurement there is a whole class of people whose job is to make you unhappy: marketers, who make you need what you didn't know existed a minute before. An the TV guys who sell them your brain time. A TV? Not for me - thanks, even if you pay me for that. Less TV indeed.