Indeed, this is a competent summary. I don’t think they “hate” the poor, rather their hubris regards them as little more than animals, beasts of burden here to serve them. Like all people, some may treat their animals decently and a few are openly cruel. The goal seems to be a 21st century of the feudal model. We are serfs who are allowed to exist if we remain useful and don’t get uppity. Kristi Noem secured her bona fides when she wrote about shooting a dog that was not useful to her, therefore it didn’t deserve to live. A cold,cruel person who fits the mold. Love has no place in their world and they certainly are not Christians.
Another recent example of MAGA/Trumpian depravity exemplifying the regard the wealthy and powerful have for the common folks who just want to survive free from fear is that deplorable prison DeSantis built on the Everglades. The despicable press secretary was on television yesterday gloating about the prison, the dangers, the fact that prisoners won’t have air conditioning and so on. Her eyes were gleaming, she was full of glee. This is reminiscent of some of the ugliest parts of history throughout the world where humansfile into places like the Colosseum to watch slaves fight to the death and so on. And we thought we were more civilized than this.
Julie, you said "we thought we were more civilized than this" It is really "I am more civilized than this"
An honest man thinks every one is honest, a crook thinks everyone is crooked.
We don't live in the heads of others, so the only way we can assess the behavior of others is by projecting. until we are forced to face the fact that we are not they.
You are quite obviously a good and decent person with empathy, and thus think that others are like you.
You are right, William. It took me a long time to figure out that many (not all) people "think" with their emotions, are wedded to their beliefs, no matter how illogical, to give themselves meaning, and neither want more information nor will speak up. And sadly that people like the miserable ones in the GOP gang assume everyone else is either a fool or as mean spirited, greedy and crooked as they are.
While I would argue that it is important not to assume we know what other people think or believe, and I do see a lot of this but mostly with reference to people/groups we don’t interact with frequently, or at all.
The truth is that social life and social acts is much smoother when we take care in predicting the attitudes and behaviors of others. Sure, we may project, some more so, other less so. But we don’t usually do so from a position of ignorance.
One of the ways we “know” what other people think or how they see things is as members of society, they likely have similar shared meanings of the different situations, roles and statuses in which most of interactions take place. As a simple example, If I walk into a classroom, I likely share with everyone else there a general idea of what is supposed to happen there, the status and roles people will take, and the attitudes and behaviors associated with their roles. F course, each of us may have a somewhat unique way of being in those roles and status, and from the first class meeting, there will be various negotiations between relative rules as to the specifics of how each Individual will “make” their role in that class. But coordination is necessary to some degree, or the expected outcome of the situation will not occur. And given that most situations, the relative status and roles not necessarily equal,- ie the teacher is usually understood to have the ability to sanction behavior of students - there are boundaries to acceptable behavior, and negative consequences for those failing to respect those boundaries.
Even in this example, it’s highly unlikely that everyone is just projecting on others; in fact, interaction depends on a collective effort (and success) in gauging the perspectives and behavior of the others in the situation.
Whatever we are doing that involves other people, we use a multitude of strategies to get through the situation. And to our end goal: We have a shared meaning system, including shared definitions of situations and their component parts, we can use our observations of others, and our conversations as well. When dealing with people in the abstract, we also have our history of interactions with people from different social groups, we probably have read about how people from different groups or certain political or social identities perceive and act, we also, unfortunately have prejudices and biases about this or that group, and so on.
In short, we don’t usually enter a particular social situation without attempting to take the perspective of others and the better we are at it, the more likely we will have a positive social Interaction.
We do the same even in the abstract. We use what George Mead called a “generalized other,l or actually, I rolls argue multiple generalized others. This is a set of ideas we carry around with us about “them” or “those people”. I know we all catch ourselves trying to imagine how “they” will see us (especially when we are trying to dress for the occasion) or preparing ourselves for a new kind of experience, or first day at the job. I imagine we have e a generalized other for just about any situation we may find ourselves in.
While it’s true that sometimes our anticipation of how “they” will see us, or respond to us and/or our actions (our speech. Performance, presentation, or just our presence) will turn out to be wrong, most of us learn how to adjust as we go along. But we probably don’t do so by simply projecting into ourselves, our own beliefs or attitudes, unless we have a sense that this projection fits the views of others.
My point here is that no, as a rule, we don’t just project our own attitudes and behaviors in others. Maybe, if don’t expect anyone to know that we did so and might be wrong, or we are being lazy and doing so doesn’t affect our own objectives.
The only exception I can think of, is of someone has the power to expect everyone else to adapt to my projection, especially if I have the power to punish those who fail to adapt and/or do so quick enough.
I guess maybe, if someone is so extremely positive, and has never been around anyone who isn’t, they may go around with that Polly Annish view that everyone is wonderfully positive. Likewise, if I’m such a miserable angry and distrustful person, I might not believe that anyone could truly be anything else. But these are extreme exceptions, and of held in social interactions, would likely leave them with many problematic situations and many failed social acts.
I’ll give you this - people often make errors in their assumptions about the attitudes or behaviors of groups of people they have little or no personal experience with or information about. Prejudice (positive or negative) thrives in these conditions.
We may also overgeneralize our own views, especially if we are not around people who have different points of view. I see this happen quite often. But it’s less about projection and more about lack of exposure to the likely range of viewpoints out there.
In my experience, I’ve actually found that there is a difference between what people say in the context of a highly partisan encounter and what they say when discussing specific issues that matter to them, when partisan identity is not made an issue. It’s in the latter encounters that I have learned that most Americans want the same thing, a decent life, with job that pays their bills, a safe and comfortable home. Good schools for their children, a belief that opportunities for advancing their economic and lifestyle status will be available, a safe and strong community and politicians who actually listen to them and represent their needs and interests.
Of course; anyone can turn these shared interests into Partisan disagreements, not because of any any real party difference in the value of these interests but by smelly twisting them into attacks against the other.
The irony here is that these interests aren’t rocket science. They make sense, they are totally understandable and we know that a growing proportion of America is struggling to have lives that reflect these interests.
In this case, the problem isn’t with projecting, it’s confusing partisan rhetoric with what people really want. I’ve had no problem talking with people across the partisan landscape on these issues. And I admit to be somewhat amazed at how consistently people agree that these are the issues they wish their government would work on improving. These are shared interests of the people, and it would seem the only people who wouldn’t see things this way are those who have an interests in denying these outcomes to the American people. I think Hartman is right on in his argument. If politicians really cared about their constituents, they would be doing everything in their power to make their interests a reality. But it politicians only want a vote and to support their wealthy donors they will twist these shared interests until they become reasons to hate the opponent. Sadly, those caught up in this hateful rhetoric think they are getting support for their interests, but instead are being used to power those who want nothing of the kind. (And we need to step back from judging them for their error- this destruction of the working people (whether they call themselves middle class or not) started decades ago, and I don’t recall too many people protesting those early actions that would eventually bite them in the ass. Just be glad you managed to get the knowledge now. I spend my energy looking for ways to explain these negative trends in America to those who don’t have the knowledge or experience to see them yet. It took me a lot of education and effort to have the perspective I have today; I won’t look down at people who haven’t had the luck I had in escaping the economic bondage that kept me from the knowledge and development of intellect that allows me to see the larger picture today.
I've know quite a few in my life, was married to one.
There is no way for anyone to know what pleases another, so a people pleaser has no choice but to project.
People pleasers will modify their behavior to please their audience, which is often the public. Yet they have no idea what the others may or may not think, much less care.
Back in the 90's when cell phones were bricks and you had to live in an area where there was a tower. I had a friend, who would drive down the freeway
(I-5 from San Francisco to San Jose) holding one of those bricks, pretending they wares talking to some, just to impress people she didn't know nor would ever see again.
People will say anything to get your attention, especially when they are trying to sell you something, like in politics or vacuum cleaners or a car. But you have no idea what is really going on their mind.
Why did you feel it was necessary to say that you don't look down on people.?
The thought never crossed my mind. Looking down on people? I feel for folks who aren't as well off as myself. And I consider myself lower to middle middle class, a product of a single mother raised in a project, who was a puny punk who had to learn to take care of myself and not be bullied.
Fortunately I have made some good choice in life, and in my old age, I am very comfortable, no economic worries, only health worries, and I am very, very pro active as regards my health, not a hypochondriac (the only medication I take is metformin), but I monitor all my vital signs daily or more than daily from blood glucose to blood pressure and oxygen levels. I even sleep with an oxygen concentrator hooked up to my CPAP machine, No debts, not mortgage, Medicare and Tricare for life, but I am still lower to middle middle class and wouldn't think of looking down on anyone, and do what I can to help those less fortunate.
So why would you even think about looking down on someone, the thought never ever crossed my mind.
Here is the way I see the world. I am no a mind reader, I don't know what others think, thus I can only respond to their behavior. Because I don't know what others think, there is no way I can behave in a manner that pleases them.
Because I have no way to know what pleases them. So I live my life with the axiom "to thy own self be true"
Social living, requires that one live a life that is respectful of others,to be fair and honest , respectful and considerate in all interactions, caveat repay debts in like coin,and don't tolerate bullshit, Meaning I don't and can't tolerate MAGAts. or people whose beliefs would tread on my right to live
I apologize, I did not intend the latter part of my comment to seem like it was directed at you. When I wrote it, I meant it to be a general statement of what I perceive taking place in our social discourse. More precisely, when I said “we need to step back from judging them for their error” I was continuing my line of thought, not responding to something you wrote.
I do see that I must have been tired writing so much as there a number of typos and I was inconsistent with my use of pronouns, all of which could make it hard for anyone to make sense of what I was trying to say.
As for the rest of your response, it interesting. I don’t think a person has to be a “people pleaser” to adjust and adapt their behavior in a situation. Theory and research indicates this is something we all do in order to achieve our objective.
We don’t read each other’s minds, but we do pay attention to how people act, over all and in a given situation, and adjust our own behavior accordingly to improve the likelihood of a situation working out the way we prefer. We attempt to read each other, to take one another’s perspective to reach our objective.
This is just basic human social behavior. We adjust and adapt, up to a point, depending on how important our personal and shared objectives are. Yes, there are those who feel they shouldn’t have to engage in the give and take of social interactions; Ive witnessed the awkwardness of the unrelenting actor who makes a scene because while they expect all other actors to bend to their will, they refuse to compromise themselves (often over something rather minor, like someone bumping into them, or outrage because a cashier won’t take their check).
I believe that social life is possible only because we all not only share a set of meanings and understanding of the basic rules of social life, but also through taking the perspective of others (not mind reading of course, but based on everything we know about the others status, situational role, their expressions, their actions, so on) and adapting, adjusting and compromising, often in what feels like a split second. Why? Because we want to get to our objective, and more coordinated our interactions with others is, the easier it is for us to reach our objective, with as little hassle as possible
Of course, if we are in a mood, irritated or edgy, we might deliberately obstruct others acts, especially if we’ve decided they have offended us somehow - like refusing let someone merge into our lane in the road, or just be contrary in our interactions with others.
We have the freedom to choose to make things more complex, to make situations more difficult, but we also have the choice to adjust and compromise just so we can move through a social engagement more easily.
We spend most of our lives in micro level interactions. But our actions are also shaped, constrained or otherwise affected by macro conditions. Most of us choose which battles are worth fighting, that is by refusing to adjust, adapt or compromise, it may even be part of our objective in a given situation (ie during political protest), and for the rest, the process of working our way through situations and social acts is largely automatic.
I’d also argue people in a given society are not totally free nor totally controlled. We are not as different from one another as we think we are, but we’re also not all the same. We don’t read minds, but we depend largely on the shared meanings, taking the perspective of the other, and being able to adjust, adapt or even compromise when despite all the above, we miscalculate in our prediction of how others will behave, to what ever degree we are willing in order to achieve our objective.
For the most part, much of these daily interaction takes place while we are on automatic - we don’t think much about it. Sometimes, though, a situation requires our more focused attention, at which time we have to decide what is more important - getting through to the other side of situation and move on, or to stand our ground. But no matter what; social life does require some level of compromise, most of it insignificant. It’s the costs of living in a society, benefiting from the perks of being part of collective (actually humans are social animals, and even though some of us may check out - we tend to call them hermits and we often perceived them to be mentally unbalanced (being alone all the time can make you a little nuts- I speak from experience), it’s likely that our survival over the last 1-3 million years is largely due to the fact that we live in groups (as earth species go, humans are pretty vulnerable alone).
That’s just my take, based on sociological and social psychological perspectives of human interaction. It’s less a perfect description of any one person, and more a description of social patterns of behavior.
Reptilian life abounds. The name has already inspired the Florida Republican Party to sell shirts, hats and koozies with the what appears to be AI-generated images of a prison with gators and pythons. Uthmeier, a DeSantis appointee, is also selling “Alligator Alcatraz” gear – including bumper stickers, golf balls and coffee mugs that say “Nowhere to run. Nowhere to hide” – to raise political cash for his 2026 election.
Mr. Solomon thank you for that citation. It is ALMOST unbelievable. But we live in cynical times which remind me of the historical period of Machiavelli's time. The most cynical and perhaps sinister period in European history.
For years I have carried on polemic with colleagues and friends over the question: Which is a more powerful motive, love, or hate? This is a far more complicated and difficult topic than at first appears. We have never come to a resolution of the argument.
I think, however, it is accurate to say today, that hatred is the primary motive of those in power. And cruelty is their policy.
By genealogy, Daniel, do you mean DNA. Liberalism, sexual orientation and gender identity . or even basic identity, are not passed down via DNA There are legions of blacks that identify as whites, like Mark Robinson, Kanye, Candace Owens, Herschel Walker, Tim Scott, B yron Donalds, even Stephen a. Smith.
Mr. Farrar, in order to acquire a conviction in criminal court, it is necessary to prove both actus reus and mens rea.
Actus reus is the question of whether or not the accused performed the criminal act.
Mens rea is the question of whether or not the accused harbored intent to perform the act.
Because of Mr. Solomon's years as a magistrate, his thinking is perhaps often way ahead of the rest of us, on these matters. I have sometimes found it difficult to follow him. I am not trying to speak for him here, however.
In many years of teaching Criminology, it was necessary to discuss this subject with my students.
Thanks. I find myself often chiding people, especially on Quora for using Acronyms, especially esoteric ones. Military is one example.
There are many words and terms that are meaningless to lay people,but those accustomed to it by trade or training, seem to take it for granted that they are universally understood.
For decades, Thom Hartman has challenged his listeners and viewers, with money on the table, for anyone to name one single GOP legislation that has explicitly benefited the general public and the poor. So far, nobody has come forward to name one. This means, since the New Deal and the Great Society legislations, the GOP has been working relentlessly to dismantle the middle class and screw us to the benefit of the morbidly rich. That voters send these people to congress year after year tells how completely conned we have been.
Corporate, establishment Democrats are perfectly happy to perpetuate the the cancerous decline of American democracy, as witness their response to Zorhan Mamdani’s victory in the NYC Democratic mayoral primary. Thrilled? Hardly. Muted at best, passive-aggressive subversive too often. Mamdani out-polls the Democratic Party spectacularly; there’s a lesson in that.
Concerning Mamdani, his critics profess concern that he is a Muslim, or that he is a Socialist, but they are really afraid that he actually responds to the concerns of voters.
That is it Jeff, attacks on Mamdani for being a Muslim or a socialist, are typical political attacks.They mask the real concern, that he is not up for sale and can't be bought.
Remember Max Cleland, Senator from Georgia, the man was a genuine war hero, lost an arm and both legs in Vietnam, and Karl Rove painted him as an upatriotic coward because he opposed Dubya's criminal war.
Thom, when you explained modernization theory, it immediately dawned on me that Russell Kirk, and Republicans in general, saw this theory "through a glass darkly". Surely enough, as I read on, you did make that observation. The growth of the middle class, and the concomitant growth of democratic socialism, are an existential threat to the Republican ideal of a corporatist feudalism. That's why they declared war on us (the Powell memo), and have been winning ever since.
Since Mamdani's win, there is more and more open talk about democratic socialism (I am one). It is relevant at this time to revisit Milovan Djilas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milovan_Djilas a self describe democratic socialist, and once consider for President of the Soviet Union,
defines the new class in this chapter as the political bureaucracy, "a monopoly over the working class itself". This "new class actually seized the lion's share of the economic and other progress earned by the sacrifices and efforts of the masses". Djilas attributes the rise of this new class to Stalin.[4]: 37–69
Djilas claims the Communist Party "is the backbone of the entire political, economic, and ideological activity," with public life determined by "what happens party forums". He further states, "Regardless of laws, everyone knows that the government is in the hands of the party committees and the secret police"
In that he could be talking of the Republican party and MAGAts today. The BBB passed the Senate and authorizes 45,000 additional Sturmabeitlung, Stasi thugs for Trump.
Djilas said: that the party-state officials formed a class which "uses, enjoys and disposes of nationalised property".[3]
If you understand that the Soviet Union was actually seven trusts , and of the seven the trust for human resources (the KGB) was the most powerful and feared, then you might understand that when the USSR's economy was reorganized, these trusts were sold off to KGB agents and thus the oligarchs
Russian oligarchs gained power through the privatization of state-owned assets following the collapse of the Soviet Union, often through opaque and corrupt practices. These individuals, with close ties to political elites, amassed vast fortunes by acquiring valuable enterprises at discounted prices or through state contracts, sometimes with little to no actual investment. generative AI
Mr. Farrar, I was unaware that Milovan Djilas was considered a contender for the presidency of the USSR. He was Yugoslavian, was he not?
After the USSR collapsed in 1989 the eager young followers of the bean-counting, abstract empiricist Milton Friedman swarmed out of the University of Chicago and travelled to Moscow to advise those aspiring Russian oligarchs how best to privatize the Russian economy. The dangerous, extremely stratified, fascist mess we see now, is the result.
Yes Gerald he was a Yugoslavian. A democratic socialist, not a communist
Well Friedman was followed by the Bank for International Settlements in 84 or 85 Annual Report (my copies are in the garage in boxes), where it stated that the Soviet Union was a failed economic experiment and needs to be restructured.
The major problem, economically, besides the fact that the state, meaning the council, owned and directed everything is that there was a perpetual depression because the ruble was tied 100% to gold. The ruble was valued at .9851 grams fine gold, and only enough roubles were printed as the store of gold permitted, thus a perpetual shortage of roubles, hence a perpetual depression
They hate the poor too! Medicaid is only for the poor. Slashing Medicaid is this CR bill’s main focus. Medicaid is only available if your income is virtually nil, i.e., your prove that you are very poor. Republicans have not heard Blessed are the poor. We are responsible for these people. https://hotbuttons.substack.com/p/the-25-trillion-annual-deficit-plan?r=3m1bs
Alan Grayson said it, the Republican health care plan
Don't get sick, and if you do then die quickly.
To them we are cogs in a machine and when a tooth wears down, chuck it and replace it.
The tragic irony is that most of the cogs are MAGAts.
After Obama's election, Alexandra Pelosie, a documentarian, visited the south and produced a documentary "The Right Feeling Wrong".
Standing on the crate that served as his door step, in front of his trash strewn lawn, and his dilapidated Single Wide, was a snaggled toothed, bib overalled dude answering her questions.
"Why are you opposed to food stamps?" She asked. Because them lazy nigrahs don't deserve them.
She responded: But you get food stamps as well. His reply;'"That's different I deserve them"
This is why I believe that the blue states and any other state that wants to live in a free democratic society should seceed from the union and join Canada. There is no way to get out from under the thumb of the Supreme Court and their ruling in the 1970's to allow the money men to bribe and eventually control the electoral process. They have total control now and nothing can stop them. They will end democracy before the people will have any power left to stop them. The ball game is over.
This design for poverty keeps us from having the "beloved community" that John Lewis spoke about.
Republicans are once again proving with their Big Bad Bullshit Bill they are about to pass that they will financially stab the middle class in the back and literally kill off the poor. Trump has ordered them to do it and the Cult must follow. Move that money to the top. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.
It's been five years since we lost John Lewis. He will be the focus of nationwide demonstrations on July 17th. Call out the killers. Make some good trouble that day---help create a beloved community. See you in the streets on the 4th and the 17th!
Well Thom, maybe the top 50 percent of earners in 'murka need this explanation, but the bottom half absolutely do not. All this grift, graft and greed comes down to two 'impressions' from millennia ago - the divine right of kings and the transference and projection that gods are actually created by male humans to keep the kings in power; and second, that the accumulation of all kinds of wealth is signatory to persons being favored by gods due to their cleverness and ambition.
If truth of some kind be told, if you ask what makes so-called common people happy, or at least calm and stable, wealth is at or near the bottom. Values clarification shows that emotional and 'spiritual' satisfaction/feelings rank at the top. Un-ambitious persons have a whole different paradigm of contentment and satisfaction than the empty shells of the morbidly ambitious. As the easy-to-please folks will tell you, and I live among them, always have, family, home, land as a responsibility to steward, hard work followed by relaxation, some sense of awe at higher energies/powers/realities and the pleasure/satisfaction gained from personal responsibilities/creativity/expression are Way More Valued than the cringe world of Bezos/Buffett/Muck/Branson/Theil et. al.
To be cleansed of the desperate mental/physical addictions of lucre, hoarding, vanity, self-aggrandizement, immense ego husbandry, and the demands of hubris are valued highly amongst the so-called common folk, who do not rate their lives by these paranoid obsessions.
The game played by psycho-sociopaths and their sadism and perversion is what we are seeing now, as history has educated us to as being just as emphatic in past times. That this latest pathos and embarrassing and disgusting shitshow is frowned on by 2 to 1, even in a heavily gaslighted/Newspeak/Doublethink culture like 'murka should shake the foundations of the ogres of the neuvo-riche, the blue bloods and the wall street casino crowd and their meaningless portfolios.
Hence the need for the latest perfume coming from the most rotten smelling entity alive today. They cannot stand the smell of their own treachery and betrayals. We must keep pushing their own foul crap back in their ugly faces, non-stop, with purpose and intensity.
A law school professor from Harvard, several years ago published an article in the Atlantic. He openly talked about something he calls common good constitutionalism I think. While he isn’t 100% on board with every mega position, he openly advocates for establishing absolute authority in a monarch like figure Who will impose what he considers to be moral law on the rest of us. He makes comments to the effect that the masses may not like it, but it’s really for their own good. I think the Peter teal type technocrats and others really buy into and believe that there is a small group of people who are better than everyone else And generally we identify them because they have made a lot of money. This confers on them the right to rule the rest of us and tell us what to do because obviously they know what’s good for us and we don’t. I
While that might be true, the conundrum is that the "middle class" showed up in droves to Trump rallies sporting hats, T's, flags, etc., which suggested the majority voted MAGA. I doubt that MAGAs hate the middle class who elected them. Condescension is not the same as hatred - just an assertion that I am entitled to tell you what to do because I am smarter and more accomplished than you.
If anything, Trump was re-elected because he successfully created an image of liberals as lacking common sense, wasting tax money on lazy "losers," and who were thus detached from voter needs. The DNC dementia cover-up surely validated that image for many voters.
Now the foot is on the other shoe as it is rather obvious that Trump is just as senile as Biden, but he has more energy and he is rich while Biden is not. Most Americans still seem to believe the playground adage "If you're so smart, how come you're not rich?" They do not realize that great wealth is more often than not an indicator of ruthlessness than it is of competence.
One can argue that liberals do lack common sense. Otherwise they would have paid attention to the needs of the public and they would have realized that the electorate was moving away because of the liberals' apparent disinterest in addressing their concerns. Hence, a grifter, a serial liar, and a felon is now in the White House.
So, Modernization Theory says that coming out of the dark ages and eliminating ignorance, xenophobia, superstition, white superiority mythology, greed and indifference to suffering, destructive religious domination, and elitism leads to a better milieu for everyone and for society, which is perpetuated by democratic and egalitarian governmental policies. Then why is there an insistence on keeping education out of schools by promoting authoritarianism via laws which imprison children and subjugate teachers to arbitrary authority imposed by state governors such as DeSantis and Abbott? That is the opposite of modernization. We tried it for nearly two centuries and it failed miserably. We do not have enlightenment, edification, education, equality, or liberty. We have more of the same bureaucracy and hypocrisy and frustration of the needs and discoveries of young people throughout their entire childhood years. Coercion is the opposite of freedom for those who haven't noticed.
The Republicans also hate the middle class and poor because neither one has enough money to do them any good in their campaigns. The middle class and poor are cannon fodder in the US.
I think mostly they just want cheap compliant labor that facilitates their ascent in terms of power and authority. A well educated, robust middle class will challenge them every step of the way and we have done so in the past. We must continue and we can prevail.
Thom, I believe that more people are opening their eyes to this divide and conquer strategy that is the GOP specialty. This article sums it up very neatly.
I believe that a lot of the anger in American society is misdirected. We all (even those who can well afford a middle class lifestyle) have a sense that we are being constantly ripped off, upsold, and lied to by the rampant greed of capitalism, yet too many have been programmed to blame the most marginalized members of society instead of corporations & oligarchs.
I'm always relieved to see political issues expressed in class terms. That's the nub of the issue of who has what or who doesn't. That remark you quote by Buckley and his co-snob has to be rated as stupid/vile/utterly ignorant. But those folks see the rest of us just like that: unable to "handle" any time off work. Phew.
I believe they HATE with all capital letters - because they are truly the scion of southern state slavers - who hated their slaves but needed them to produce wealth. What Republican state is not the remnant of the Civil War secessionists who did not want to rebuild what they destroyed but specifically wanted the new untouched mid west native American lands. And they rampaged until they got it. Now the rest of us are the recipients of the southern slaver/taker states retribution against the loss in the Civil War they started. Their souls and minds are tainted and poisoned and they won't be content until everyone else's souls and minds are tainted in the same mind numbing greed and dystopia. I'm sick of it. Bring on the BBB Bill and let all of "those" people also be the recipients of their own sickness. Sorry for the diatribe.
One of your better posts! In 1950, the US held 80% of the gold supply of Central Banks; today, we hold around 20%. M2 in 1959, 286 billion. M2 in 2024. 21 trillion! GDP 1959, 521 billion. GDP 2024, 29 trillion. Since 1971, the Gold Standard has been discarded, and the world has operated on fiat currency; markets have defined the value of a currency. The dollar became the
"reserve currency " for the world. Today, many countries are using their dollar reserves to buy Gold.
Do the math above, and the answer becomes obvious. America is beginning to look like post-WW1 Germany. Our fiat money supply has exploded while our percentage of world GDP has shrank! We no longer run the world with our whip. Inequality is a product of capitalism and the culture it creates! When the pie gets smaller, the rich and powerful don't share the pain. Bye-bye, middle class! Bye-bye democracy.
Indeed, this is a competent summary. I don’t think they “hate” the poor, rather their hubris regards them as little more than animals, beasts of burden here to serve them. Like all people, some may treat their animals decently and a few are openly cruel. The goal seems to be a 21st century of the feudal model. We are serfs who are allowed to exist if we remain useful and don’t get uppity. Kristi Noem secured her bona fides when she wrote about shooting a dog that was not useful to her, therefore it didn’t deserve to live. A cold,cruel person who fits the mold. Love has no place in their world and they certainly are not Christians.
Another recent example of MAGA/Trumpian depravity exemplifying the regard the wealthy and powerful have for the common folks who just want to survive free from fear is that deplorable prison DeSantis built on the Everglades. The despicable press secretary was on television yesterday gloating about the prison, the dangers, the fact that prisoners won’t have air conditioning and so on. Her eyes were gleaming, she was full of glee. This is reminiscent of some of the ugliest parts of history throughout the world where humansfile into places like the Colosseum to watch slaves fight to the death and so on. And we thought we were more civilized than this.
Julie, you said "we thought we were more civilized than this" It is really "I am more civilized than this"
An honest man thinks every one is honest, a crook thinks everyone is crooked.
We don't live in the heads of others, so the only way we can assess the behavior of others is by projecting. until we are forced to face the fact that we are not they.
You are quite obviously a good and decent person with empathy, and thus think that others are like you.
You are right, William. It took me a long time to figure out that many (not all) people "think" with their emotions, are wedded to their beliefs, no matter how illogical, to give themselves meaning, and neither want more information nor will speak up. And sadly that people like the miserable ones in the GOP gang assume everyone else is either a fool or as mean spirited, greedy and crooked as they are.
While I would argue that it is important not to assume we know what other people think or believe, and I do see a lot of this but mostly with reference to people/groups we don’t interact with frequently, or at all.
The truth is that social life and social acts is much smoother when we take care in predicting the attitudes and behaviors of others. Sure, we may project, some more so, other less so. But we don’t usually do so from a position of ignorance.
One of the ways we “know” what other people think or how they see things is as members of society, they likely have similar shared meanings of the different situations, roles and statuses in which most of interactions take place. As a simple example, If I walk into a classroom, I likely share with everyone else there a general idea of what is supposed to happen there, the status and roles people will take, and the attitudes and behaviors associated with their roles. F course, each of us may have a somewhat unique way of being in those roles and status, and from the first class meeting, there will be various negotiations between relative rules as to the specifics of how each Individual will “make” their role in that class. But coordination is necessary to some degree, or the expected outcome of the situation will not occur. And given that most situations, the relative status and roles not necessarily equal,- ie the teacher is usually understood to have the ability to sanction behavior of students - there are boundaries to acceptable behavior, and negative consequences for those failing to respect those boundaries.
Even in this example, it’s highly unlikely that everyone is just projecting on others; in fact, interaction depends on a collective effort (and success) in gauging the perspectives and behavior of the others in the situation.
Whatever we are doing that involves other people, we use a multitude of strategies to get through the situation. And to our end goal: We have a shared meaning system, including shared definitions of situations and their component parts, we can use our observations of others, and our conversations as well. When dealing with people in the abstract, we also have our history of interactions with people from different social groups, we probably have read about how people from different groups or certain political or social identities perceive and act, we also, unfortunately have prejudices and biases about this or that group, and so on.
In short, we don’t usually enter a particular social situation without attempting to take the perspective of others and the better we are at it, the more likely we will have a positive social Interaction.
We do the same even in the abstract. We use what George Mead called a “generalized other,l or actually, I rolls argue multiple generalized others. This is a set of ideas we carry around with us about “them” or “those people”. I know we all catch ourselves trying to imagine how “they” will see us (especially when we are trying to dress for the occasion) or preparing ourselves for a new kind of experience, or first day at the job. I imagine we have e a generalized other for just about any situation we may find ourselves in.
While it’s true that sometimes our anticipation of how “they” will see us, or respond to us and/or our actions (our speech. Performance, presentation, or just our presence) will turn out to be wrong, most of us learn how to adjust as we go along. But we probably don’t do so by simply projecting into ourselves, our own beliefs or attitudes, unless we have a sense that this projection fits the views of others.
My point here is that no, as a rule, we don’t just project our own attitudes and behaviors in others. Maybe, if don’t expect anyone to know that we did so and might be wrong, or we are being lazy and doing so doesn’t affect our own objectives.
The only exception I can think of, is of someone has the power to expect everyone else to adapt to my projection, especially if I have the power to punish those who fail to adapt and/or do so quick enough.
I guess maybe, if someone is so extremely positive, and has never been around anyone who isn’t, they may go around with that Polly Annish view that everyone is wonderfully positive. Likewise, if I’m such a miserable angry and distrustful person, I might not believe that anyone could truly be anything else. But these are extreme exceptions, and of held in social interactions, would likely leave them with many problematic situations and many failed social acts.
I’ll give you this - people often make errors in their assumptions about the attitudes or behaviors of groups of people they have little or no personal experience with or information about. Prejudice (positive or negative) thrives in these conditions.
We may also overgeneralize our own views, especially if we are not around people who have different points of view. I see this happen quite often. But it’s less about projection and more about lack of exposure to the likely range of viewpoints out there.
In my experience, I’ve actually found that there is a difference between what people say in the context of a highly partisan encounter and what they say when discussing specific issues that matter to them, when partisan identity is not made an issue. It’s in the latter encounters that I have learned that most Americans want the same thing, a decent life, with job that pays their bills, a safe and comfortable home. Good schools for their children, a belief that opportunities for advancing their economic and lifestyle status will be available, a safe and strong community and politicians who actually listen to them and represent their needs and interests.
Of course; anyone can turn these shared interests into Partisan disagreements, not because of any any real party difference in the value of these interests but by smelly twisting them into attacks against the other.
The irony here is that these interests aren’t rocket science. They make sense, they are totally understandable and we know that a growing proportion of America is struggling to have lives that reflect these interests.
In this case, the problem isn’t with projecting, it’s confusing partisan rhetoric with what people really want. I’ve had no problem talking with people across the partisan landscape on these issues. And I admit to be somewhat amazed at how consistently people agree that these are the issues they wish their government would work on improving. These are shared interests of the people, and it would seem the only people who wouldn’t see things this way are those who have an interests in denying these outcomes to the American people. I think Hartman is right on in his argument. If politicians really cared about their constituents, they would be doing everything in their power to make their interests a reality. But it politicians only want a vote and to support their wealthy donors they will twist these shared interests until they become reasons to hate the opponent. Sadly, those caught up in this hateful rhetoric think they are getting support for their interests, but instead are being used to power those who want nothing of the kind. (And we need to step back from judging them for their error- this destruction of the working people (whether they call themselves middle class or not) started decades ago, and I don’t recall too many people protesting those early actions that would eventually bite them in the ass. Just be glad you managed to get the knowledge now. I spend my energy looking for ways to explain these negative trends in America to those who don’t have the knowledge or experience to see them yet. It took me a lot of education and effort to have the perspective I have today; I won’t look down at people who haven’t had the luck I had in escaping the economic bondage that kept me from the knowledge and development of intellect that allows me to see the larger picture today.
Rhonda, here is an example:
You've heard of people pleasers, I am sure.
I've know quite a few in my life, was married to one.
There is no way for anyone to know what pleases another, so a people pleaser has no choice but to project.
People pleasers will modify their behavior to please their audience, which is often the public. Yet they have no idea what the others may or may not think, much less care.
Back in the 90's when cell phones were bricks and you had to live in an area where there was a tower. I had a friend, who would drive down the freeway
(I-5 from San Francisco to San Jose) holding one of those bricks, pretending they wares talking to some, just to impress people she didn't know nor would ever see again.
People will say anything to get your attention, especially when they are trying to sell you something, like in politics or vacuum cleaners or a car. But you have no idea what is really going on their mind.
Why did you feel it was necessary to say that you don't look down on people.?
The thought never crossed my mind. Looking down on people? I feel for folks who aren't as well off as myself. And I consider myself lower to middle middle class, a product of a single mother raised in a project, who was a puny punk who had to learn to take care of myself and not be bullied.
Fortunately I have made some good choice in life, and in my old age, I am very comfortable, no economic worries, only health worries, and I am very, very pro active as regards my health, not a hypochondriac (the only medication I take is metformin), but I monitor all my vital signs daily or more than daily from blood glucose to blood pressure and oxygen levels. I even sleep with an oxygen concentrator hooked up to my CPAP machine, No debts, not mortgage, Medicare and Tricare for life, but I am still lower to middle middle class and wouldn't think of looking down on anyone, and do what I can to help those less fortunate.
So why would you even think about looking down on someone, the thought never ever crossed my mind.
Here is the way I see the world. I am no a mind reader, I don't know what others think, thus I can only respond to their behavior. Because I don't know what others think, there is no way I can behave in a manner that pleases them.
Because I have no way to know what pleases them. So I live my life with the axiom "to thy own self be true"
Social living, requires that one live a life that is respectful of others,to be fair and honest , respectful and considerate in all interactions, caveat repay debts in like coin,and don't tolerate bullshit, Meaning I don't and can't tolerate MAGAts. or people whose beliefs would tread on my right to live
I apologize, I did not intend the latter part of my comment to seem like it was directed at you. When I wrote it, I meant it to be a general statement of what I perceive taking place in our social discourse. More precisely, when I said “we need to step back from judging them for their error” I was continuing my line of thought, not responding to something you wrote.
I do see that I must have been tired writing so much as there a number of typos and I was inconsistent with my use of pronouns, all of which could make it hard for anyone to make sense of what I was trying to say.
As for the rest of your response, it interesting. I don’t think a person has to be a “people pleaser” to adjust and adapt their behavior in a situation. Theory and research indicates this is something we all do in order to achieve our objective.
We don’t read each other’s minds, but we do pay attention to how people act, over all and in a given situation, and adjust our own behavior accordingly to improve the likelihood of a situation working out the way we prefer. We attempt to read each other, to take one another’s perspective to reach our objective.
This is just basic human social behavior. We adjust and adapt, up to a point, depending on how important our personal and shared objectives are. Yes, there are those who feel they shouldn’t have to engage in the give and take of social interactions; Ive witnessed the awkwardness of the unrelenting actor who makes a scene because while they expect all other actors to bend to their will, they refuse to compromise themselves (often over something rather minor, like someone bumping into them, or outrage because a cashier won’t take their check).
I believe that social life is possible only because we all not only share a set of meanings and understanding of the basic rules of social life, but also through taking the perspective of others (not mind reading of course, but based on everything we know about the others status, situational role, their expressions, their actions, so on) and adapting, adjusting and compromising, often in what feels like a split second. Why? Because we want to get to our objective, and more coordinated our interactions with others is, the easier it is for us to reach our objective, with as little hassle as possible
Of course, if we are in a mood, irritated or edgy, we might deliberately obstruct others acts, especially if we’ve decided they have offended us somehow - like refusing let someone merge into our lane in the road, or just be contrary in our interactions with others.
We have the freedom to choose to make things more complex, to make situations more difficult, but we also have the choice to adjust and compromise just so we can move through a social engagement more easily.
We spend most of our lives in micro level interactions. But our actions are also shaped, constrained or otherwise affected by macro conditions. Most of us choose which battles are worth fighting, that is by refusing to adjust, adapt or compromise, it may even be part of our objective in a given situation (ie during political protest), and for the rest, the process of working our way through situations and social acts is largely automatic.
I’d also argue people in a given society are not totally free nor totally controlled. We are not as different from one another as we think we are, but we’re also not all the same. We don’t read minds, but we depend largely on the shared meanings, taking the perspective of the other, and being able to adjust, adapt or even compromise when despite all the above, we miscalculate in our prediction of how others will behave, to what ever degree we are willing in order to achieve our objective.
For the most part, much of these daily interaction takes place while we are on automatic - we don’t think much about it. Sometimes, though, a situation requires our more focused attention, at which time we have to decide what is more important - getting through to the other side of situation and move on, or to stand our ground. But no matter what; social life does require some level of compromise, most of it insignificant. It’s the costs of living in a society, benefiting from the perks of being part of collective (actually humans are social animals, and even though some of us may check out - we tend to call them hermits and we often perceived them to be mentally unbalanced (being alone all the time can make you a little nuts- I speak from experience), it’s likely that our survival over the last 1-3 million years is largely due to the fact that we live in groups (as earth species go, humans are pretty vulnerable alone).
That’s just my take, based on sociological and social psychological perspectives of human interaction. It’s less a perfect description of any one person, and more a description of social patterns of behavior.
Understood.I do the same thing from time to time.
Reptilian life abounds. The name has already inspired the Florida Republican Party to sell shirts, hats and koozies with the what appears to be AI-generated images of a prison with gators and pythons. Uthmeier, a DeSantis appointee, is also selling “Alligator Alcatraz” gear – including bumper stickers, golf balls and coffee mugs that say “Nowhere to run. Nowhere to hide” – to raise political cash for his 2026 election.
Read more at: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/immigration/article309775385.html#storylink=cpy
Mr. Solomon thank you for that citation. It is ALMOST unbelievable. But we live in cynical times which remind me of the historical period of Machiavelli's time. The most cynical and perhaps sinister period in European history.
For years I have carried on polemic with colleagues and friends over the question: Which is a more powerful motive, love, or hate? This is a far more complicated and difficult topic than at first appears. We have never come to a resolution of the argument.
I think, however, it is accurate to say today, that hatred is the primary motive of those in power. And cruelty is their policy.
Julie, there is something in the air, because Robert Reich covered this, from another direction, today https://robertreich.substack.com/p/trump-musk-and-the-empathy-bug
The lack of empathy in MAGAts (and libertarians)
Thanks, I will read this. They were cruelty like it’s a badge.
They hate the "other." I don't think that economics or social standing seem as important to them as geneology.
By genealogy, Daniel, do you mean DNA. Liberalism, sexual orientation and gender identity . or even basic identity, are not passed down via DNA There are legions of blacks that identify as whites, like Mark Robinson, Kanye, Candace Owens, Herschel Walker, Tim Scott, B yron Donalds, even Stephen a. Smith.
It's their mens rea, not mine.
What is a rea?
Mr. Farrar, in order to acquire a conviction in criminal court, it is necessary to prove both actus reus and mens rea.
Actus reus is the question of whether or not the accused performed the criminal act.
Mens rea is the question of whether or not the accused harbored intent to perform the act.
Because of Mr. Solomon's years as a magistrate, his thinking is perhaps often way ahead of the rest of us, on these matters. I have sometimes found it difficult to follow him. I am not trying to speak for him here, however.
In many years of teaching Criminology, it was necessary to discuss this subject with my students.
Thanks. I find myself often chiding people, especially on Quora for using Acronyms, especially esoteric ones. Military is one example.
There are many words and terms that are meaningless to lay people,but those accustomed to it by trade or training, seem to take it for granted that they are universally understood.
This seems to be where we're headed....
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/24/yanis-varoufakis-technofeudalism-capitalism-ukraine-interview
For decades, Thom Hartman has challenged his listeners and viewers, with money on the table, for anyone to name one single GOP legislation that has explicitly benefited the general public and the poor. So far, nobody has come forward to name one. This means, since the New Deal and the Great Society legislations, the GOP has been working relentlessly to dismantle the middle class and screw us to the benefit of the morbidly rich. That voters send these people to congress year after year tells how completely conned we have been.
Corporate, establishment Democrats are perfectly happy to perpetuate the the cancerous decline of American democracy, as witness their response to Zorhan Mamdani’s victory in the NYC Democratic mayoral primary. Thrilled? Hardly. Muted at best, passive-aggressive subversive too often. Mamdani out-polls the Democratic Party spectacularly; there’s a lesson in that.
Concerning Mamdani, his critics profess concern that he is a Muslim, or that he is a Socialist, but they are really afraid that he actually responds to the concerns of voters.
That is it Jeff, attacks on Mamdani for being a Muslim or a socialist, are typical political attacks.They mask the real concern, that he is not up for sale and can't be bought.
Remember Max Cleland, Senator from Georgia, the man was a genuine war hero, lost an arm and both legs in Vietnam, and Karl Rove painted him as an upatriotic coward because he opposed Dubya's criminal war.
Mr. Farrar, yes I too remember the courageous senator Cleland and that shameful attack by the execrable, hate-spewing, cowardly Rove.
Thom, when you explained modernization theory, it immediately dawned on me that Russell Kirk, and Republicans in general, saw this theory "through a glass darkly". Surely enough, as I read on, you did make that observation. The growth of the middle class, and the concomitant growth of democratic socialism, are an existential threat to the Republican ideal of a corporatist feudalism. That's why they declared war on us (the Powell memo), and have been winning ever since.
Since Mamdani's win, there is more and more open talk about democratic socialism (I am one). It is relevant at this time to revisit Milovan Djilas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milovan_Djilas a self describe democratic socialist, and once consider for President of the Soviet Union,
He was a dissent of communism, jailed, and wrote a book The New Class https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Class:_An_Analysis_of_the_Communist_System
In it he:
defines the new class in this chapter as the political bureaucracy, "a monopoly over the working class itself". This "new class actually seized the lion's share of the economic and other progress earned by the sacrifices and efforts of the masses". Djilas attributes the rise of this new class to Stalin.[4]: 37–69
Djilas claims the Communist Party "is the backbone of the entire political, economic, and ideological activity," with public life determined by "what happens party forums". He further states, "Regardless of laws, everyone knows that the government is in the hands of the party committees and the secret police"
In that he could be talking of the Republican party and MAGAts today. The BBB passed the Senate and authorizes 45,000 additional Sturmabeitlung, Stasi thugs for Trump.
Djilas said: that the party-state officials formed a class which "uses, enjoys and disposes of nationalised property".[3]
If you understand that the Soviet Union was actually seven trusts , and of the seven the trust for human resources (the KGB) was the most powerful and feared, then you might understand that when the USSR's economy was reorganized, these trusts were sold off to KGB agents and thus the oligarchs
Russian oligarchs gained power through the privatization of state-owned assets following the collapse of the Soviet Union, often through opaque and corrupt practices. These individuals, with close ties to political elites, amassed vast fortunes by acquiring valuable enterprises at discounted prices or through state contracts, sometimes with little to no actual investment. generative AI
Mr. Farrar, I was unaware that Milovan Djilas was considered a contender for the presidency of the USSR. He was Yugoslavian, was he not?
After the USSR collapsed in 1989 the eager young followers of the bean-counting, abstract empiricist Milton Friedman swarmed out of the University of Chicago and travelled to Moscow to advise those aspiring Russian oligarchs how best to privatize the Russian economy. The dangerous, extremely stratified, fascist mess we see now, is the result.
Yes Gerald he was a Yugoslavian. A democratic socialist, not a communist
Well Friedman was followed by the Bank for International Settlements in 84 or 85 Annual Report (my copies are in the garage in boxes), where it stated that the Soviet Union was a failed economic experiment and needs to be restructured.
The major problem, economically, besides the fact that the state, meaning the council, owned and directed everything is that there was a perpetual depression because the ruble was tied 100% to gold. The ruble was valued at .9851 grams fine gold, and only enough roubles were printed as the store of gold permitted, thus a perpetual shortage of roubles, hence a perpetual depression
They hate the poor too! Medicaid is only for the poor. Slashing Medicaid is this CR bill’s main focus. Medicaid is only available if your income is virtually nil, i.e., your prove that you are very poor. Republicans have not heard Blessed are the poor. We are responsible for these people. https://hotbuttons.substack.com/p/the-25-trillion-annual-deficit-plan?r=3m1bs
Alan Grayson said it, the Republican health care plan
Don't get sick, and if you do then die quickly.
To them we are cogs in a machine and when a tooth wears down, chuck it and replace it.
The tragic irony is that most of the cogs are MAGAts.
After Obama's election, Alexandra Pelosie, a documentarian, visited the south and produced a documentary "The Right Feeling Wrong".
Standing on the crate that served as his door step, in front of his trash strewn lawn, and his dilapidated Single Wide, was a snaggled toothed, bib overalled dude answering her questions.
"Why are you opposed to food stamps?" She asked. Because them lazy nigrahs don't deserve them.
She responded: But you get food stamps as well. His reply;'"That's different I deserve them"
This is why I believe that the blue states and any other state that wants to live in a free democratic society should seceed from the union and join Canada. There is no way to get out from under the thumb of the Supreme Court and their ruling in the 1970's to allow the money men to bribe and eventually control the electoral process. They have total control now and nothing can stop them. They will end democracy before the people will have any power left to stop them. The ball game is over.
This design for poverty keeps us from having the "beloved community" that John Lewis spoke about.
Republicans are once again proving with their Big Bad Bullshit Bill they are about to pass that they will financially stab the middle class in the back and literally kill off the poor. Trump has ordered them to do it and the Cult must follow. Move that money to the top. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.
It's been five years since we lost John Lewis. He will be the focus of nationwide demonstrations on July 17th. Call out the killers. Make some good trouble that day---help create a beloved community. See you in the streets on the 4th and the 17th!
Well Thom, maybe the top 50 percent of earners in 'murka need this explanation, but the bottom half absolutely do not. All this grift, graft and greed comes down to two 'impressions' from millennia ago - the divine right of kings and the transference and projection that gods are actually created by male humans to keep the kings in power; and second, that the accumulation of all kinds of wealth is signatory to persons being favored by gods due to their cleverness and ambition.
If truth of some kind be told, if you ask what makes so-called common people happy, or at least calm and stable, wealth is at or near the bottom. Values clarification shows that emotional and 'spiritual' satisfaction/feelings rank at the top. Un-ambitious persons have a whole different paradigm of contentment and satisfaction than the empty shells of the morbidly ambitious. As the easy-to-please folks will tell you, and I live among them, always have, family, home, land as a responsibility to steward, hard work followed by relaxation, some sense of awe at higher energies/powers/realities and the pleasure/satisfaction gained from personal responsibilities/creativity/expression are Way More Valued than the cringe world of Bezos/Buffett/Muck/Branson/Theil et. al.
To be cleansed of the desperate mental/physical addictions of lucre, hoarding, vanity, self-aggrandizement, immense ego husbandry, and the demands of hubris are valued highly amongst the so-called common folk, who do not rate their lives by these paranoid obsessions.
The game played by psycho-sociopaths and their sadism and perversion is what we are seeing now, as history has educated us to as being just as emphatic in past times. That this latest pathos and embarrassing and disgusting shitshow is frowned on by 2 to 1, even in a heavily gaslighted/Newspeak/Doublethink culture like 'murka should shake the foundations of the ogres of the neuvo-riche, the blue bloods and the wall street casino crowd and their meaningless portfolios.
Hence the need for the latest perfume coming from the most rotten smelling entity alive today. They cannot stand the smell of their own treachery and betrayals. We must keep pushing their own foul crap back in their ugly faces, non-stop, with purpose and intensity.
If the Republicans hate the middle class — which they most assuredly do — then the lower class is beneath their contempt.
A law school professor from Harvard, several years ago published an article in the Atlantic. He openly talked about something he calls common good constitutionalism I think. While he isn’t 100% on board with every mega position, he openly advocates for establishing absolute authority in a monarch like figure Who will impose what he considers to be moral law on the rest of us. He makes comments to the effect that the masses may not like it, but it’s really for their own good. I think the Peter teal type technocrats and others really buy into and believe that there is a small group of people who are better than everyone else And generally we identify them because they have made a lot of money. This confers on them the right to rule the rest of us and tell us what to do because obviously they know what’s good for us and we don’t. I
While that might be true, the conundrum is that the "middle class" showed up in droves to Trump rallies sporting hats, T's, flags, etc., which suggested the majority voted MAGA. I doubt that MAGAs hate the middle class who elected them. Condescension is not the same as hatred - just an assertion that I am entitled to tell you what to do because I am smarter and more accomplished than you.
If anything, Trump was re-elected because he successfully created an image of liberals as lacking common sense, wasting tax money on lazy "losers," and who were thus detached from voter needs. The DNC dementia cover-up surely validated that image for many voters.
Now the foot is on the other shoe as it is rather obvious that Trump is just as senile as Biden, but he has more energy and he is rich while Biden is not. Most Americans still seem to believe the playground adage "If you're so smart, how come you're not rich?" They do not realize that great wealth is more often than not an indicator of ruthlessness than it is of competence.
One can argue that liberals do lack common sense. Otherwise they would have paid attention to the needs of the public and they would have realized that the electorate was moving away because of the liberals' apparent disinterest in addressing their concerns. Hence, a grifter, a serial liar, and a felon is now in the White House.
So, Modernization Theory says that coming out of the dark ages and eliminating ignorance, xenophobia, superstition, white superiority mythology, greed and indifference to suffering, destructive religious domination, and elitism leads to a better milieu for everyone and for society, which is perpetuated by democratic and egalitarian governmental policies. Then why is there an insistence on keeping education out of schools by promoting authoritarianism via laws which imprison children and subjugate teachers to arbitrary authority imposed by state governors such as DeSantis and Abbott? That is the opposite of modernization. We tried it for nearly two centuries and it failed miserably. We do not have enlightenment, edification, education, equality, or liberty. We have more of the same bureaucracy and hypocrisy and frustration of the needs and discoveries of young people throughout their entire childhood years. Coercion is the opposite of freedom for those who haven't noticed.
So, basically, in the 1980s, the rich told the middle class, You're getting too big for your britches. Now we have a Big, Beautiful Bill for you.
The Republicans also hate the middle class and poor because neither one has enough money to do them any good in their campaigns. The middle class and poor are cannon fodder in the US.
I think mostly they just want cheap compliant labor that facilitates their ascent in terms of power and authority. A well educated, robust middle class will challenge them every step of the way and we have done so in the past. We must continue and we can prevail.
Thom, I believe that more people are opening their eyes to this divide and conquer strategy that is the GOP specialty. This article sums it up very neatly.
I believe that a lot of the anger in American society is misdirected. We all (even those who can well afford a middle class lifestyle) have a sense that we are being constantly ripped off, upsold, and lied to by the rampant greed of capitalism, yet too many have been programmed to blame the most marginalized members of society instead of corporations & oligarchs.
I'm always relieved to see political issues expressed in class terms. That's the nub of the issue of who has what or who doesn't. That remark you quote by Buckley and his co-snob has to be rated as stupid/vile/utterly ignorant. But those folks see the rest of us just like that: unable to "handle" any time off work. Phew.
I believe they HATE with all capital letters - because they are truly the scion of southern state slavers - who hated their slaves but needed them to produce wealth. What Republican state is not the remnant of the Civil War secessionists who did not want to rebuild what they destroyed but specifically wanted the new untouched mid west native American lands. And they rampaged until they got it. Now the rest of us are the recipients of the southern slaver/taker states retribution against the loss in the Civil War they started. Their souls and minds are tainted and poisoned and they won't be content until everyone else's souls and minds are tainted in the same mind numbing greed and dystopia. I'm sick of it. Bring on the BBB Bill and let all of "those" people also be the recipients of their own sickness. Sorry for the diatribe.
One of your better posts! In 1950, the US held 80% of the gold supply of Central Banks; today, we hold around 20%. M2 in 1959, 286 billion. M2 in 2024. 21 trillion! GDP 1959, 521 billion. GDP 2024, 29 trillion. Since 1971, the Gold Standard has been discarded, and the world has operated on fiat currency; markets have defined the value of a currency. The dollar became the
"reserve currency " for the world. Today, many countries are using their dollar reserves to buy Gold.
Do the math above, and the answer becomes obvious. America is beginning to look like post-WW1 Germany. Our fiat money supply has exploded while our percentage of world GDP has shrank! We no longer run the world with our whip. Inequality is a product of capitalism and the culture it creates! When the pie gets smaller, the rich and powerful don't share the pain. Bye-bye, middle class! Bye-bye democracy.