Quick note on Thomas Frank's Listen, Liberal.

I finally finished Thomas Frank-Listen, Liberal. I first became aware of him with his book on wondering how Kansas moved from a late 19^th century populist stronghold to a radical right red state.  Personally, I like its angle of criticism. It takes dead aim at the Democratic Party rejection of the working class. He traces the movement to the division over the Vietnam War and the change in the Democrats party rules in favor of a younger well-educated, white collar constituency. The rule changes of the McGovern group that led to the 1972 convention were its start to move against the power of labor unions. .As time went on, this turned into policy and personnel in administrations. It presciently notices some of the reasons Sec. Clinton did not connect with working class voters, even though some policy proposals went distinctly left. In other words he sees a direct line from Gary Hart to Clinton to Obama. As time went on, this turned into policy and personnel in administrations. It fell in with the new economy entrepreneurs and “innovation” as a watchword. In part, taking sides with this element of society and culture helps explain the liberal orthodoxy of belittling the intelligence of those who oppose them, rather than making a case for a policy and making a case against an opposing view.

Democrats adopted a much more conservative economic policy that was a geared toward the new approach to Wall Street investment ideas and a love affair with high-tech. With Clinton, Robert Reich spoke for the younger generation of Democrats, baby boomers, who had little respect for the old liberal warhorses and their economic ideas. Flushed with an almost religious belief that the service sector was the inevitable wave of the future, Carter Democrats led a wave a de-regulation, especially in the financial sector. They turned a blind eye to the trend line of increasing economic inequality and the stagnation of wages and opportunity for most Americans. Wave the magic word innovation and new Democrats swoon. They seem blind to a vision of meritocracy that is often based on class divisions. Liberals see an inevitable service sector shift as leaving the old working class behind.

Not only does it have some stark illustrations, one can find a treasure trove of data in its pages, especially in its footnotes.

GW Bush lowered the bottom rate to 10% and expanded Medicare to include a prescription benefit. Both aided working class Americans. Democrats cannot point to a similar set of programs enacted that have this level of aid for their “natural” constituency.