I have NO problem with you folks who think the Democrats have become a nasty right-wing party. I agree. I also am old enough to remember when the Democratic Party was NOT like this at all. Yes this is Minnesota where Republicans used to be considerably to the left of, say, All Franken. So in my heart, I see a guy like Griego as a throwback to when Democrats were really Democrats. I understand he isn’t going to get support from the party bigwigs, but shouldn’t we support efforts to take our party back from the right-wing hacks.

Just asking.

I think we should make a VERY BIG POINT of letting the corporate Dems that we will not support them because they are evil heretics. Or something like that.

Yes indeed, you are so right about the label progressive. Personally, I started calling myself a Progressive in the 1980s after reading a book on Robert LaFollette—the towering giant of the Progressive movement in Wisconsin and 1924 Presidential candidate for the Progressive Party. I was tired of “liberals”—especially the Cold War variety like Hubert Humphrey—and was looking for a label that fit me better. So now we have a LOT of liberals who call themselves Progressives. Unfortunately, the vast majority of them do not know that Progressive describes a real set of beliefs that have a well-defined historical meaning.

My suggestion, whenever someone calls himself a “progressive,” ask about LaFollette. If you get the dog-watching-a-ceiling-fan look, you are probably talking to a cultural liberal who grew tired of the label.

I suspect the real problem with “progressives” is that they don’t have a relevant message anymore. Back when Democrats ran just everything, our central message was raising the living standards of the working poor. Now after nearly 45 years of multiculturalism and gonad politics, nobody thinks we are serious about the BIG issues in their life. So even when we DO occasionally discuss economics, people think its a momentary diversion from our cultural agenda.

For example, I recently attended a screening of Inside Job by a local Moveon member. I’m not much of a Moveon type but I loved that movie and thought it would be a chance to meet others who wanted to discuss the crash of neoliberal economics on the rocks of reality. As the credits rolled, I got psyched to discuss the subject of where the economics profession has led us astray and other things covered in the documentary. Waste of time. One woman was a newly minted MBA who assured us that things weren’t so bad in the world of finance. And soon the discussion had turned to an upcoming demo over a proposed amendment to the state constitution banning gay marriage. Even after the showing of Inside Job, a room full of progressives couldn’t bring themselves to discuss the economic assault on the middle class for three freaking minutes. Working Americans saw their wages peak in 1972 and still economics still hasn’t made it to the top of anyone’s “progressive” agenda.

When Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, claimed that USA wanted no part of a military strike on Iran (which he did over the weekend—an act that sent Nut ‘n Yahoo into another rage) it indicates that even our professional warrior class thinks an attack is a seriously stupid idea.

In fact, those who want a war with Iran fall into one of only two categories—Morons, and Drooling Morons. Apparently that debate in California was a drool-bucket-only affair. Sounds like a couple Michelle Bachmann wannabes to me.

So David, you spent only one year with the Quakers and you got this enlightened? I spent seven years in a Mennonite-run school (and I wasn’t even Mennonite) so I understand where you are coming from. Those folks didn’t get involved with tax protests but they were VERY strict about not sending their young men off to war. Spend major time in that environment and the absurd triviality of the Catholics protesting condoms just doesn’t quite cut it as an ethical issue. And since no USA war in my lifetime has risen to the most minimal standards of a “just war”, one would think that even the Catholics would be as upset about the warmongering as they are about birth control. (sigh)

Donohue isn’t worth the venom? Really?

I am not religious. I stopped attending devout observances when I was 18 and I am now 62. I TRY not to let the fact that this country is awash in religious nutcases bother me. But I must say, whenever that ignorant bigot shows up on television the thought flows through my head, “So THAT’S why my ancestors were willing to die horrible deaths to avoid being Catholic!”

I mean, outside of the Catholic church’s frontal attack on public education (vouchers) and their willingness to destroy the Democratic party over reproductive issues, I could even ignore their creepy clergy with their disgusting views on sex. But since the mother church HATES democracy, I am glad my tribe starting ignoring it back in 1517.

You know Lisa, that’s an awfully thoughtful letter to respond to an email that was probably mostly computer-generated. There’s a person in there somewhere but they aren’t exactly churning out original stuff.

But that you for letting US read it.

I had someone volunteer to write on the subject of debt collection for my blog based on the fact that I often cover debt issues. Of course, I write about debt repudiation, jubilees, and so on but he wanted to write about how debt collectors are really good guys doing an honest day’s work. I wanted to explain the difference but it was probably some kid glad to have any job.

Be glad you can write with integrity.

Damn!

I posted that picture of Caitlin Curran and her sign on my blog with the caption “Best Protest Sign EVAH!” Version xxxxxxxx of No Good Deed Goes Unpunished, I guess.

What kind of world do we live in where someone can lose their job over THAT?

But Peterr. You live in a country where the dominant form of Christianity is Calvinism. Why would it surprise you when folks preach that God loves the rich, there is really nothing wrong with usury, and that the poor are probably evil because it is a sin to be poor? These people have always believed that if you are uptight about sex, you were moral—no matter what you do with the rest of your life. Lots of Puritans were involved with the slave trade, after all.

The role of John Calvin was discussed recently over at the real economics blog. You may find it interesting. It argues that Calvinism was not only the dominant form of USA Protestantism, but clearly defined the right wing of the Reformation.

According you your intro, UWP was “officially” formed in 1968, yet I know for a fact that I had to sing UWP songs in choir during the 66-67 school year. (Still know some of the lyrics such as–If more people were for people all people everywhere, there’d be a lot less people to worry about about and a lot more people who care. Think I can make lame stuff like that up?)

So what was the official story?

BTW, considering the choir I was in usually performed things like Back double motets, the UWP stuff was like a break from work. Horrid shit but easy to sing.

Yes Airbus is a protected industry. But so is Boeing. Do you really think there would have been a 707 without the KC-135? ETC!

Boeing has been a BIG recipient of government money over the years–a fact noted whenever Airbus EADS is mentioned in trade hearings.

Boeing has been doomed for a long time. But the moment that stands out in my mind is when Debbie Hopkins, the neoliberal, Wall Street approved, spokes-ditz who had found her way into senior finance management during the 2000 SPEEA strike, asked stridently “Why does Boeing needs engineers anyway?” It was an amazingly stupid question for the chief finance officer of a company whose main asset was its engineers.

Eventually, SPEEA “won” that strike (No nerds, no birds) and the money boys were so outraged they insisted that the management of Boeing relocate to Chicago so as to avoid any hint of solidarity with the people they needed to build their airplanes in Seattle.

So now the greatest aircraft manufacturer in history cannot deliver aircraft ordered and paid for and gets trounced at the 2011 Paris Air Show by Airbus. It was the inevitable outcome of the MoTU believing that even rocket scientists are just another form of labor to be screwed. Ah yes, the banksters can screw up ANYTHING.

The reason Al Gore has so little credibility on the issue of climate change is that his proposed “solutions” are so lame. “Cap and Trade” is barely more than a revival of the medieval indulgences that triggered the Protestant Reformation. The pathetic list of what we can do at address climate change at the end of Inconvenient Truth was beneath childish. And when Gore decided to build a hideous energy-pig of a mansion with the money he made from the movie business, he utterly discredited himself as a spokesman for climate change.

Even so, he is STILL better than Obama. We are so doomed!

Of course, it’s all well and good that the car companies are back to making cars and money. If this tiny example of industrial policy can open a few of the minds of the “planning is bad” crowd, then it has been wildly successful. But it should not be treated as anything but a demonstration project. Here’s why.

It is very probably that we have reached global peak oil. We don’t know because the Saudis aren’t coming clean with their data, by no less than James Howard Kunstler says Peak oil has already occurred. This means we have about ten years to replaced the entire infrastructure of the USA so it can be powered by something else. We are making a few steps towards oil substitute but at the rate we are going, it would take 100 years. Making up the difference can ONLY be done by planners with Werner von Braun-like skills.

Oh, and one other thing, anyone who claims we can solve our problem for less than $3 trillion a year is blowing smoke.

I can’t make the link function work but you can see Kunstler’s argument here:
http://real-economics.blogspot.com/2011/02/has-world-reached-peak-oil.html

(If you want to see the sort of economic thinking common to the old industrial policy crowd, you are encouraged to wander around the rest of the blog.)

Thanks for this amazing post David.

I once waded through the utterly fascinating “official” biography of Robert LaFollette written by (I think) his daughter. Because of him, Wisconsin may have the most interesting political history in the USA. I know for a fact that Progressive politics here in Minnesota was heavily assisted by the Wisconsin experience.

GO CHEESEHEADS!!!

The overuse of the Theory of Marginal Utility has been criticized for a long time. Thorstein Veblen made this issue one of his main themes starting in 1909 with his “Limitations of Marginal Utility” first published in the Journal of Political Economy. You can find a copy here:

In point of fact, you can always tell an economist is a right-winger whenever he or she starts talking about how “utility” makes it mathematically possible to prove his or her point.