As the economic news continues to depress us (pun intended), there is no mistaking the rise of populism once again in our nation's political discourse. The emotion most often attached to populism is anger: supposedly every day people are fed up with corporate fat cats/government bureaucrats/insert your favorite target here. And we're not gonna take it!
Could this "anger" be consolidated into political power by one of the two major parties? Or could a new, alternative, populist party form? Some House Democrats have already formed a
Populist Caucus which they say is open to members of both parties. As the party of labor as opposed to management, individuals as opposed to corporations, the Democrats would seem to be more naturally aligned with an ideology that speaks to and for the frustrations of the masses. Yet, one of the first recommendations of this caucus was that the stimulus package have a "buy American" provision. Economic isolationism and protectionism would seem in some ways to be conservative impulses.
The ravaging effects of globalism on certain local economies are very real. Here in North Carolina, many smaller localities have been long dependent on relatively high-wage, low-skill manufacturing jobs, particularly in textiles. Those jobs have fled in the thousands to all the places in the world that have cheaper labor and less stringent environmental protections. Rural North Carolinians have traded a job for cheap clothes at Wal-Mart. The sentiment I keep coming across is anger that the corporate honchos have "shipped our jobs overseas," as if some nefarious plot exists to put people out of work. Most people don't make the link between the global economy and their own purchasing habits. Stop buying cheap imports at the Dollar Store, and put that money into local economies. In watching the various anti-Wal-Mart documentaries that show the devastating effects on small town businesses, I often have to remind myself that people choose to take their business from one place to another. Rather than scream about job losses, perhaps we can start making decisions locally that, for example, give tax incentives to businesses that want to set up shop in a depressed town center rather than a big box store in the exurbs.
As the U.S. auto makers prostrated themselves before Congress to seek out billions in bailout funds, we heard the mighty drumbeat of populist anger once again. Scorn was heaped on CEOs who made the PR blunder of flying in corporate jets to attend hearings. Members of Congress seemed to channel their constituents venom with increasingly sarcastic and bitter questions. The auto bosses were sent back to do homework before they finally got their money. That'll teach them! Fascinatingly, at the same time, the auto unions were receiving the same excoriating criticism. Certain salient details of union-negotiated contracts struck a nerve: did you know that some workers are paid not to work!?! Contempt was hurled at managers and workers in equal portions. Occasionally someone would suggest that we needed to bail the companies out in order to prevent a further collapse of the overall economy, but for the most part, people seemed to genuinely want the Big Three to fail, to utterly cease to exist.
Mr. President jumped on the populist bandwagon when he suggested a cap on CEO salaries at $500,000 for any firm receiving federal bailout dollars. Who, besides the CEOs themselves, wouldn't agree to that? Personally, I have little sympathy for those at the top who are having to sweat out this crisis, but I cannot agree with the government mandating the salaries of workers in a private company. If anything, we should turn our attention to restructuring the tax code to eliminate the Bush breaks for the super-rich. Let's get the money after it flows out of the tap, not before. Surely some of the weaker, more foolish firms will fail during this period, hopefully prompting some reforms in executive pay within companies themselves.
Finally, CNBC's Rick Santelli spoke for many when he suggested that the government “put up a website to have people vote … to see if we really want to subsidize the losers’ mortgages?” Here we find populist anger directed at a lower socioeconomic set of people. Not the rich, but the upwardly mobile, the purchasers of that American dream castle par excellence, the McMansion. Greedy, greedy, greedy, goes the populist version of the story. They had to have it all, and have it now. They should have known better, and now we have to pay. Now, as someone who was a long-time renter and who bought a very small home at a fixed-rate mortgage, I could easily jump on that bandwagon. Yet, I was ironically fortunate to have a relatively low income that qualified me for an FHA loan. Others who made more were sold the same message from their banks, investment houses, and the popular business press: get as much house as you can, because no asset will grow in value faster. As a society we collectively ignored the impending housing bubble. Not only that, but foreclosure relief funds will help the thousands of people who didn't overbuy. Many have simply lost their jobs and can't pay their mortgages or afford to sell their homes at a cut rate. Millions of unemployed people is bad enough; do we want to add homeless and unemployed to our roster of ills as well?
Citizen participation in government is a fine thing, and anger at the powers-that-be is understandable and even noble at times. But what I'm sensing now is the beginnings of mob mentality, the sense that something has to be done right now, someone must be held accountable, someone must pay. The causes for our various problems are multi-faceted, complex, and have deep roots. To turn with bulging neck veins and start screaming at the nearest authority figure is not going to help anyone.
Just checking in folks. I have been lost in the addicting netherworld of online Scrabble, otherwise known as Lexulous. Found on that nefarious online social network Facebook, I find myself dreaming seven, eight, and nine letter words. One consolation: my good friend Darren M. has joined me for several late night matches.
