Ivy League Populists
Victor Davis Hanson on the weirdly deformed populism being preached by both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Calling it reminiscent of John Edwards campaign rhetoric, he points out the absurdity of that rhetoric - and the completely misguided assumptions that guide that talk.
The rhetoric of Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton about the sad state of America is reminiscent of the suspect populism of John Edwards, the millionaire lawyer who recently dropped out of the Democratic presidential race.
Barack Obama may have gone to exclusive private schools. He and his wife may both be lawyers who between them have earned four expensive Ivy League degrees. They may make about a million dollars a year, live in an expensive home and send their kids to prep school. But they are still apparently first-hand witnesses to how the American dream has gone sour. Two other Ivy League lawyers, Hillary and Bill, are multimillionaires who have found America to be a land of riches beyond most people's imaginations. But Hillary also talks of the tragic lost dream of America.
In these gloom-and-doom narratives by the well off, we less fortunate Americans are doing almost everything right, but still are not living as well as we deserve to be. And the common culprit is a government that is not doing enough good for us, and corporations that do too much bad to us.
In the new pessimistic indictment, the home mortgage meltdown has not occurred because too many speculative buyers were hoping to flip houses for quick profits. It had nothing to do with misguided attempts of government and lending institutions to put first-time buyers in homes through zero-down payments, interest-only loans, and subprime but adjustable mortgage rates - as part of liberal efforts to increase home ownership rates.
And there apparently are few Americans who unwisely borrowed against their homes a second and third time to remodel or purchase big-ticket consumer items - on the belief that their equity would always be rising faster than their debts. Nor are we to look at this downturn as part of a historical boom-and-bust cycle in the housing industry - the present low prices and non-performing loans the natural counter-response to the overpriced real estate of the last five years.
There is quite a lot more. There is something a bit crazy about the extremely well-off slamming the system they were able to work quite successfully to get ahead. In a way it is climbing to a high spot then pulling the ladder up behind you. You cannot tax your way to prosperity any more than you can drink yourself into sobriety. Yet that is precisely what is being offered by the preppy populists. They are proposing bigger, more lavish government spending when we are already running a deficit.
I'm not in favor of the already high spending levels and sure don't want even more government intervention in everyday life.
By Plumb Bob, Thursday, 21 February , 2008 @ 3:39 pm
It’s one of those ironies of history that people get mad when things are getting better. The French Revolution occurred, not when the French people were starving and without hope, but when they had rising expectations that weren’t being met.So, today, young people are upset, not because they have no food to eat, but because they can’t immediately afford furniture as nice as what their parents had. Rising expectations, you see.Find enough selfish people expecting something they can’t have, no matter how unrealistic, and you’ve got yourself a Democratic presidential campaign.(Unrelated to this topic, please visit my political blog, "Plumb Bob Blog: Squaring the Culture," at http://www.plumbbobblog.com. Thanks.)
By Mockinbird, Thursday, 21 February , 2008 @ 3:51 pm
I read this piece by Hanson earlier today.
The Obamas and the Clintons are classics I’ve seen all my life. They are snotty and exclusive . From high school, through college, masters degree and on into adult life. I refer to that type as trust fund trotskies and muni bond marxists. They often, are very social, attractive and outgoing. Those types often run for office, since they would otherwise not have to work. From the late 60’s on, they tend to be left wing, or progressive (John Kerry, Kennedies, Rockefellahs, you get the idea). Yes, they do want to as you think, want to pull the ladder up after themselves due to their rampant narcissism. They think of us as little people; easy to dupe and then keep us in our places…down here in flyover country.
By KJC402, Thursday, 21 February , 2008 @ 4:24 pm
Probably the toughest thing these people have ever done, is to make it through a 2 hour lecture class with a hang-over.
Why is it that people with no experience at being middle-class, think that they are our champions or that watching the History channel and playing "Risk" qualifies them to be Commander-in-Chief?
By MikeO, Thursday, 21 February , 2008 @ 4:30 pm
Though populism makes no sense, Senators Clinton, Obama, and Edwards have been competing for primary votes from people whose very party affiliation casts doubt on their cognitive abilities. I have to disagree with your observation about "slamming the system they were able to work quite successfully to get ahead." Edwards made his millions as a tort lawyer channelling unborn babies in front of jurors. Obama and Clinton make their millions as collectivist machine politicians trading in graft. These people got ahead as parasites on the system the rest of us work, and their livelihoods are founded on the demagoguery of tricking enough people to let feelings trump reason on election day.
By tabitharuth, Thursday, 21 February , 2008 @ 8:02 pm
Frankly, the fact that they have a million dollar income and still haven’t paid off their loans makes me cringe.