Rich Men North of Richmond, Part I. Resisting the "signs and wonders" and completely missing what's gong on.

Rich Men North of Richmond, which is independently produced, I think, had made a big Internet and music scene splash, and frankly, not because it's good.

It is, as of this writing, on Billboard's Hot 100.

The ballad is played by Oliver Anthony, a genuine blue collar Virginian, apparently.  All of his music videos seem to be filmed in a heavily wooded lot, which also appears to be genuine, although the rural South provides a certain cache in country music to such an extent that a Canadian band has even affected it, calling itself The Dead South.  All of Anthony's music is played on a Resonator Guitar, a type of guitar I normally call a Dobro.  I associate resonated guitars with the blues, not with country music, so this is a bit odd in and of itself.

How I imagine a guitar with a resonator properly being used.

Fans have gushed on the "return" of "real" or "authentic" country music, and this may indeed be the first genuine example of authentic country music to become a big hit in decades.  Even 1st Lt. Austin von Letkemann, the author (host? mc?) of the wickedly funny Army satire series Mandatory Fun Day mentioned it the other day, as a real fan, citing Colter Wall at the same time.  Wall is authentic, that's for sure, but in a different genre, genuine Western, i.e., cowboy, music.

But I don't think it's the music that boosted Anthony's song to the top of the C&W charts.  It's the content.  Consider the lyrics:

I've been sellin' my soul, workin' all day

Overtime hours for bullshit pay

So I can sit out here and waste my life away

Drag back home and drown my troubles away

It's a damn shame what the world's gotten to

For people like me and people like you

Wish I could just wake up and it not be true

But it is, oh, it is

Livin' in the new world

With an old soul

These rich men north of Richmond

Lord knows they all just wanna have total control

Wanna know what you think, wanna know what you do

And they don't think you know, but I know that you do

'Cause your dollar ain't shit and it's taxed to no end

'Cause of rich men north of Richmond

I wish politicians would look out for miners

And not just minors on an island somewhere

Lord, we got folks in the street, ain't got nothin' to eat

And the obese milkin' welfare

Well, God, if you're 5-foot-3 and you're 300 pounds

Taxes ought not to pay for your bags of fudge rounds

Young men are puttin' themselves six feet in the ground

'Cause all this damn country does is keep on kickin' them down

Lord, it's a damn shame what the world's gotten to

For people like me and people like you

Wish I could just wake up and it not be true

But it is, oh, it is

Livin' in the new world

With an old soul

These rich men north of Richmond

Lord knows they all just wanna have total control

Wanna know what you think, wanna know what you do

And they don't think you know, but I know that you do

'Cause your dollar ain't shit and it's taxed to no end

'Cause of rich men north of Richmond

I've been sellin' my soul, workin' all day

Overtime hours for bullshit pay

Rich Man North of Richmond, it might be noted, comes hard on the heels of In A Small Town, by Jason Aldean.  

Consider its lyrics:

Sucker punch somebody on a sidewalk

Carjack an old lady at a red light

Pull a gun on the owner of a liquor store

Ya think it's cool, well, act a fool if ya like

Cuss out a cop, spit in his face

Stomp on the flag and light it up

Yeah, ya think you're tough

Well, try that in a small town

See how far ya make it down the road

Around here, we take care of our own

You cross that line, it won't take long

For you to find out, I recommend you don't

Try that in a small town

Got a gun that my granddad gave me

They say one day they're gonna round up

Well, that shit might fly in the city, good luck

Try that in a small town 

See how far ya make it down the road

Around here, we take care of our own

You cross that line, it won't take long

For you to find out, I recommend you don't

Try that in a small town

Full of good ol' boys, raised up right

If you're looking for a fight

Try that in a small town

Try that in a small town

Try that in a small town

See how far ya make it down the road

Around here, we take care of our own

You cross that line, it won't take long

For you to find out, I recommend you don't

Try that in a small town

Try that in a small town

Ooh-ooh

Try that in a small town

Aldean, I'd note, isn't from a small town.  He's' from Macon, Georgia, population 150,000 or so, so it's a mid-sized city.  And In A Small Town isn't real country, but rather country and enjoyed the same popularity.

Both of these songs immediately became populist anthems.  So much so that none other than liberal economist Robert Reich, whom this blog has an obvious love/hate relationship, just posted on the song, with frankly a typically disappointing analysis.

Rich Men North of Richmond

Republicans court cultural populism, while Democrats eschew economic populism. But economic populism is the key.

Reich offers his view, but he's wrong on what's going on here, at least in part, and certainly wrong on the fix.  Like other left wing economists in the United States, Reich is a corporate capitalist, which is also what all the right wing economists are. Reich correctly believes that the system has gone wonky to the detriment of the working class (whatever the current working class may be), but he fails to grasp, as nearly every economist in the United States and perhaps the Western World, or maybe even the planet, that the economy is supposed to serve average lives and average lives come first.  I.e., it's 1) my life and;  2) I need to work.  Not I'm a worker in a glorious worker's state and work will exalt me, or I'm a consumer in a glorious consumption state and consumption will exalt me, which are effectively the flip side of corporate capitalism.

So what's going on here?

Well, the economy isn't serving people's lives, and that's because corporate capitalism doesn't.  Neither right nor left economists get it.  For that matter, left wing politicos, as exhibited by Reich's writings, particularly don't get it.

Reich is one of the people who keep interpreting this stuff from solely an economic prospective, while simultaneously, and increasingly from a bigoted prospective, issuing warnings about "Christian Nationalism", which actually isn't a movement this is part of at all.  Southern Cultural Christianity is, but that's completely different, and indeed largely leans on a different branch of Christianity (the same people who go to Trump rallies and find him to be a fine Christian probably think Constantine the Great ripped the faith away from the Baptists, or something).

Constantine the Great watching the burning of the books of Arian heretics.  Constantine would likely regard most MAGA Christians as appalling on religions grounds, while he'd recognize Christian Nationalist.  He can't be considered one, however.  He's regarded as a saint by the Easter Orthodox and the Ukrainian Catholic Church.

You can get a taste of what's actually up with these songs from the comments to Rich Men North of Richmond on Youtube.

1.  39 years old. Spent 12 1/2 years as a plumber until the small company I worked for went under as the pandemic began. Working for a big chain home store for the last 3 years getting beaten into the ground, treated like a disposable asset, and watching my earnings equal less and less as the prices of basic necessities goes up. Ive fought addiction and won. Ive found love and lost it. This song resonates on a level that I havent felt in a long time. Thank you and god bless. 🙏

2.  As a disabled Marine, struggling to even be in public, struggling with all the bullshit in this world, struggling with thoughts of suicide, struggling to find pride in my Country, struggling to find the strength to get up every day to do the same damn thing to barely make ends me… as an American STRUGGLING with LIFE… thank you for bringing a little hope to my small part of the world… thank you for letting me know I am not alone with my thoughts and feelings… THANK YOU and God bless you Oliver Anthony

3.  I’m a 42 year old ex addict living in a camper trailer pay cheque to pay cheque with my kids part time while working to help the homeless and addicted community. I won’t stop working like the rest of you because we know at some point that one day will come that we may get that one break that shows us it was all worth it. 

Amazing song Oliver, thank you for sharing it

4.  As a hard working black American man, this song is 🔥 📛  the first country song on my Playlist and I hope for more. In an Era where soul is gone from music THIS IS A BREATH OF MUCH NEEDED AIR. even put a tear in my eye 🔥

5.  And just like that you became the voice of 40 or 50 million working men. Amazing work, sir.

And there are a lot more.

Let's break down the lyrics again, emphasizing the ones that are telling.

I've been sellin' my soul, workin' all day

Overtime hours for bullshit pay

So I can sit out here and waste my life away

Drag back home and drown my troubles away

It's a damn shame what the world's gotten to

For people like me and people like you

Wish I could just wake up and it not be true

But it is, oh, it is

Livin' in the new world

With an old soul

These rich men north of Richmond

Lord knows they all just wanna have total control

Wanna know what you think, wanna know what you do

And they don't think you know, but I know that you do

'Cause your dollar ain't shit and it's taxed to no end

'Cause of rich men north of Richmond

I wish politicians would look out for miners

And not just minors on an island somewhere

Lord, we got folks in the street, ain't got nothin' to eat

And the obese milkin' welfare

Well, God, if you're 5-foot-3 and you're 300 pounds

Taxes ought not to pay for your bags of fudge rounds

Young men are puttin' themselves six feet in the ground

'Cause all this damn country does is keep on kickin' them down

Lord, it's a damn shame what the world's gotten to

For people like me and people like you

Wish I could just wake up and it not be true

But it is, oh, it is

Livin' in the new world

With an old soul

These rich men north of Richmond

Lord knows they all just wanna have total control

Wanna know what you think, wanna know what you do

And they don't think you know, but I know that you do

'Cause your dollar ain't shit and it's taxed to no end

'Cause of rich men north of Richmond

I've been sellin' my soul, workin' all day

Overtime hours for bullshit pay

 Okay, some of that, like Mr. Reich notes, is economic, but a lot of it isn't. The protagonist notes:

1.  He has "an old soul".

2.  The rich men he complains about want total control, even over what he thinks.

3.  He complains about the Jeffrey Epstein saga, but more in an allegorical way than a specific way, suggesting that politicians are more concerned with their immoral pursuits than the lives of average working people.

4.  He takes a shot at the welfare poor, and unusually, notes fat ones (hardly anyone does that in contemporary America).

Hmmmm. . . Doesn't seem to be all economic. . .

There's a common liberal belief, and Reich is one of those espousing it, that if only the economy is good, everyone is happy.  Reich is one of those who goes on to point out, and correctly, that the economy really is good right now.  One who also does this nearly weekly is Donna Brazile, who is a Democratic political commentator I really like.

Nobody is saying the economy is perfect, of course, including Reich or Brazile.

But there's something they've noted, that they are missing.

If the economy is really good, and in actuality it is, and a large section of the middle class (and contrary to what pudits claim, its definately not all the "white male" middle class) are bitterly unhappy, what's going on.

The usual assertion is that the economy is doing well, but people just don't know it, which is a bit of a bizarre assertion.  People tend to know if they're doing well or not, which raises this question, with unemployment down, wages up, and inflation slowing, are people doing well?

Well, they might not actually be, and COVID may have made that plain to them.

One thing that's underlying the tone of the song is the economic shift in the nature of work since about 1970.

Well, the economy isn't serving people's lives, and that's because corporate capitalism doesn't.  Neither right nor left economists get it.  For that matter, left wing politicos, as exhibited by Reich's writings, particularly don't get it.

Reich is one of the people who keep interpreting this stuff from solely an economic prospective, while simultaneously, and increasingly from a bigoted prospective, issuing warnings about "Christian Nationalism", which actually isn't a movement this is part of at all.  Southern Cultural Christianity is, but that's completely different, and indeed largely leans on a different branch of Christianity (the same people who go to Trump rallies and find him to be a fine Christian probably think Constantine the Great ripped the faith away from the Baptists, or something).

Constantine the Great watching the burning of the books of Arian heretics.  Constantine would likely regard most MAGA Christians as appalling on religions grounds, while he'd recognize Christian Nationalist.  He can't be considered one, however.  He's regarded as a saint by the Easter Orthodox and the Ukrainian Catholic Church.

You can get a taste of what's actually up with these songs from the comments to Rich Men North of Richmond on Youtube.

1.  39 years old. Spent 12 1/2 years as a plumber until the small company I worked for went under as the pandemic began. Working for a big chain home store for the last 3 years getting beaten into the ground, treated like a disposable asset, and watching my earnings equal less and less as the prices of basic necessities goes up. Ive fought addiction and won. Ive found love and lost it. This song resonates on a level that I havent felt in a long time. Thank you and god bless. 🙏

2.  As a disabled Marine, struggling to even be in public, struggling with all the bullshit in this world, struggling with thoughts of suicide, struggling to find pride in my Country, struggling to find the strength to get up every day to do the same damn thing to barely make ends me… as an American STRUGGLING with LIFE… thank you for bringing a little hope to my small part of the world… thank you for letting me know I am not alone with my thoughts and feelings… THANK YOU and God bless you Oliver Anthony

3.  I’m a 42 year old ex addict living in a camper trailer pay cheque to pay cheque with my kids part time while working to help the homeless and addicted community. I won’t stop working like the rest of you because we know at some point that one day will come that we may get that one break that shows us it was all worth it. 

Amazing song Oliver, thank you for sharing it

4.  As a hard working black American man, this song is 🔥 📛  the first country song on my Playlist and I hope for more. In an Era where soul is gone from music THIS IS A BREATH OF MUCH NEEDED AIR. even put a tear in my eye 🔥

5.  And just like that you became the voice of 40 or 50 million working men. Amazing work, sir.

And there are a lot more.

Let's break down the lyrics again, emphasizing the ones that are telling.

I've been sellin' my soul, workin' all day

Overtime hours for bullshit pay

So I can sit out here and waste my life away

Drag back home and drown my troubles away

It's a damn shame what the world's gotten to

For people like me and people like you

Wish I could just wake up and it not be true

But it is, oh, it is

Livin' in the new world

With an old soul

These rich men north of Richmond

Lord knows they all just wanna have total control

Wanna know what you think, wanna know what you do

And they don't think you know, but I know that you do

'Cause your dollar ain't shit and it's taxed to no end

'Cause of rich men north of Richmond

I wish politicians would look out for miners

And not just minors on an island somewhere

Lord, we got folks in the street, ain't got nothin' to eat

And the obese milkin' welfare

Well, God, if you're 5-foot-3 and you're 300 pounds

Taxes ought not to pay for your bags of fudge rounds

Young men are puttin' themselves six feet in the ground

'Cause all this damn country does is keep on kickin' them down

Lord, it's a damn shame what the world's gotten to

For people like me and people like you

Wish I could just wake up and it not be true

But it is, oh, it is

Livin' in the new world

With an old soul

These rich men north of Richmond

Lord knows they all just wanna have total control

Wanna know what you think, wanna know what you do

And they don't think you know, but I know that you do

'Cause your dollar ain't shit and it's taxed to no end

'Cause of rich men north of Richmond

I've been sellin' my soul, workin' all day

Overtime hours for bullshit pay

 Okay, some of that, like Mr. Reich notes, is economic, but a lot of it isn't. The protagonist notes:

1.  He has "an old soul".

2.  The rich men he complains about want total control, even over what he thinks.

3.  He complains about the Jeffrey Epstein saga, but more in an allegorical way than a specific way, suggesting that politicians are more concerned with their immoral pursuits than the lives of average working people.

4.  He takes a shot at the welfare poor, and unusually, notes fat ones (hardly anyone does that in contemporary America).

Hmmmm. . . Doesn't seem to be all economic. . .

There's a common liberal belief, and Reich is one of those espousing it, that if only the economy is good, everyone is happy.  Reich is one of those who goes on to point out, and correctly, that the economy really is good right now.  One who also does this nearly weekly is Donna Brazile, who is a Democratic political commentator I really like.

Nobody is saying the economy is perfect, of course, including Reich or Brazile.

But there's something they've noted, that they are missing.

If the economy is really good, and in actuality it is, and a large section of the middle class (and contrary to what pundits claim, it's definitely not all the "white male" middle class) are bitterly unhappy, what's going on.

The usual assertion is that the economy is doing well, but people just don't know it, which is a bit of a bizarre assertion.  People tend to know if they're doing well or not, which raises this question, with unemployment down, wages up, and inflation slowing, are people doing well?

Well, they might not actually be, and COVID may have made that plain to them.

One thing that's underlying the tone of the song is the economic shift in the nature of work since about 1970.

A meme version of the economics of the 1950s. . . dealing with more than economics.  This depiction of the 50s drives commentators nuts, who decry it as a myth, but there's more than a little truth to it, both in what it states, and in what it otherwise depicts.  

Americans tend to look back to the 1950s as some sort of golden age, and have a really mythologized view of the era.  Be that as it may, in the 50s, most men could in fact support a family on their income alone, and not just from white collar jobs but from blue collar jobs.  Not only could most men do it, but most men did do it.  As late as the 1970s, a lot of husbands actually objected to their wives working, whereas now most married women not only do work, but must work.  Perhaps an error in here, however, is that in the 50s that a lot of people were going to college.  In reality, in 1950 only 7.3% of men had a college degree and only 5.2% of women did, which by 1960 was 10.3% and 6% respectively.  This means, however, that a university degree was like gold.  Of interest, both of my mother's parents had university degrees, which is phenomenal given that they obtained them in the early 20th Century.  Neither of my father's parents did.  Also of note, my mother had a college degree, an AS, but she obtained in the 1970s and was not a high school graduate due to the Great Depression, where has my father had a DDS and his brother and one of his sisters attended university in the 1940s/1950s.

The 50s through the early 1970s really reflect post World War Two conditions, however, and might not be the best era to look at.  The 40s can't be looked at either, due to World War Two, nor can the 30s, due to the Great Depression.  You really have to get back to the 10s and 20s for economies to compare to, with some comparison from later decades.  Any way you look at it, however, a lot more families were supported from a single, usually male, income, but it was also the case that a lot more women always worked than is recognized.

Myths have power, however, and they also reflect aspects of reality as a rule.  Beowulf may not have slain a dragon in Sweden, but a warrior named Bear (Bee Wolf) probably was an early Scandinavia warrior vassal of note.  There really was a big battle at Troy, and it probably did start off as a totally juvenile spat over a girl that somebody regarded as a babe, although it's likely there was more to it than that.  Arthur wasn't a chivalric knight, but somebody the legend was based on, probably was a British Roman who did take on the invading Teutons in defense of Roman Britain heroically before going down on a battlefield.  There was indeed an era, not long ago, when a high school education could bring a person a living wage for not only the graduate, but a spouse and kids, and provide a middle income life.

And there was also a time during which, as harsh as the reality is, that you weren't in grocery store lines behind people who are paying for food with assistance, but who had money for tattoos, and who have suspended any regard for their personal appearance.

This is all obvious to people who are barely eeking by, but who know that their grandparents, with no more education than they have, did relatively well.

To add to it, although only subtly grasped, people are also aware, even as they participate in it, that the country's become a moral sewer.  The problem, in a way, is not that Jeffrey Epstein is uncommon, but rather than he is common in a way.  Only the rich, of course, used him as a procurer for teenage prostitutes, but the entertainment industry is essentially a society wide procurer for cinematic prostitution that has become increasingly debased.

All that does involve wealth, but part of the underlying tone, and one that people like Reich can't seem to grasp, is that the American political left insists that it all conduct be accepted and each person's choices, no matter how self-destructive, anti-natural, debased, or weird, be celebrated.  People very well know that the entire movement to support surgical gender mutilation of children is wrong, for example, as well as deeply weird, but the left demands it be celebrated, just as it insists that what nearly amount to homosexual sex manuals be placed in public schools with public funds.  It is not that the standard bearers of the right are moral people.  Trump is a serial polygamist.  It's rather that there's a difference in promoting immorality and demanding that it be accepted and distancing policy from it, even if you engage in immorality yourself.  Double standards abound, but what the unhappy class is looking at doesn't seem to be grasped.  

Indeed, as the left repeatedly fails to grasp in regards to the that unhappy class, is that the class itself may not really apply the standards it mourns all that deeply, in regard to at least some of them.  Critics from the left, like Robert Reich, keep branding the movement "Christian Nationalist", as do some critics from the right, such as Susan Stubson.  They're both in correct.  Christian Nationalist take the practice of Christianity really seriously.  Southern Cultural Christian Populist, however, have a world roughly framed out by the Southern Baptist Convention, the pre-1970 Episcopal and Methodist Church's, or the African Methodist Church loosely in mind, but as a framework, not as a fortress.  Put another way, Christian Nationalist look to the Apostolic age and know what that meant, and aren't really comfortable completely with people who sit around watching NASCAR on Sundays.  Southern Cultural Christians are perfectly comfortable with watching NASCAR on Sundays and attend church for weddings, funerals, Easter and Christmas. They aren't the same thing.

But what both are uncomfortable with, but in different ways, is a liberalism that insists that genders can be changed, and there's nothing wrong with books in public schools that explore sodomy.  That exceeds the boundaries of the loosely defined structure for Southern Cultural Christians and is definitely gravely immoral to Christian Nationalists, as well as frankly gravely immoral to any Christians of any stripe who are serious about what their faiths hold.

In 2008, I stopped at the liquor store on my way home from work to buy a six-pack of beer.  It was late summer.

In the liquor store there were two young women, in their very early 20s, with a young man of the same age.  One of the young women was holding a baby.

The girl, and that's really what she was, holding the baby was pretty, but in a trashy sort of way, and in the way that you know won't last.  The other girl was not.  Both young women were wearing t-shirts that were too small for them, and too tight to be decent.  They were both wearing Daisy Dukes.  The young man was shaking and incredibly disheveled.  It was pretty clear that he was the father of the baby, equally clear that he and the young woman weren't married, and just as clear that he was a tweaker.

The pretty girl holding the baby had eyeliner and a proud visage, sort of like the pretty but trashy girls did back when I was in high school. They'd retained the eyeliner sort of make up that girls in junior high wore, back when I was in junior high, after girls of that age first started taking up makeup.  Most girls abandoned that by high school, but the ones that were of a certain type didn't.  That girl, the pretty one, was wearing an Obama for President t-shirt.  I knew at that moment, well before the election, who would win.

The image that was on the girl's t-shirt.  It wasn't "Hope" that they had a vested interest in.

Now, this isn't a comment on President Obama at all, but rather on something else, and that something else gets back to Rich Men North of Richmond.

The young man in that group is likely dead by now.  Tweaking in his early 20s, it's unlikely he survived another fifteen years.  The girl who the mother likely is, and if she was 21 then, she's 36 now.  She's also likely in the 300 lbs category the song referenced, the signs of that already being there.  And indeed, what she was supporting, and likely at least her female cohort, wasn't "hope", as Obama was espousing, it was government assistance.  The child, now 15, has probably spent his or her entire life on it.

And that, in some vague sort of way, is what Oliver Anthony is lamenting.  

All of these people likely descended from people who had held blue collar jobs.  But a modern society reconstructed in a liberal image had turned them into wards of the government in some ways, and they weren't ashamed of it.  Their attachment to any sort of conventional morality had lapsed, perhaps beyond repair, and they were reproducing without structure and raising a generation behind them, perhaps as they'd been raised, that recalls Philippians,  "Their end is destruction, their god is the belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things."  They didn't go on to be Megan Rapinoe, who would be just about their age, almost undoubtedly, but probably heavily tattooed, and living on the funds generated by others.

A large number of abandoned rust belt and other blue collar Americans are well aware of this, even if they aren't necessarily beyond some of the call of that themselves.

That's what liberal pundits are missing, and that's what populist, some sincere and some not, have picked up on.

El Paso Sheriff : What's it mean? What's it leadin' to? You know, if you'd have told me 20 years ago, that I'd see children walking the streets of our Texas towns with green hair and bones in their noses, I just flat-out wouldn't have believed you.

Ed Tom Bell : Signs and wonders. But I think once you quit hearing "sir" and "ma'am," the rest is soon to foller.

El Paso Sheriff : Oh, it's the tide. It's the dismal tide.

No Country For Old Men. 

And that's why their message is failing.

And for traditional conservatives, as, well as liberals, there may now be, by this time, something even scarier at work. . . . 

Blog Mirror: Hageman Says Gender Affirming Treatements are Sexual Labotomies.

 A recent Cowboy State Daily article on a comment by Harriet Hageman:

Hageman Says Gender-Affirming Treatments Are Sexual Lobotomies | Your Wyoming News Source (cowboystatedaily.com)

I find myself cringing when I agree with something Hageman says, as she has so far been a real Trumpite and came into her position by turning on her old political friend, Liz Cheney.  Cheney was absolutely correct, and stood for the law, on the issue of Trump and his subversion of democracy.

Hageman's comparison here, however, is quite correct.

This shows the extent to which issues like this really serve as red meat for the populist right.  The left stands in wonder on how so many in the country suddenly seem willing to force their views on society even if it means trampling democracy.  Having used the courts to trample democracy for decades, and coming to the point where, in their minds, mutilation of children in the name of transgenderism, something that may very well not even exists, helps explain how we got to the scary point we are now at.

There's no such thing as debt "forgiveness", existentially, and why do we never discuss the morality of economics?

I'm continually amazed by how liberal economists actually don't understand economics at all.  It's bizarre. 

Consider this, brought about by the Supreme Court's determination that the President cannot forgive student loans by executive fiat (which is actually what it decided):

Robert Reich

@RBReich

·

Jun 30

Total student loan debt that would have been erased for millions of Americans: $400 billion Total cost of the Trump tax cuts that largely benefited the wealthy and corporations: $1.9 trillion This is what I mean when I say the system is rigged.

Debt isn't really "erased".  It's transferred.  Debt that is forgiven is transferred to whomever extended the credit.

In this case, the student debt would have been passed on to the public, which already is heavily in debt with; 1) personal debt and 2) the debt the government has already imposed upon it.

Which raises this question. Would transfer of this debt have been moral?  

This hardly ever comes up in the context of this sort of discussion, but would it have been?  The general population of the United States would have acquired the personal debt of students, largely unknown to them, for what reason?

Well, the reason is that most student loans are bad investments, not yielding a sufficient return to pay for themselves.  That can indeed be a personal tragedy.  It is one that is encouraged by the student loan system, which no longer makes any sense.  Loans should be subject to more criteria than simply somebody wants one, but that is about it.

The Government indeed has some culpability in this, and perhaps that provides a basis for "forgiveness", but only if the Government seeks to address the underlying problem, for which there is no evidence.

At any rate, all the Court said is that Congress has to do this.  Part of the Court's ongoing reminder to Congress that it has a job to do, and to the general public that it's up to it to elect people.  Liberals hate that as, by and large, the public isn't too keen on stuff like this, and they know that.

As for tax cuts, I agree with Mr. Reich that taxes should be raised, but the President can't do that by fiat either.  Hence, why these two items cannot be compared, and the "rigged" accusation here is subject to a logic failure.

Pride and Unintended Consequences.

Yesterday, I ran this item, which noted the following:

Lex Anteinternet: On Pride Month, the nature of Pride, and compellin...: 

All of this fuels part of the counter reaction which is raging in our time.  People wonder how a late septuagenarian serial polygamist with weird bad hair can openly demand to be crowned Emperor and stand a good chance of having it happen, or how a thirty-something single Californian who has never held a real job but who spouts conspiracy theories and cloaks himself in the mantle of true conservatism can win office and be prayed over by college Republicans, or how individuals can be voted onto school boards with the intent to remove books.  Well, an administration that demands you accept the unnatural, a political party that requires you accept the new eugenics, and the stocking of books in school libraries that are openly sexually perverse are a big part of the reason why.

In other words, going from the widely accepted "look, we don't tell you what to do in your bedrooms, so just leave the same sex attracted alone, and they won't bother you", to "you must accept children being taught sodomy" and "you must let gender mutilation of minors occur" is a big part of that.  People on the left might claim that's the manifestation of Christian Nationalism (which it really isn't), but a lot of the reaction is just a species knowing what is biologically correct and reacting to being attacked. 

It wasn't the first time I noted this.

It's sometimes claimed, although I haven't researched it, that the moral descent of Berlin in the 1920s lead in part to people voting for the Nazis in the early 30s.  I.e., their revulsion over what they were seeing lead them to an extreme reaction, it's claimed.  At least one writer has noted:

It seems grotesque in retrospect, but Hitler posed as a moral crusader gallantly battling the forces of iniquity, corruption, and even deceit. Many Germans, horrified by the loosening of moral standards in Germany after World War I, were duped by his promises of moral rejuvenation. Hitler’s project resonated with many who were disgusted by the rampant hedonism and carnality of Weimar high culture and popular culture. Whether one views Hitler and Nazism as a Utopian and technocratic expression of the modernist project, or as an atavistic reaction against modernity, or as some blend of the two (“reactionary modernism” or “conservative revolution”), or as something completely unique, it is clear that Nazism promised a resurrection or awakening of the German people that involved a revival of morality that was in the process of decay and degeneration.

Hitler as Moral Crusader and Liar, Richard Weikart, abstract.

Extreme wealth in upper Russian society certainly contributed to the rise of the Communists in late imperial Russia and the Bolshevik Revolution.

The point of this is this.  While the Southern Populist ethics that have spread into the American middle class country wide (more on this soon) are full of hypocrisies, people do have a limit. Most people don't think night and day about politics, which opens the void to people like Rep. Ward of Casper, whose reaction to a Pride event in Casper lead to this headline:

Wyoming Lawmaker Calls For Boycott Of Businesses That Sponsored Casper Pride Fest

Ward's rise as a legislator in a state that she has almost no connections with stunned me.  She's of the extreme right and has a Weltanschauung that she's imported from the Rust Belt, where she previously lived and politiced. She's associated herself in politics with Christianity, but in a way that suggest she doesn't understand her claimed faith very well.  In Illinois, she showed up associated with some outrage over a school teacher who claimed that Christians and Muslims worship the same God, which in fact they do.  In Wyoming's last legislative session, she made the claim that Christians are not their brother's keeper, and that the story of Cain and Able in the Old Testament really only meant that you just weren't supposed to kill your brother, but otherwise could let him suffer.

Middle Class Germans of the 1920s were heir to a long Christian tradition.  Upper class Germans were as well, and frankly lower class Germans were too, that latter class being the one most vulnerable to Nazi and Communist agitation.  Russia had a long history of Christianity, leading into 1917.  

Wealthy societies produce largess.  Largess produces self-indulgence, and a lot of the self-indulgence will, seemingly almost inevitably, turn into sexual narcissism and individual domination.  Disgust inevitably results by those who don't chose that path, which is, at the end of the day, most people.  But when a society becomes focused on it, those willing to stand most in the opposing spotlight, no matter how extreme they are, will take up most of the opposing light.  

Immoderation leads, inevitably, to immodesty, which leads, almost inevitably, to opposing immoderation.  When toleration becomes a demand for absolutely acceptance, in categories of extremes, those masses simply trying to get through their days will listen to the loudest voices.

Southern Populism gave us what the Southern Strategy took into the GOP.  Losing the moorings on genuine civil rights, amongst other things, gave us a warped left wing view that individualistic self definition is a right, no matter how destructive or delusional.  That latter left wing view is pushing the other, far right populist view, to success, at least temporarily.

Oikophobia

Oikophobia is, in psychological terms, fear of one's own home.  In political terms, however, it's the repudiation of your national and cultural heritage.  The right wing accuses the left of it constantly, and its overdone, but the claim is not wholly without merit.  

Indeed, without knowing the term, I've noted the irony of it frequently.  The West, culturally, is the heir of, in chronological order, Greek thought, Roman thought and Christianity.  While we're at it, we'd note that the European East, where not mixed with the West, is the heir of Greek thought and Christianity, with Rome omitted.

In terms of influence, however, the West is, in order, heir to Christianity, Roman thought, and then Greek thought.  One of the features of Christianity is tolerance, due to love, of all humans.  The irony of much of modern leftist thinking is that it's taken Christian views, including tolerance, the equality of women, and the like, and sort of perverted them. That's given rise in recent years to some strains of thought in Christian Nationalism and in Populism.

Anyhow, one of the things I've noted from time to time is this.  In no other society but one heavily influenced by Christianity would questioning everything about what's inherent in the culture, including at least cultural Christianity, be tolerated.  The broadening influence of Rome is part of that as well.  That's why, ironically enough, oikophobia tends to be limited to European cultures, including our own.

I've also personally observed, but I don't think I've posted on it, that the explosion of academic sub disciplines in recent years creates entire fields that only exist in academia.  I.e., while most of what a classic liberal education provides is useful in all sorts of ways, and employable in all sorts of ways, some of the more recent sub disciplines are wholly useless outside of academia.  All the recent higher education focus on, for example, transgenderism that has schools, such as the University of Wyoming, employing people to worry about a demographic which is something like 1/2 of 1% of the American population, but which has morphed in record speed from a demographic that previously was subject to psychological pondering to one now where a 200 lbs+ man can claim to be a girl and then sit around in a sorority, crossed dressed, but with an erection.

What this notes is that, but for academic oikophobia really can only exist in that atmosphere:

The Paradox of Academic Oikophobia

An interesting item in this text:

What makes oikophobia paradoxical is that those who are most infected by this pathology are the greatest beneficiaries of national largesse. In other words, they bite the hand that feeds them, and they bite it the hardest.

It's very true.

Left, Right, and Changing Lanes. The Evolution of the American Political Parties. Part 1, the Republican Party.

Chuck Gray's recent fantastical editorial in the Tribune brought this to mind, along with letters to the editor every week accusing somebody of being a "RINO".

Parties evolve, but the parties themselves, and their members, don't seem to recognize this.  This causes endless ironies in finger pointing exercises.

To listen to the current GOP in the state, everyone who is not a Trumpist is a RINO, a secret liberal Democrat or maybe even a Communist bent on the destruction of the nation.  The populist right doesn't seem to realize here that 1) it's the new arrival in the state party; and 2) it's the new arrival in the GOP.  Trumpist/Populist could in some ways be accused of being DUYs. . . Democrats Until Yesterday.

A quick look at this, using the unfortunate blue/red color scheme adopted by the American press as an example of misbegotten American Exceptionalism.

The History of the GOP

The Republican Party, had it not adopted that name, and had the "Liberal" "Conservative" monikers been around in 1854 when neck beard (truly) Horace Greeley gave them that name, was originally a center left to radical left party, and could have called itself the Liberal Party.

The party was anti-slavery (liberal) and pro-American System in terms of economics (liberal).  That is, it took a radical view on human liberty, siding with natural law, and was in favor of state participation in the economy.

We'll skip the big early example of its policies, the prosecution of the Civil War in order to end the bondage of slavery, and go right to other examples.  The GOP used the Civil War as an excuse to advance the American System, with the Transcontinental Railroad and the Homestead Act being the big early examples.  It entered public life with the Morrill Land Grant College Act of 1862.  Free of Democratic blocking, it could charge ahead with its concepts of equality and government sponsorship of industry.  Following the war, it kept at it, with it being the party that sponsored civil rights and favored government interaction in the economy all the way up until the death of Theodore Roosevelt in January 1919.

During that period, it wasn't uniformly on the left.  It was center left in the majority, with the far left in the party struggling to rise.  The only time it really did rise was with the Presidency of Theodore Roosevelt from 1901 to 1909.  That brought Progressives to the forefront and they dominated the party.  The split with Taft however caused a rift in which the Progressives bolted, and the Democrats adopted a Progressive platform.

Former mainstream Republicans came back in the party and even Roosevelt himself did, but the ball had been passed. With Roosevelt's death in 1919, the chance to revive it died as well.  Dedicated Progressives became Democrats, where the movement was strong in the northern party, or joined more radical parties, with some becoming Socialist and some even joining Communist parties.  The flame having burnt out, the party became a Conservative Party with the rise of Harding, dedicated mostly at that time to maintaining an imagined pre Great War sort of nation.

That's what the party became in earnest with the collapse of the Hoover Presidency and the Great Depression.  The GOP was "conservative", but mostly in the sense of being against stuff.  It was against the New Deal, it was against foreign involvement.  It was against most of what Theodore Roosevelt had been for.  It retained that basic instinct, which is in part why it lost elections in the 1930s, until the fall of China in 1949 when it was shocked into realizing that being against foreign involvement meant supporting the rise of Communism.  At that point, it became anti Communist and supportive of foreign involvement.  That meant supporting big government.

From 1949 until the election of Ronald Reagan, the GOP was mildly conservative, but only barely so.  Discerning the difference between Republicans of the era and Democrats was not all that easy until around 1968 when modern Conservatism began to rise.

It was thinkers like William F. Buckley who began to give intellectual weight to the GOP in the 60s, with those individuals having a concrete philosophical concept of what being a Conservative meant.  Still, it was the "Country Club Republican" who dominated the GOP from the onset of the Depression until some point in the 1970s.  They were fiscally conservative, and in the 30s and 40s they were opponents of foreign entanglements.  That was pretty much the extent of their ideology.  Starting, as noted, in 1949, their anti Communism lead them to be in favor of taking on the Communist around the globe, although the Democrats were in favor of the same thing at the same time.  In spite of Buckley and his fellow travelers, it wasn't really until the late 60s that an ideology really developed.

The first time it really showed up was in 1968. That's the same year the Democratic Party nearly split in two over the Vietnam War at Chicago.  Republicans didn't split, they continued to support the war, and they were increasingly opposed to the rising liberalism in the Democratic Party, most particularly the rising social liberalism.  The extra judicial opinion of Roe v. Wade in 1973 increased the party's discovery of Buckleyite conservatism and the financial crisis of the early 70s, fueled by the spending of Country Club Republicans and Democrats, increased it. The result was Ronald Reagan.

Reagan was the first really ideological Republican President since Theodore Roosevelt, although his wing of the GOP was not completely dominant.  Country Club Republicans remained hugely influential in the party, and in essence they governed together as a more or less friendly coalition.  Reagan Republicans yielded to Country Club Republicans again with both Bush's, who were also heavily influenced by Neo Conservatives, who were largely former Democrats or in some cases actually former Trotskyites.

Reagan, however, also brought into the Republican Party Southern Democrats, who were populists.  Making a political calculation that this remaining body of conservative populists would abandon the Democrats as the Democrats had abandoned them brought the GOP into the South for the first time.  It also, however, brought populist into the GOP for the first time since the late 1890s.

Populists would be a noisy distraction in the Republican Party throughout the Reagan and Bush years, but it was really the coalition of Country Club Republicans, Buckleyites and Neo Conservatives who controlled it.  Starting with the second George Bush, it began to run into real problems as it could no longer gain the majority of the popular vote.  It also tended to only give lip service to the populists, which tends to be the case for populism's history.

Donald Trump, whatever his merits or demerits, tapped into the populists, knowing that Republican and Democratic Populists, and they remained in both parties, were angry and completely disaffected.  He brought them wholesale into the GOP, and they are his base.  And now, for the first time in the country's history, they're able to control large parts of a political party nationwide.

Given the history of populism, the GOP should be worried.

Before we do that, however, how can we sum up the history of the Republican Party, so we can tell who are the dreaded RINO's and who are not.  Well, thus:

• From March 10, 1854, until January 6, 1919, the Republican Party was the nation's liberal party, an period of 65 years.
• From 1919 until 1949, the Republican Party, the Republican Party was a conservative party, but one lacking an intellectual foundation, a period of 30 years.
• From 1949 until 1980, the Republican Party was a moderate center right party, a period of 31 years.
• From 1980 to 2016, the Republican Party was a Buckleyite conservative party, a period of 36 years.
• From 2016 to the present, a period of seven years, the GOP has been in a civil war between Buckleyite conservatives and populists.

Blog Mirror: Garnett on "Why Liberalism and Constitutionalism Need Christianity"

 

Garnett on "Why Liberalism and Constitutionalism Need Christianity"