Krugman sees new Gilded Age

Bradford DeLong jbdelong at uclink.berkeley.edu
Mon Oct 21 11:21:27 PDT 2002



>[Thought I'd post this nugget from Slate about an upcoming Paul
>Krugman article in the NY Times magazine. As Doug noted yesterday,
>Oct. 16 (in an LBO post I received today) Hotmail is massively
>fucked up currently resulting in extensive email delays. The
>problem seems to be worsening so perhaps this post will hit the list
>about the time Krugman's article hits the stands. I wonder whether
>Krugman's actual article will be less stupid than it sounds from
>this summary.]
>
>Slate.com
>
>Living in a Gilded Age
>By Holly Bailey, Joshua Foer, Sian Gibby, David Plotz, and Kate Taylor
>Updated Wednesday, October 16, 2002, at 1:53 PM PT
>
>New York Times Magazine, Oct. 20
>In Part 1 of a two-part piece on social class, Times columnist Paul
>Krugman says we've entered a new Gilded Age, in which the rich again
>wield as much wealth and power as they did in Gatsby's time. In the
>1980s, the experts looked for economic explanations for the increase
>in inequality. Now there's a growing consensus that the change was
>cultural: a new "permissiveness" that condoned huge executive
>compensation packages.

The thesis is not stupid--and is frighteningly plausible. In my version, it is that the United States of America is not now and has never been a western European-style social democracy. Rather, we Americans believe that our rich, our industrial statesman--even those whom Teddy Roosevelt would call malefactors of great wealth, even those born with many silver spoons in their mouths--in some sense *deserve* their wealth as a reward for their excellence, achievements, and luck in being at the right place at the right time.

According to my version of this thesis, the Great Depression caused the United States to move down a deviant political path--the economic collapse of 1929-1933 threw the moneychangers down from their high places in the temple of our civilization, and the hard times of the 1930s temporarily convinced the politically-active and opinion-molding upper middle class that their interests were aligned with those of the working class. This was a big change: recall that even with a solidly Democratic south (committed to keeping the Nigras down) Democrats and Progressives were a distinct minority force in American politics until 1930.

But now the memory of the Great Depression is all but gone. And the enduring cultural myths of America are pushing American politics and political discourse back into its pre-Rooseveltian form--in which it is easy to make libertarian and individualistic arguments that translate into pro-plutocracy on the ground, and difficult to make arguments for social insurance based on solidarity.

The thing that sends me running screaming into the night...

[Nah. I can't continue this. I have to work today. And it's too depressing.]

Brad DeLong



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list