[lbo-talk] Re: further adventures in political surrealism

JBrown72073 at cs.com JBrown72073 at cs.com
Thu Feb 16 07:47:43 PST 2006



>If it was, then everything would fit perfectly. Everyone would be voting
>rationally (as statistically collective masses, if not as individuals). And
>the Franks puzzle would not only be solved, but would contribute to
>confirming the oldest assertion in the mainstream sociological book: that
>status varies independently of class, and can't be reduced to it.
>
>Michael

Except it leaves the mystery of (1) why anyone in the lower 90% of income votes for Bush and (2) why people vote at all. I mean, what motivates them, not 'what's the point?' Because a large percent--often a majority--don't vote. So voting as an act needs to have some more motivation than the empty exhortations 'don't forget to vote!' we get around election time. I still think Frank is essentially right when he says that the Democrats could do a lot better among the U.S. working class if they weren't Republicans light on economic issues. For example, they could actually make a case for why the estate tax is a good thing, and maybe should be higher, say, confiscatory. Let's have a public debate about whether the children of the rich should be automatically rich or whether they should have to get a job. But that's against most politicians' personal interests, so we'll never find out if it's against their political interests.

Jenny Brown



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list