I re-read the FX chapter of Wall Street that you posted. Lovely piece of work, as I remembered, but I have a minor query. Why do you say, in a reversal of 19th century populism's anti-gold, pro-silver attitudes, today's far right wingers tend to be gold bugs, or vice versa? I paraphrase. I don't disagree about the modern link between gold buggery and lunatic right wing politics. But why the implied comparison to populism? Populism was politically complex, yes?, and had right wing element, like virulent racism. Not that that was lunatic or so regarded at the time. But wasn't it anti-corporate, anti-Wall Street, pro-democratic within the limits of how democracy was then understood (white, male)? Granted, the modern wing nuts tend to view Wall St as part of a cabal of illuminati and International Jewry. I'm not sure that a modern left-right schematism fits much 19th century American politics very well. There was some classical leftism of the socialist or anarchist varieties in the labor movement, but a modern welfare state was something that was off the map for the entire political spectrum. I'd like to see your explanation of why populism (old) is like right wing extremism (today).
Sent from my iPad