How Democrats Killed Their Populist Soul

[Bob Butler 54]

(10-25-2016, 11:29 AM)Mikebert Wrote: I learned a bit from that article.  I always saw the beginning of the anti-populist move in the Democratic party with JFK's call for tax cuts, which were implemented by Johnson in 1964. But Johnson pretty much on board with the New Deal and Humphrey was a New Dealer.  I always knew that part of the shift was the civil rights/anti-war Democrats who wanted to put social issues front and center. But this article shows another generation divide between Lost and GI's.  The old-school populist who was ousted was a Lost, one of the original New Dealers. The people who took over were GI's.

You can view it as a shift in priorities as the greatest problems in the culture changed.  The New Deal originally focused on economics.  [understatement] That was important in the 1930s, [/understatement] a key focus, shouldn't be forgotten, and basic.  However, come the 1960s, it wasn't the primary reason not to trust people over 30.

I can acknowledge the shift in emphasis from economics to social issues without framing things in terms of evil triumphing over good or people losing their souls.  The New Deal led to the economic boom time that lasted for decades.  The emphasis and focus on the policies that achieved the boom may have faded as early as the 60s, but it was Reagan that really messed it up, redistributing the wealth from Main Street to Wall Street.

And the old seniority system was flawed.  If one couldn't trust people over 30 back then, people over 60 were right out.  The times, they were a changing.  Weakening the grip of the old dudes seemed like a good idea.

Doesn't mean we shouldn't take a good long look at the economic policies of the original New Dealers.  Now isn't then.  Too much has changed to try to recreate the economy of the time America was Great.  Still, some attitude and base principles might be worthy of review.