03-10-2021, 02:01 PM
I remember 2010. President Barack had taken innovative, rational measures to reverse an economic downturn that had legitimately scared people of a reprise of the Great Depression. What was impossible was of course to recover the speculative boom that had imploded.
The recovery was on a scale unprecedented since the recovery from the Great Depression. To be sure there was a huge difference: the Obama recovery came after roughly a year and a half of a destructive meltdown, and FDR's recovery came after three years of destructive meltdown.
![[Image: 9f7f6b540986c66f8f4d3fd2e7ef3257.png]](https://preview1.advisorperspectives.com/images/content_image/data/9f/9f7f6b540986c66f8f4d3fd2e7ef3257.png)
(Pardon the repetitive quality of the discourse, as I have said much of this before). Matching the economic peaks of late 2007 and late 1929, share prices had fallen at least 50% within a year of the peaks, indicating that something was terribly wrong. Early 2009 and early 1931 are good analogues for what had happened. In early 2009 the stock market (and other economic activity) started to rebound. It would take until 1932, due to the horrible bank runs that devastated the overall economy when it needed no further harm, for the early-Depression economy to bottom out.
The economic royalists of FDR's time had lost huge amounts of asset valuation, and profits would be slow to recover. They had to concern themselves with economic survival, and buying into the political process in the 1930's made little sense. In the 2010's the economic elites had the funds for buying into the political process -- and used those funds effectively, sponsoring politicians who fully believed the canon that no human suffering can ever be in excess in the enhancement of the power, indulgence, and gain of economic elites. Exit Russ Feingold; enter Ron Johnson. Economic elites often hold the attitude that the rest of Humanity owes those elites everything for the privilege of living in their world... and that is exactly how they behaved in 2010.
Question: will 2022 be more like 2010 or like 1934 politically? If like 2010, then you can expect a raucous expression of right-wing politics that gives a populist flavoring to reactionary ideology. If like 1934, then we will know that the neoliberal era in which profits are all that matter has come to an end.
Donald Trump lost his re-election bid, but it was close. Even so we cannot quite be certain that his support has cratered after the January 6 insurrection. Trump has true believers as neither Dubya nor Herbert Hoover had. Trump was able to get people to risk their lives, fortunes, and reputations on his behalf, which speaks much about the personal loyalty that many people have to him.
Analogies always present themselves, and many contradict. That Donald Trump barely lost his re-election bid despite bungling his response to COVID-19 indicates a strong residuum of support for his beliefs. COVID-19 will likely be old news in 2022.
The recovery was on a scale unprecedented since the recovery from the Great Depression. To be sure there was a huge difference: the Obama recovery came after roughly a year and a half of a destructive meltdown, and FDR's recovery came after three years of destructive meltdown.
(Pardon the repetitive quality of the discourse, as I have said much of this before). Matching the economic peaks of late 2007 and late 1929, share prices had fallen at least 50% within a year of the peaks, indicating that something was terribly wrong. Early 2009 and early 1931 are good analogues for what had happened. In early 2009 the stock market (and other economic activity) started to rebound. It would take until 1932, due to the horrible bank runs that devastated the overall economy when it needed no further harm, for the early-Depression economy to bottom out.
The economic royalists of FDR's time had lost huge amounts of asset valuation, and profits would be slow to recover. They had to concern themselves with economic survival, and buying into the political process in the 1930's made little sense. In the 2010's the economic elites had the funds for buying into the political process -- and used those funds effectively, sponsoring politicians who fully believed the canon that no human suffering can ever be in excess in the enhancement of the power, indulgence, and gain of economic elites. Exit Russ Feingold; enter Ron Johnson. Economic elites often hold the attitude that the rest of Humanity owes those elites everything for the privilege of living in their world... and that is exactly how they behaved in 2010.
Question: will 2022 be more like 2010 or like 1934 politically? If like 2010, then you can expect a raucous expression of right-wing politics that gives a populist flavoring to reactionary ideology. If like 1934, then we will know that the neoliberal era in which profits are all that matter has come to an end.
Donald Trump lost his re-election bid, but it was close. Even so we cannot quite be certain that his support has cratered after the January 6 insurrection. Trump has true believers as neither Dubya nor Herbert Hoover had. Trump was able to get people to risk their lives, fortunes, and reputations on his behalf, which speaks much about the personal loyalty that many people have to him.
Analogies always present themselves, and many contradict. That Donald Trump barely lost his re-election bid despite bungling his response to COVID-19 indicates a strong residuum of support for his beliefs. COVID-19 will likely be old news in 2022.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.