The Populist Persuasion: An American History

Rating:
Summary: A good review of the decline of progressive populism.....
Review: In the 60's the Democratic Party abandoned the working class in and it was Republicans who have laid claim to be the spokesmen of taxpayers, home owners, small-business entreprenuers, and church-goers. Most Democrats would say that 'populism' means right-wing fundamentalism and racism, which says a lot about why the Democratic Party is so divided and diminished today.

The first populists were the People's Party of the 1890's which rose up against the concentration of wealth that resulted from the Civil War. Kaxin points out that pure populism has 2 main components: 1) a plebeian moralism that identifies "common folks" with moral virtue based on the teachings of Christianity; 2) a "producers" economic view that elevated labor over capital as the source of all wealth and economic progress.

With it's roots in the ideas of Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln, populists believed that wage earners, self-employed and farmers were the bedrock of the American Democracy, and that Landowners, Railroads, Corporations, Wall Street---in effect anyone who made a living from investment instead of work---as literally 'immoral', and undercut the the intentions of the American Revolution.

Kazin does a good job of documenting the roots of populism resulting in the formation of the People's Party, how it changed in the urban socialist and union movements, it's connection to Prohibition, it's place in the New Deal, the influences of the Cold War, and finally, the abandonment of populism by the "New" Left and the student activists of the 60's.

Also, Kazin could spend a little more time on studying how populism was co-opted by Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, as it would provide more insights on how the Republicans and the right-wing have managed to co-opt it today.

Aside from lipservice such as Clinton in his '92 acceptance speech, and Gore's "people versus the powerful" line, populist sentiments are absent from both the Democratic Party and today's so-called "Left". This is due to several reasons, which Kazin alludes to. 1) A large percentage of 60's Activists and the "New" Left was Jewish and agnostic, while populism was always religious, patriotic, and often had an anti-semitic fringe. 2) An old fashioned 'work ethic" seemed irrelevant to the spoiled sons and daughters of the middle-class in the 60's. 3) Today's so-called "Left" had it's world views shaped by their participation in the Civil Rights, Vietnam and Sexual Liberation Movements of the 60's, instead of the farmer's cooperative movements and union organizing.

Kazin seems to be one of an increasing numbers of skeptics of 60's Student activism and he speaks from his own experiences from inside academia and the SDS. Kazin gently ever so gently faults the "New" Left as the point where things changed.

Personally, I think the "New" Left needs a more direct condemnation than Kazin is willing to take on. But gently so gently he points out that the student activists of the late 60's and early 70's were over-whelmingly middle-class, suburban or urban, and ultimatly elitist. It was impossible for them to identify with the views of the working class. But that is no excuse for them to be practically contempuous of the values of work and religion and community and patriotism. Unfortunately, it's these folks who today form the so-called "activist base" of the Democratic Party.

Before the 60's, populism supported the New Deal and FDR. After the 60's, the new "fat cats" and threats to working class became 'big government' and 'bureaucrats'.

Populism used to mean farmers and laborers struggling to build cooperatives and unions against the entrenched power of Capital and "Combinations". Today it's Republicans champions "Middle America" under attack by a spendthrift, immoral political elite Democrats.

This is a sad state of affairs. I would fault Kazin for not being more critical of the "New" Left and the Student Movments of the 60's. He admits his view of populism is jaundiced by his own middle class Jewish upbringing.

But others would call it 'balanced'. Kazin is right on the money in concluding that until America returns of it's 'root' values of progressive populism, America will continue to experience economic stagnation, increasing concentration of wealth and priviledge, a declining middle class, and war.

Frankly a better book on populism needs to be written. But until then, "The Populist Persuasion" is a good start to attempting to understand what populism was and it's unique influence on American politics.