The president-elect’s tariff threats are rejected by all professional economists and almost all business leaders. They are mistakenly intended to provide international relations negotiating leverage, force firms to build US factories, and increase domestic manufacturing employment employment. They are based upon the misguided belief that the US economy is broken. It is ironic that Democrats and liberal have trumpet the amazing condition of the US economy.
https://www.kent.edu/may-4-historical-accuracy
May 4, 1970. The world changed when 13 student protestors were shot and 4 killed by Ohio State National Guardsmen at Kent State University following the escalation of the “Vietnam War” into Cambodia.
Cleveland had experienced civil disorder in the hot summer of 1966 with the “Hough Riots”.
https://case.edu/ech/articles/h/hough-riots
In the 1968 election, George Wallace won 1/9 Ohio votes, tipping the state to Richard Nixon.
In the hot summer of 1969, the Cuyahoga River “caught fire” and gained national attention.
In November, 1969, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported the atrocities of the My Lai massacre.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_massacre
Governor Rhodes, who oversaw the state guard actions at Kent State, served for 16 years as the governor of Ohio from 1963-71, interrupted by constitutional limits, and then from 1975-83.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Rhodes
Carl Stokes was elected as mayor of Cleveland and served from 1967-71 as the first African-American mayor of a major US city.
https://case.edu/ech/articles/s/stokes-carl-b
He was followed by Republican Ralph Perk.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Perk
Throughout the 1950’s, 1960’s and 1970’s, Cleveland was a leading venue for the growth of “rock ‘n roll”. Counterculture, but not too much.
https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2017/01/birth_rise_of_rock_n_roll_in_c.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upbeat_(TV_program)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CKLW
Like most major cities, Cleveland had two major daily newspapers, many radio stations and 3 network tv stations in the post-war era. Dorothy Fuldheim was a pioneering woman journalist who served throughout this period. She challenged the Kent State shootings.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_Fuldheim
I grew up in a small town of 4,000 people about 30 miles east of Cleveland, dominated by the Cleveland media. As a youngster, I delivered newspapers for the 2 big Cleveland and 2 local printers. Cleveland saw itself as a very major US city. 5th largest nationally in 1920. 8th largest in 1960. Cleveland was a major industrial supplier of the WWII war effort. It’s corporations greatly benefited from the post-war global industrial expansion. They struggled to face the 1970 challenges from international (Japanese) competition, environmental regulations, labor power/regulations, technological changes (IT, process), and consumer/retailer power changes.
The Cleveland economy was stagnant in the 1960’s and declining in the 1970’s. Locals supported the civil rights movement but recoiled from the Hough riots. The world was changing faster than the local economy and thought leaders could digest in 1969. With Kent State, the population and political leaders turned inward. The students were wrong. The guard did its job. A majority agreed. A substantial minority disagreed.
As a country we remain very divided, 54 years later.
The film “Network” expressed this passionate viewpoint in 1976. Economic and cultural changes were so great that people could not digest them. The difficulties of the 1960’s revolution continue 50 years later. Left and right both struggle with our situation today.
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Politics-Voices/2014/1114/Politics-ain-t-beanbag
Donald Trump won. He improved in many demographic segments. The Republican Party won. The Democratic policies, politicians and messages lost. Democrats seems to be in denial.
Most are blaming someone or something: Biden’s late withdrawal, Kamala’s tight link with unpopular Joe, American sexism, Trump’s magnetic hold on the country, the media’s unwillingness to hold Trump and Republicans accountable for lies, plainly inaccurate or misleading claims, an uninspiring centrist platform, too many far-left positions that can be exploited by the opposition, billionaire dark money, Trump’s undermining of any normal frame of reference for character or policies through his years of speaking and acting that would have never been accepted before him, the thumb of the Supreme Court on political activities that benefit Republicans, Trump’s reassembly of the Republican Party into a personality cult where no opposition exists to provide options, discussion or pressures, the Republican news media’s amazing power to shape beliefs of Republicans, independents and Democrats, the undercutting of all institutional frames of reference (media, universities, FBI, DOJ, courts, churches, intellectuals, movies, civic organizations, business, schools, government), Republican manipulation of the state election systems to create a built-in advantages, the lack of a charismatic Democratic leader, polarized politics turns out politicians and their party every 4 years, a lack of belief in any politician or political party, a “what have you done for me lately” transactional politics from many voting blocs, the transition of minority groups from being solidly Democratic to better reflecting a normal distribution of left to right views, the global embrace of populism in a post Western, capitalist, democratic, human rights, global trade and development consensus, the inherent disadvantage of progressive parties who must deliver on their promises rather than oppose and check the misguided, unrealistic opposition. The list is unlimited.
There may be important content in many of these explanations. But, overall, they fail to focus on the two core issues. What policies, politicians and messages COULD be attractive to persuadable voters, either from the base or the middle? How does the Democratic Party reestablish itself as a credible voice to be considered?
This election once again confirmed that the US is an individualistic, capitalist, local, independent, freedom loving, patriotic, culturally moderate society. Economics and culture both matter. A supermajority of Americans wants moderate policies. They don’t really want revolution. This is a real problem for the idealistic wing of the Democratic Party which has grown from 5% to 20% of the country and 10% to 35% of the party. The national American electorate does not support policies that can be framed or challenged as extreme, costly, risky, uncertain, elite, cosmopolitan, global, socialist, irrational, idealist, utopian, etc. Whenever these more progressive policy options are promoted, the Republican Party wins at the national level. To have a chance of winning, the Democratic Party needs to have the discipline to frame policy options that deflect Republican counterattacks yet motivate the base to support the party goals. This is difficult, requiring creative development and communications.
First, take a firm stand as a center-left party and consistently reject “far left”, “new left”, “socialist”, “green”, and “postmodernist” policies that are so easily defeated. Second, focus on pragmatic policies that clearly benefit middle Americans economically. Focus on equal opportunity, rather than redistribution. Focus on basic economic fairness rather than demonizing the rich, the billionaires, the bankers, Wall Street, the 1%. See my RESPECT proposals. Focus on the middle class, not “the poor”. This strategy maximizes consideration from the persuadable voters at all income levels, in all locations.
There was a time when Americans required presidential candidates to meet high standards. Goldwater was thrashed because he was considered unstable by many. McGovern could not recover from his association with “acid, amnesty and abortion”. His running mate Eagleton’s mental health history was a big issue. Muskie could not recover from his public crying about one of Nixon’s dirty tricks and withdrew from the campaign. Bush Sr’s broken “no taxes” promise was fatal. Dukakis could not overcome the “Willy Horton” released prisoner crimes or the comic picture of him in a tank as a military leader. Kerry could not overcome the “swift boat” attack on his military career. Most importantly, Bill Clinton was elected because he convinced Americans that “I feel your pain”. His impeachment raised questions about presidential character that still resonate today. Democrats argued that personal matters are not all that important. This opened the door for Newt Gingrich and a purely “ends justify the means” approach to politics.
In a “postmodern” world, we’ve lost objective knowledge, truth or morality. We are wrestling with the loss of this agreed upon reality among our citizens and leaders. The 1960’s opened the door for a radically “relative” world view. The shift was jarring. As commentators noted about the Clinton campaigns in 1992, 1996 and 2016 we were still arguing about the 1960’s cultural revolution and the politics of the Vietnam War. The bottom line is that many citizens, left, right and center, no longer believe in a fixed, objective world defined by science, religion or natural law.
Hence, our expectations of politicians are very low. Solid truth, honesty, and objectivity are no longer required. I think what we see from Trump is that “authenticity” has been elevated to become the premier value. “I don’t agree with him but at least he is authentic. He does what he says. He is not a phony”.
We may be at a place where all we can expect is for them to keep “most” of their “largest” promises.
We have a complicated situation regarding political ethics. We either believe there are core objective ethical values or not. In general, I see most Democrats of both left and center perspectives as ethical idealists. There is an ethical standard. We know what it is. We ought to follow it. I agree with respect to personal decisions. I’m not sure this is the best practical rule for politicians and political parties. I think that there is an element of “the end justifies the means” that applies to real world politics. We see the same tension between idealistic and pragmatic politics at the international level (real politic). I think that pragmatism must compete with idealism in real world politics.
I’ll never forget when Hillary Clinton was asked what was either a “softball” or a “gotcha” question in a 2016 debate. “As president or secretary of state, are there times when you must lie or ‘manage the truth’?” Hillary gave the George Washington response, “I can never tell a lie”. I screamed at the television. Really? As Secretary of State? Our chief international negotiator? As a leader? As a motivator? As a communicator? As a politician? Trying to appeal to diverse coalition partners? As a presidential candidate, trying to engage both the base and the undecideds? As president, trying to lead the whole country? I think that my “in-authenticity” button was pressed.
I thought about salespeople, negotiators, purchasers, supply chain managers, account managers, marketers, persuaders, speakers …. The whole capitalist system is driven by these kinds of communications that blend facts, history, relations, cultures, promises, implied threats, incentives, short-term and long-term, risks and rewards, opportunities, possibilities. It’s complicated. That’s why we collectively invest so much in managing these relationships.
Politics is the same. International politics is the same. Why do we want to claim that our politics are perfect, pure, above board? They are not. They cannot be. They should not be. When political leaders pretend to be “holier than thou”, they lose credibility with a majority of the electorate.
We’re stuck in a moral grey area. We want to think of ourselves as ethical. But, to achieve our desired ends for society we cannot be perfectly ethical. I don’t have an answer as to where the line is, or the exact tradeoffs, or a perfect example of what to do. I am sure that there is a need to consider ethical ideals and political reality when making political decisions.
Don’t hold the country hostage to approve an increase in the deficit ceiling.
Don’t manipulate the election process to win.
Don’t embrace special interest groups to attract funding and votes.
Don’t use the judicial and administrative regimes to win political battles.
A party that can establish credibility here will possess a major asset.
LBJ as senator and president is exhibit #1. Whatever it takes.
Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see how they are made.
https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/otto_von_bismarck_161318
Ideals are “nice”, but I elected you to deliver. In a pragmatic, transactional world, results matter more than ever.
Inflation was growing rapidly in 2021. Biden needed to address it. Lower government spending. Pressure the Federal Reserve Board to raise interest rates. Apply “bully pulpit” pressure on corporations to not raise prices. Implement excess prices or excess profits controls under emergency presidential authority.
Immigrant volumes increased after Biden took office. Engage the military and national guard to “secure the borders”. Reallocate federal appropriations to “solve the problem”. Use the finances and political power of the US to intercept immigrants at the southern Mexican border.
Aggressive antitrust reviews and enforcement, given expressed Republican support.
Consolidate all welfare spending into a single bill to increase benefits while “solving” the problems of earned benefits and equity. Invest in “welfare fraud” investigators together with IRS agent funding.
Make a $15/hour minimum wage bill a top priority. Organize strikes to support it. Engage corporate supporters. Fine-tune the details to deal with teenager and agriculture exceptions.
Israeli PM Netanyahu wishes to wage war in Gaza and expand West Bank settlements. Provide a clear set of support and limits. Enforce the limits up to complete withdrawal of military support.
Create a “blue ribbon commission” on Social Security funding structured to ensure that the compromise recommendations will be approved.
Engage with Republicans to support policy proposals that benefit middle Americans.
Biden followed this “deliver results” strategy to cancel many varieties of student loan debt. A majority of Americans opposed this. it is only effective if most Americans agree. Delivering for the base or individual constituencies is inherently suspect.
Rapidly deliver visible “pilot project” results from the 2 large infrastructure bills that were passed.
Resolve the “temporary” status of the 2 federal home mortgage guarantee agencies.
Determine a long-term solution for the US Postal Service that provides some local mail delivery and reduced costs and employment.
The key to providing credibility is proactively finding solutions that meet the needs of the general public even when party supporters must incur some of the costs or risks of the solutions.
Democrats need to take a hard look in the mirror. They have lost the support of the American people. To recover, they need to refocus their policies on the economic opportunity needs of “middle America”. They must convince “middle America” that they have no extreme economic or cultural policy agendas. They need to deliver results that match their promises. There are no “moral victories” in politics. Parties must win elections in order to deliver results. When in power they must use all of the levers of power. Pragmatic means for progressive ends.
According to some on the left (and some on the right), the “wealthy, capitalists, billionaires or 1%” are evil, irredeemable, “vampire squids” only interested in making, keeping and growing wealth, power and influence. They say that the only solutions to this situation are to tax, regulate and publicize their finances and influence. Any number of laws should be enacted to fight against this force against the public good.
The wealthy and powerful actively invest to protect and expand their wealth. In the United States, they have repeatedly “captured” the political system with two interludes of effective opposition during the progressive era and the New Deal from FDR to LBJ. Their tools include political contributions, network influence, legal actions, administrative agency capture, media control, social influence, lobbying, contracting, funding political parties and thought influencers. They can easily hire the most effective professionals to pursue their goals in all areas.
The American political system generally undermines centralized governmental power. [Although the imperial presidency under Trump with possible Supreme Court support will be a big test]. Federal agencies, the Senate, Congress, the President and the courts jockey for federal power and compete with state and local governments. Focused investments by a relatively small group of wealthy individuals have a strong chance of finding the weakest spots in “the government of the people, by the people and for the people”. If this group makes good choices in setting goals, investing in politics, selecting strategies and showing that they are willing to do “whatever it takes” to win, they attract political supporters and greatly leverage their relatively small investments and very small voting numbers.
Progressives have tried to legislate their way to victory. The wealthy have fought back and reversed many of the gains in limiting their power to pursue greater wealth without limits placed upon them by other stakeholders: labor, consumers, investors, nations, nature, religion, or local communities. There have been some permanent gains in labor conditions/rights, consumer safety, environmental protection, progressive taxation, public education, public infrastructure, monopoly regulation, anti-discrimination, etc. There are some real changes between 1850 and 2020. No one wants to turn back the hands of time.
Yet, on the enduring core political issues, the wealthy have successfully pursued counter-offensives. Lower taxes of all kinds. Undermined support for government and government services. Judicial challenges and rulings. Weakened regulations.
They have maintained effective control of the Republican party for 175 years. They have partnered with middle America, urban elites, WASP America, industry, corporate America and small business/entrepreneurial America, mainstream and fundamentalist religion, anti-slavery and states’ rights groups, Main street America, rural America, southern America, sunbelt America, isolationists and pro-traders, anti-communist hawks and America firsters, assertive neo-conservative foreign policy wonks and inherently defensive thinkers, promoters of American power through international relations and doubters, international free traders and mercantilist tariff warriors, libertarians, the professional class and the working class, skeptical protestants and conservative true believers, farmers and bankers, philosophical conservatives and political pragmatists, fiscal conservatives and political idealogues, preserving and restoring American culture, separation of church and state versus promoting one religious group, liberal and conservative social policies, the mainstream media is authoritative or fake. The end justifies the means. Some coalition of voters and interests can always be assembled to support their core financial interests.
The defenders of wealth have effectively shaped political debates by prioritizing issues, framing positions and policies to be considered, crafting favorable and unfavorable language and stories, shaping debates against extreme strawman positions, and polarizing positions. Democrats have attempted to use the same techniques but have been much less effective. Democrats have also shifted their positions on issues and reassembled their coalitions through time but been unable to secure a solid base of support in the last 50 years. They repeatedly point to a demographic “emerging majority” and the “rightness” of their causes and hope for more success soon.
Why does a small group of wealthy individuals consistently capture one political party and oppose efforts to reduce their wealth and power? Are they unusually evil? Is there a “class interest”? Don’t they care about our country and those less fortunate? I think there are two key factors. First, we have lived in an individualistic, relatively equal opportunity, relatively meritocratic economy for two centuries in the US. The economic winners can honestly look in the mirror and say, “I earned this”. [note the Obama buzzsaw around “you didn’t build this”]. Like each of us, they exaggerate their own merits and discount chance, privilege, inherited assets, opportunities, and ethical choices. Second, they have such great assets that they must protect them. The scale of accumulated wealth in the US is almost [or actually] beyond comprehension. Current GDP is nearing $23.4 Trillion, up 10 times in real terms from $2.2 Trillion in 1947. Stop for a minute to let this sink in. The US was truly the savior of the world in 1947. We now have 10 times as much wealth, resources, assets, power. Real $ GDP in 1850 was only $62 Billion. Real GDP increased 35 times in that century, perhaps the most amazing century of growth in world history, despite the Great Recession and WW II.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GDPC1
https://www.measuringworth.com/graphs/graph_1.php
America has grown its population, its productivity/per capita GDP, and its corporate profits by at least 350 times in the last 175 years. A million here and a million there, and pretty soon you have real money. This is the power of compound interest. Wealth begets wealth. This is Thomas Piketty’s point.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Piketty
A well invested portfolio provides 3-5% real returns per year. It accumulates to infinity sooner than you might imagine.
So … America has 350 times more annual economic output than in 1850. The wealthy have captured more than an equal share, so their wealth per person has grown 500-fold. Digest this ratio. There are more wealthy individuals. The winnings are divided across a larger population. Wealthy individuals control 500 times more assets per person than they did in 1850.
Average incomes have also increased. The reported $144/month for farmhands with board in 1850 becomes $5,800 today with 40X inflation. The current median income is $37,600, so the “typical” worker is 6.5 times better off today than in 1850.
The bottom line is that wealthy individuals or families have tremendous wealth to “manage” or protect. Some will highly value the other factors that produced their wealth and their obligations to society. Others will discount them and be the leading investors in political actors to preserve their wealth even though they too will face the “free rider” dilemma. Why should I invest to protect my wealth if others will do so for my benefit? As wealth has grown, a greater share of wealthy individuals has rationally invested in the political system to protect their wealth.
Wealthy individuals and families have much to worry about. If you have a billion dollars of assets, there are many risks and obligations, duties and responsibilities, social obligations, political interests, generational interests, black swan risks, portfolio effects, opportunities, and legacies. I would argue that the greatest risk is posed by democracy. Plato, Socrates and Aristotle all pointed to pure democracy as a threat to the wealth of the ruling class. This was clear when extreme wealth was a mere 1/1,000th of the level today. The individuals with the lowest incomes and wealth could use the power of the state to capture a greater share. Everyone thinks that they deserve more. This is human nature. The many outnumber the few. In a pure democracy they will “take from the rich”. They might reduce the top quintile by 20% to benefit the bottom 3 quintiles. They might flatten incomes. They might confiscate wealth. They might confiscate ALL wealth. This is the greatest fear of the economic winners in our society. The political system might “take” more than half of their income and all of their wealth. Wealthy individuals are “highly motivated” to prevent these outcomes. This is not spoken of “in polite company”.
Although most Democrats, liberals, leftists and progressives have an intuitive sense that they must fight wealth and power because it is right and fair, I argue that we ought to agree to permanently remove the risk of significant confiscation of wealth and income from the economic winners in our society. As those who claim to look at the big picture and the long run, we should set limits on how much income and wealth redistribution is required to meet our goals of a fair and prosperous society.
We should agree to set permanent structural limits on these areas. Enact constitutional amendments to clarify the redistribution limits of our society. We are so much wealthier today as a society.
JK Galbraith in 1958 was way ahead of the people in 1958 with his Affluent Society argument.
The wealthy can “make do” with a lesser share of our continually growing wealth. But no one wants to lose or give up what they have. This is human nature. I think the time has arrived to stop fighting the economic redistribution war that has never been won and find a solution that can gain support from a majority of wealthy individuals.
Wealthy individuals and families have great wealth to protect. As a nation and society, we have an obligation to eliminate this concern from being a primary role in our political decisions. We can set reasonable limits on the maximum contributions required from prosperous individuals in our society. Many left-leaning individuals are focused on increasing the share of taxes paid by wealthy individuals on an equity basis. I argue that the nation would be best served by setting maximum taxation limits. Wealthy individuals might prefer lower tax rates, but they will be able to relax knowing that there is a limit on what political groups might choose to extract. Fewer would be highly motivated to invest extraordinary amounts in our political system if their greatest risks were already protected.
I encourage national Democratic Party leaders to quickly acknowledge that the American people have chosen to support candidate Trump’s policy proposals. They need to find areas of agreement and work quickly with the new president and his party to support and implement policies where agreements can be found. Democrats ought to fight against other proposals that they cannot support.
Support proposals that help the working class and middle class.
Fix an earlier attack on states’ rights.
6. Eliminate the $10,000 federal tax limit of state and local income tax (SALT) deduction.
Take reasonable steps to pursue American foreign policy goals.
7. Negotiate a settlement to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
8. Negotiate a settlement to Israel’s response to being attacked. Leverage world opinion to impose a settlement that creates a Palestinian state that is better for everyone.
9. Negotiate a trade deal with China that promotes “fair trade”, environmental equity, labor equity, and protects American intellectual property.
10. Pressure NATO allies to commit to 3% of GDP commitment to national defense spending by 2030.
Protect American borders.
11. Pass the compromise border security bill negotiated in 2024.
Control government spending.
12. Appoint a “blue ribbon commission” to identify systematic ways to reduce federal government spending. Include Democratic members.
13. Support a “balanced budget” constitutional amendment. Find language that forces Congress to reduce spending or increase taxes when material % of GDP budget deficits exist in a “full employment” economy. For example, “When Federal Budget deficit exceeds 2% of GDP and unemployment is less than 5%, Congress shall reduce the deficit by at least 33% in the next year”.
Address the Social Security funding situation.
14. Appoint a “blue ribbon commission” to recommend a combination of tax increases, benefits limits, inflation measures and age qualifying rates that ensures promised social security benefits will be paid for the next 50 years.
Address Health Care Costs
15. Appoint a “blue ribbon commission” to recommend methods to systematically reduce total health care costs as a percentage of GDP by 5% by 2035.
Summary
Democrats and Republicans need to look out for the interests of all Americans. There are big issues where compromise solutions must be found. Democrats should step forward and provide a list of areas where they are willing to work with the new president to serve the American people.
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2024/04/politics/trump-campaign-promises-dg/
America is often described as an “individualistic” society. Sometimes as a compliment. More often as a criticism.
The positive reviewers note that it incorporated John Locke’s individualistic principles to form the first “classic liberal” democracy which has endured for more than two centuries of geographical expansion, rapid population growth, technological and social changes and foreign challenges. They argue that it demonstrates that a federal system of checks and balances, limited government and preservation of individual liberties can be economically and socially successful. Such a government can be effective even with diverse racial, ethnic, class, political and religious interests.
The critics say that the society has always balanced individual and community interests, that the government system relies upon a strong culture of shared values and that “rugged individualism” is a myth that has been used to provide political support for laissez faire capitalism.
The heroic, self-sufficient individual has been promoted throughout American history. Washington and the founding fathers were memorialized. Jefferson’s ideal of the independent citizen farmer still resonates. Jackson further elevated the importance of the common man as central to American success. The explorer, pioneer, frontiersman, Lewis & Clark, Daniel Boone, and the self-made man were celebrated. The citizens and leaders who spread the new American individual rights across the continent were hailed for bringing about a new society, an example for the world to follow.
Americans embraced Thoreau’s retreat, Emerson’s “self-reliance”, Franklin’s “common sense”, Horatio Alger, cowboys, private detectives, military, political and superheroes. Proponents of laissez faire capitalism contrasted natural property and individual rights against unnatural government interference during the Gilded Age. Carnegie, Ford and Hoover promoted the same ends at the turn of the century highlighting the progress driven by individual inventors and owners. Hayek, Rand, Goldwater and Reagan argued that FDR style government was illegitimate and threatened the liberty and security of the nation, while praising job creation, technical innovation and entrepreneurs.
The Reagan revolution re-established the intellectual and popular legitimacy of holding conservative social and economic philosophies. Some successors pressed the arguments further, equating taxation with theft, comparing job creators and job killers, questioning the motives and results of government departments and employees, and promising no new taxes under any situation. “The self-sufficient individual is great, government is bad”, they said.
The role of community tends to get lost in the shadow of the great liberal versus conservative battle over the role of the state in “regulating” the economy and society. Most historians, political scientists and commentators agree that the American political system was constructed upon the assumption that citizens would share a common Christian culture with objective virtues complementing the God-given rights and responsibilities of citizens. The authors of the Federalist Papers, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights understood that this social glue was needed to support a democratic system of checks and balances, especially as the young nation expanded its small population across the Appalachian Mountains. They promoted “freedom of religion” but also relied upon enduring religious belief and participation. The founders held classic conservative ideas about the necessity of individuals to possess a sense of civic duty to participate in government, willingness to sacrifice for the common good and a commitment to the institutions of collective self-government.
Community is eclipsed by individualism in the public’s mind for many reasons. The promotion of liberty-loving and economically productive individuals who require only minimal government. The ease of highlighting outstanding individuals and individual types in the arts, journalism, history and marketing. The complexity, abstractness, variety and organic nature of community functions. The overlap of community and government when contrasted with “rugged” individualism. The soft, feeling, unmeasurable nature of community. The supporting rather than leading nature of community. The limited visibility of many community functions.
Community relations and results are exhibited throughout society. First, in the relations between citizens and their government. In the many voluntary associations that diverse citizens create and join in a nation with limited government and services. In local residential communities. In business, trade and agriculture. In the arts, travel and entertainment. In government organizations. In the country as a whole.
The American government plan is based upon a relationship between the citizens and government. The citizens/individuals exist first and create the government. At the same time, they commit to fulfilling their duties as informed voters, candidates, soldiers, jurors, parents and supporters of the government and its institutional parts. Although the architects of the government warned against it, people soon clustered into political parties, movements and special interest groups to represent their interests. These parties have supported individual human, social and economic rights and the collective interests of classes, geographic areas, professions, industries, religions, ethnicities, sexes and races. Self-government requires a balance between the community and the individual.
The framers of the US Constitution were looking to the future. The US population was less than 3M in 1776, reaching 5M in 1800 and almost 10M in 1820. In today’s terms that’s the same as the states of Mississippi, South Carolina and Michigan or the metro areas of Charlotte, Phoenix and Chicago. This was a collection of 13 small states making sure that the central government would not become a tyrant. In 1780 the UK had 10M people, Spain 14M, Italy 16M, Germany 23M and France 28M. The US was about the same size as Sweden, Netherlands, Switzerland, Portugal and Belgium.
The large role of voluntary associations in filling the services gap between citizens and limited government was a distinct feature of the early USA, described by Tocqueville in his famous 1835 “Democracy in America”. He noted that class was absent, no religion denomination was dominant, people were preoccupied with economic affairs and the government’s role was small. Religion actively shaped lives. Citizens created voluntary organizations to fill every need: universities, fraternities, sororities, professional associations, libraries, fire companies, hospitals, seminaries, prisons, missionaries and schools. In a sparsely populated new world composed of immigrants or their descendants the “rugged” individualism required for survival was paired with a deep commitment to community based upon necessity, civil and religious beliefs.
America experienced an explosion of new associations between 1880-1920 in response to the challenges of urbanization, immigration and industrialization. YMCA, civic organizations, social organizations, scouts, Chautauqua institute, women’s movement, professional organizations, conservation organizations, mutual aid associations, settlement houses, service clubs, prohibition clubs, cooperatives, social gospel services, community funds, credit unions and unions.
America was a very religious place from the start. The Puritans, Quakers and other Christian denominations practiced their faith in congregations, even if sin and being saved were deemed individual matters. Religious groups impacted civil society. The Great Awakenings were communal events leading to the modern era crusades of Billy Sunday and Billy Graham. Colleges and universities were mainly founded by religious denominations with religious influence extending into the late 20th century. US religious membership and participation declined 50 years after such changes in Europe.
The New England township model of direct democracy and the Northwest Territory same-day horse ride county government model that followed encouraged participation in local government. This engagement together with funding and delivering government services created a deep sense of local community even as the model spread across the Great Plains to the Rocky Mountains. We still see the county seat, county square, county courthouse model. This local community model continued in urban neighborhoods, suburbs and housing developments with HOA boards and services. Urban machine politics were based on the local precincts. Urban immigrants clustered in ethnic neighborhoods with familiar faces, languages, customs and churches. Conservative philosopher Edmund Burke praised the “little platoons” of family, kinship and neighborhood as the basis for teaching social skills and holding the larger community together. The individual was complemented by a meaningful local social and political community for most Americans through time.
America began as a farming nation with a few urban traders. Jefferson emphasized the importance of maintaining a high proportion of land-owning farmers who would be incentivized to take care of their families and participate in managing the shared resources of the community. Land was inexpensive, so agriculture was able to expand for more than a century.
Even agriculture was never solely about the individual. Family farms, shared harvest time, barn raising, going into town. Land grant universities developed agricultural science and local extension agents shared their knowledge. Grange organizations. Coops. Farmer-labor populist political parties. Farm banks. Political influence and programs. Rural electric coops.
Business and manufacturing were small scale originally. With access to natural resources and transportation, American manufacturing grew rapidly starting in the 1840’s. Many inventors and capitalists. Much wealth was created in the 19th century.
Manufacturing grew and organizations developed more effective administration. The railroads, steel, coal and limestone required social organization on a larger scale. The automobile and electricity spawned even greater innovations including vertical integration and the assembly line. Unions formed to balance the owners’ power. Industrial and trades unions viewed themselves as brotherhoods. Large economic organizations became the daytime home for most workers. Professional and industry associations grew to serve the needs of their members. New community ties were formed.
Further corporate growth through 1930 and then another boom after WWII. “The business of America is business”. “What’s good for GM is good for America”. Although it is rarely recognized today, the development of effective businesses that employed thousands and even a million people was and remains an historic social achievement, overcoming the different interests of those individuals. Corporations also developed social innovations such as R&D teams, joint ventures, outsourcing, project management, functional departments, divisions, cross-functional and lean teams to balance individual and collective interests.
Americans were always sensitive about being less cultured than their European peers. They invested in seminaries, universities, libraries, printing presses and theatres. They applauded American writers and artists. Itinerant preachers shared news and thoughts. Public lectures, pamphlets and news editorials were consumed. Theatre and orchestras expanded in the cities. Leisure time brought sports. Magazines boomed and circulated. Circuses and lecturers visited. Universities offered public lectures. Radio and movies greatly increased the consumption of high and popular culture. Orchestras and big bands entertained. Movie stars and lead singers gained fame. American jazz, swing, blues and rock and roll grew. Large attendance concerts began. Community was built and reinforced.
US government organizations were quite small historically. Mostly import tax collectors and judges. The government’s role grew with Hamilton’s national bank. The government began to invest in infrastructure like roads, ports, canals and railroads. The military grew and established forts to protect the settlers. It developed its own strong collective culture. Land grant universities and the continental railroad started in Lincoln’s time. The post office and pony express grew. Rivers were managed to provide reliable transportation, electricity and recreation. Interstate highways and airports were built. The government grew dramatically under FDR as a service provider, regulator, research sponsor, investor and owner. Although the 3 million Federal government employees get the most attention today due to the impact of their work, state and local governments employ 19 million, more than 6 times as many. Government employees are more likely to be unionized, serve long careers and view their work as serving the community.
The idea of a distinct and important American culture dates to the country’s founding as a breakaway republic seeking to preserve “the rights of Englishmen”. The country’s government, economy, immigrant citizens, diversity and shared war efforts shaped its self-image. Many saw the United States as a special country created to be a positive example for the world. “American exceptionalism” was described by both its citizens and Europeans. The individual based political system, the role of churches in shaping daily life and the large number of voluntary associations all played a role in describing the character of everyday life, hopes and dreams. Given its location between 2 oceans, the US mostly followed an isolationist path until WWII. Since then, it has seen itself as a global defender of democracy against communist and totalitarian states. The US has maintained elements of its individual, religious and associational character to this day.
Robert Putnam’s series on “Bowling Alone”, “Our Kids” and “The Upswing” documented how American social institutions have evolved through time to address new needs and how participation and engagement have risen and declined across long periods of time. During the Great Depression soup kitchens, potluck suppers, community gardens, small scale retail and personal donations complemented government programs. During WW II victory gardens, scrap collecting, bond sales, rationing, black outs, civil defense clubs and female factory workers contributed to the war effort. The post-war era saw a boom in sports, civic, neighborhood, professional and religious participation followed by a reversal at the end of the century. During the 2020-23 pandemic the country experienced lockdowns that highlighted our economic and social interdependence and the negative consequences of isolation.
Community is an essential and integral part of modern life. It operates in many dimensions. We need to recognize its critical role in complementing the individualistic view of the world.
‘https://www.johnlocke.org/john-locke-his-american-and-carolinian-legacy/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_David_Thoreau
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-Reliance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horatio_Alger
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Spade
https://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?id=418
‘https://www.thehastingscenter.org/rugged-american-individualism-is-a-myth-and-its-killing-us/
‘https://www.uvm.edu/news/cas/myths-and-truths-individualism-america
‘https://rlo.acton.org/archives/124089-the-myths-of-american-individualism.html
‘https://prospect.org/economy/myth-rugged-individual/
‘https://barnraisingmedia.com/american-mythologies-andrew-jackson-individualism/
‘https://www.heritage.org/conservatism/report/american-individualism-rightly-understood
‘https://veermag.com/2020/09/the-myth-of-individualism/
‘https://www.hoover.org/research/future-american-individualism
‘https://explorewhatworks.com/hope-beyond-rugged-individualism/
‘https://time.com/5917385/history-community-america/
‘https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-transformation-of-american-community
‘https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-power-of-community
‘https://www.masterclass.com/articles/importance-of-community
‘https://www.history.com/news/life-for-the-average-family-during-the-great-depression
‘https://www.iowapbs.org/iowapathways/mypath/2591/great-depression-hits-farms-and-cities-1930s
She grew up in an Indiana town … with them Indiana boys on an Indiana night.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Jane%27s_Last_Dance
Indiana wants me, Lord I can’t go back there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Wants_Me
Oh, the moonlight’s fair tonight along the Wabash
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Banks_of_the_Wabash,_Far_Away
A little ditty about Jack and Diane
Two American kids growin’ up in the heartland
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_%26_Diane
I grew up in Greater Cleveland as a proud buckeye in “the best location in the nation” 1956 – 74. Learned about demography in my first 1974 quarter at New College in Sarasota from Dr. Peter Hruschka. Transferred to Indy in 1988. Remained ever since. Slowly became a “Hoosier”. Started documenting the Hoosier population in 2009, including the exceptional growth of our suburban Hamilton County.
The urban counties have tripled in growth. The others remain flat.
Urban counties will grow.
Indy has found a growth solution. Cleveland has not.
Urban growth, rural stagnation nationally.
Indy metro and a few suburban or university counties grew, others declined.
Long-term stagnation outside of Indy and a dozen counties.
Indy metro area is increasingly dominant.
Metro Indy stands out as a growth leader in the Midwest.
Rural America was behind in 1960. It was much further behind in 1980. The gap has continued to grow. This has huge political implications. George Wallace, Spiro Agnew and Richard Nixon deeply understood this in 1968. Not sure my Democratic party has yet caught on.
Metro areas thrived. Suburbs thrived even more.
The components of Hamilton County’s 50 years of growth.
Hamilton County breakout by suburb.
Net in-migration continues.
Population growth drives job growth.
More diverse …
Older …
An Indianapolis suburb can compete for “best place to live” in the US!
Yet I get an Indiana kick out of you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Get_a_Kick_Out_of_You
How Is It (We Are Here) (youtube.com)
John Legend – Green Light (Official Video) ft. André 3000 (youtube.com)
Spirit In The Sky – Norman Greenbaum (Official Lyric Video) (youtube.com)
Billy Preston – My Sweet Lord (Live) (youtube.com)
Larry Norman – Why Should The Devil Have All The Good Music? – [Lyrics] (youtube.com)
Peace in the Valley – Elvis Presley (youtube.com)
Elvis Presley – Amazing Grace (Official Audio) (youtube.com)
Andrea Bocelli – Amazing Grace: Music For Hope (Live From Duomo di Milano) (youtube.com)
Simon & Garfunkel – Bridge Over Troubled Water (Audio) (youtube.com)
The Weight – The Band (lyrics) – YouTube
Eric Clapton, Steve Winwood – Presence of the Lord (youtube.com)
JESUS CHRIST SUPERSTAR ( Superstar – Carl Anderson – 1973 ) HD (youtube.com)
Oh Happy Day – The Edwin Hawkins Singers (youtube.com)
NEW * Put Your Hand In The Hand – Ocean {Stereo} 1971 (youtube.com)
Speak to the Sky – Rick Springfield (youtube.com)
Jesus Christ Superstar (’73) I don’t know how to love him (youtube.com)
Jesus is Just Alright – Doobie Brothers (youtube.com)
Talking Heads – Take me to the River 1980 (youtube.com)
Go Up Moses (2021 Remaster) (youtube.com)
Argent – God Gave Rock And Roll To You (youtube.com)
Led Zeppelin – Stairway To Heaven (Live at Earls Court 1975) [Official Video] (youtube.com)
Bob Dylan – Highway 61 Revisited (Official Audio) (youtube.com)
The Devil Went Down to Georgia (youtube.com)
Blind Faith ~ Can’t Find My Way Home ~ (Original Acoustic Version) HQ Audio (youtube.com)
Young Rascals – How Can I Be Sure (1967) (youtube.com)
The Who – Won’t Get Fooled Again (Shepperton Studios / 1978) (youtube.com)
Cabaret (1972) – Willkommen (youtube.com)
Peggy Lee — Is That All There Is? 1969 (youtube.com)
Are You Experienced? (youtube.com)
Todd Rundgren – International Feel [Single Version] (youtube.com)
The Byrds – Turn! Turn! Turn! (To Everything There Is A Season) (Audio) (youtube.com)
The Lovin’ Spoonful – Do You Believe in Magic (Audio) (youtube.com)
I Am A Man Of Constant Sorrow (With Band) (youtube.com)
The Who – Who Are You (Promo Video) (youtube.com)
Prince & The Revolution – Let’s Go Crazy (Official Music Video) (youtube.com)
Richard Harris MacArthur Park Original 1968 (youtube.com)
Three Dog Night “Easy to be Hard” OnTV (youtube.com)
This leading mainline protestant denomination lost one-half of its membership between 2000 and 2022 following a slightly smaller decline in the previous 20 years.
Congregational Strategy: Presbyterian Church (USA) Membership – Good News (tomkapostasy.com)
Such a large decline has many drivers.
How (NOT) to be Secular: Reading Charles Taylor – Good News (tomkapostasy.com)
Our Kids: The American Dream in Crisis (2015) – Good News (tomkapostasy.com)
Community Attachment in Mass Society on JSTOR
Recovery Strategies
Good News 