An Age of Consequences

Over at Collapse of Industrial Civilization, an eloquent summary of our political predicament.

[O]ne of my greater concerns is the absence of humility, grace, and self reflection which as a trend seems to inversely correlate with a spike in the abundance of self righteous vitriol.

Here we are on the precipice of global ecological calamity, frail worlds dancing on a razor blown back and forth by the whims of mad men, and I fear that the wisdom the situation requires is not only not present, it is not welcome.

Fear of Falling

The logic of capitalism pushes society toward a greater concentration of wealth. Our class structure is a source of conflict which elicits various responses. A large middle class in the United States was a great accomplishment for the post World War II economy. But that middle class has been squeezed for the past 30 to 40 years. Instead of striving for understanding and analysis, it's easy to devolve into blaming scapegoats.

What Barbara Ehrenreich called the Fear of Falling has significant consequences when death rates for white, middle-aged people start to rise. Joseph Stiglitz sees it as a sign that the U.S. may become a former middle class society.

America is becoming a more divided society -- divided not only between whites and African Americans, but also between the 1 percent and the rest, and between the highly educated and the less educated, regardless of race. And the gap can now be measured not just in wages, but also in early deaths.

A study from the Pew Research Center shows that just under half of American adults are considered middle income--two thirds to double the median income. And while a larger percent of people have shifted to the upper income groups so has a disproportionate amount of income. Over about the same 44 year period, the percent of people with upper incomes grew 7 percentage points or 50 percent, while their share of income grew 20 percentage points or 69 percent. Meanwhile, the percent of people with middle incomes declined 11 percentage points or 18 percent, while their share of income declined 19 percentage points or about 30 percent.

The wealth gap is even more dramatic.

Some people win, but many others are falling behind. Lives are not what we expected them to be and we end up with a blend of anxiety, fear, and anger. Psychology professor Art Markman notes that

[fear] heightens your sensitivity to potential negative outcomes in you environment. Being fearful of a particular thing makes you aware of all the fearful things: Your entire world simply looks more scary.

Robert Reich points out that the middle class effectively has no influence over public policy. He sees a revolt that's just beginning.

The anxious class feels vulnerable to forces over which they have no control. Terrible things happen for no reason.

Yet government can’t be counted on to protect them.

Safety nets are full of holes. Most people who lose their jobs don’t even qualify for unemployment insurance.

Government won’t protect their jobs from being outsourced to Asia or being taken by a worker here illegally.

Government can’t even protect them from evil people with guns or bombs. Which is why the anxious class is arming itself, buying guns at a record rate.

They view government as not so much incompetent as not giving a damn. It’s working for the big guys and fat cats – the crony capitalists who bankroll candidates and get special favors in return.

This revolt would be dangerous for the one percent. The outrage needs to directed elsewhere. Simon Maloy on the Republican debate:

All in all it was a grim, bleak, and frightful debate that saw several leading candidates try to stoke heightened public anxiety over terrorism. A scared voter is a motivated voter, and Republicans have every interest in keeping people as terrified as possible.

Elias Isquith doesn't see an end to the politics of fear. For Republican voters, Obama's success is a sign that

the world as they knew it (and as they liked it) truly is coming to an end. As far as [the] party’s most dedicated supporters are concerned, [that] world is already over, and every piece of bad news just makes it that much more apparent.

So terrorist actions become a sideshow to distract from issues at the core of our anxiety. The politics of fear can be defeated like the National Front in France. But it poisons the national discussion. There's the thought that conservatives have a "negativity bias" which drives them to blame others--Blacks, immigrants, etc--when they see themselves losing status. Sean Illing argues for a rational approach to our economic grievances.

[S]o long as [we're] consumed with fear and misplaced anger . . .nothing much will change.

Update (December 22):  Edwin Lyngar argues that Americans are addicted to irrational fear.

We have witnessed terrorist acts and violence, but those isolated incidents are nothing compared to the damage we are doing to ourselves. We are shredding our national self-esteem and violating our own deepest values over almost nothing.

Update (December 23):  Paul Buchheit suggests that just looking at the number of middle-income people is deceptive when you factor in things like savings.

A study by Go Banking Rates reveals that nearly 50 percent of Americans have no savings. Over 70 percent of us have less than $1,000. Pew Research supports this finding with survey results that show nearly half of American households spending more than they earn.

Update (December 29):  Steven Hill describes how the "1099 economy" is wrecking the middle class.

Examples abound of companies laying off all or most of their workers and then rehiring the same workers—as independent contractors, a clear abuse of this legal loophole. One new economy booster clarified employers’ audacious strategy: “Companies today want a workforce they can switch on and off as needed” — like one can turn off a faucet or a TV.

The apps and websites of the “share the crumbs” economy have made it easier than ever to do that. Companies can hire and fire 1099 workers at will. In essence, the purveyors of the new economy are forging an economic system in which those with money will be able to use faceless, anonymous interactions via brokerage websites and mobile apps to hire those without money by forcing an online bidding war to see who will charge the least for their labor, or to rent out their home, their car, or other personal property. These perverse incentives are threatening to destroy the U.S. labor force and turn tens of millions of workers into little more than day laborers.

Update (January 1, 2016):  David Jarman elaborates on the Pew report.

Update (January 15, 2016):  Given that 56 percent of Americans have less than $1000 in their checking or savings accounts, Ben Norton suggests the U.S. barely has a middle class.

Update (January 16, 2016):  Jason McDaniel and Sean McElwee investigate reasons for the lack of government action to address inequality.

The sad reality is that most Americans don’t see a large causal connection between government policy and their lived experiences. Instead, they’ll likely blame the poor, immigrants and blacks.

Update (April 22, 2016):  Those higher death rates for middle-aged Americans seems to be about white women. But another report shows suicide rates up for both men and women.  Oh, and rich people live 10 to 15 years longer than poor people.

Update (June 1, 2016):  Paul Buchheit highlights the impact of inequality on the middle class.

Income among the middle class is plummeting
Half of us have no savings, along [with] wealth
Inequality is taking a toll on our health
It may all be getting still worse

Update (October 1, 2016):  Turns out that minorities in the U.S. now tend to be more optimistic about the future than whites.

This year’s presidential campaign has underscored an economic paradox: Financially, black Americans and Hispanics are far worse off than whites, yet polls show minorities are more likely than whites to believe in the American Dream. And they are less anxious about the outcome of the election.

[T]here’s evidence that the divide goes beyond party and Obama’s presidency. In great measure, it has to do with the past, not the future: Minorities who have seen great improvements in their lives are more confident, while whites who have seen disintegration in their lives are more pessimistic.

Helps explain the phrase: Make America Great Again.

Update (July 22, 2018):  In an interview with Paul Rosenberg, Suzanne Mettler discusses her research on the disconnect between government benefits and anti-government attitudes. She finds that "welfare" carries significant negative connotations.

[I]f people look at that one policy — whatever they mean by that — and they extrapolate, they’re thinking that government has these policies that I don't think are fair or right, and that's basically what government is: It gives special advantages to people who don't work to pay their own way, it gets them special benefits and doesn't take care of people like me who work hard, etc. I think conservatives have managed to capitalize on that kind of approach and that has served them well.

Mettler uses Kentucky as an example of how government benefits grew even as the state was sending more and more conservatives to Congress.

Of course, white people are more likely to be anti-welfare, but Mettler finds that income growth matters as well and that middle-income people tended to have the most negative attitudes.

You have people who have been in this long era of rising economic inequality, where for middle-income people and low-income people their wages have been pretty stagnant, or in some occupations deteriorating over time. So I think people have felt like they're not getting ahead, their kids are not having greater opportunities, and the Republican Party in Kentucky has effectively made the case of connecting the dots for them in a way that says the problem is Democrats and their environmental policies which have been detrimental to the coal industry and so on. Now, if you dig down, there's not good evidence for that, but they have managed to command the narrative and give people an explanation. And while Americans generally like the policies they use, when it comes to these more general principles, they are still very anti-government.

Update (September 22, 2019):  The 2018 version of the Pew report describes 19 percent of Americans as upper class (median income $187,872), 52 percent as middle class ($78,442), and 29 percent as lower class ($25,624). The report says 2016 is basically unchanged from 2011, but the story in the original post put the middle class at under half of American adults. Pew offers a calculator to determine who is middle class.

GOP Obstruction Is the Ultimate Voter Suppression Tactic

Nearly 25 years ago, P.J. O'Rourke wrote

Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work, and then they get elected and prove it.

Does low voter turnout produce bad government, or does bad government produce low voter turnout? You would think that a 12 percent approval rating for Congress would have hundreds of members being turned out of office. Barney Frank describes voters as a big part of the problem of gridlock.

But there’s another, perhaps deeper reason, one that’s both a cause and an effect of the political dysfunction from which we now suffer: a sharp decline in the public’s belief that government works.

But where does that decline come from? And who benefits when voter turnout is low? It may not always be clear. Generally, groups that tend to vote Democratic are less likely to turnout when barriers to voting are enacted. Frank acknowledges that

there is an asymmetry when it comes to party behavior. Nonvoting is more often the response of the angry left than of the angry right.

The more the prevailing narrative blames the failures of political insiders for gridlock, leading to voter alienation, the deeper the gridlock and the greater the advantage to the right.

And yet, he claims that most Republican voters do want good governance and that we need greater turnout from all groups to hold politicians accountable.

Bill Curry agrees that

[w]hen it comes to suppressing turnout nothing beats good old fashioned alienation.

And it's pretty clear who has benefited from recent lower turnouts.

In 2014, 81.6 million votes were cast, a stunning 50 million vote drop from 2008 in the lowest turnout since World War II. Since 2008 Republicans have picked up 69 House seats, 13 Senate seats and 12 governorships, one of the three biggest partisan growth spurts in American history.

These gains give Republicans no motivation to do anything differently. Obstruction is a deliberate strategy. The confirmation of judges gets delayed or passed over just because they can get away with it. Even incompetence doesn't mean you can't win elections. And you can always rig the system to make sure nothing gets done.

The Republicans know what they're doing even if some candidates take things too far. In defense of the one percent, anything that turns people off of politics works in their favor. Yet Curry doesn't let Democrats off the hook and sees a way past the alienation (although it's also a battle against skewed media coverage).

The good news: It still presents in most voters as anger rather than hard-to-reach glacial despondency. Some say voters moved right but in fact many have moved left. Their anger is over economic decay and political corruption, and is empirical, not ideological. Democrats can’t accept that voters’ anger at government is fact-based. To win them back we must show them we know how to fix what’s broken, and that this time we really mean to do it.

Update (January 16, 2016):  Eliza Webb cites polling evidence that majorities of Americans support a progressive agenda.

Americans concur: a compassionate, fair land where babies grow up in equality and human beings are treated with respect and dignity is the country for us.

To make our values fit our reality, all we have to do is vote.

Because, after all, as studies show, when people vote, liberals win.

Climate Agreement

The twenty-first session of the Conference of the Parties has adopted an agreement to "[hold] the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above preindustrial levels and [pursue] efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C".

It's being called a landmark that applies to 195 countries of which 186 have submitted voluntary emissions reduction pledges. This agreement isn't the end of the process, but there is an intent to stop the consumption of fossil fuels. According to Bill McKibben

This agreement won't save the planet, not even close. But it's possible that it saves the chance of saving the planet -- if movements push even harder from here on out.

Update (December 13):  Joe Romm seems optimistic that the agreement is a good start.

The pledges by 186 countries big and small, developed and developing, in the months leading up to the Paris conference are an enormous first step. But these intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs) will need to be reviewed and ratched up every 5 years for the rest of the century to preserve a livable climate — and that review and ratchet is a key part of the deal.

But James Hanson criticizes the lack of a carbon tax.

It’s a fraud really, a fake. It’s just bullshit for them to say: ‘We’ll have a 2C warming target and then try to do a little better every five years.’ It’s just worthless words. There is no action, just promises. As long as fossil fuels appear to be the cheapest fuels out there, they will be continued to be burned.

Also, New Internationalist says the agreement fails four criteria.

1. Catalyze immediate, urgent and drastic emission reductions
2. Provide adequate support for transformation
3. Deliver justice for impacted people
4. Focus on genuine, effective action rather than false solutions

Update (December 14):  Rebecca Leber says, "The world is a little less doomed now."

Update (December 22):  This is perhaps the harshest criticism.

Another climate conference has once again come and gone, echoing hollow promises and ugly unspoken realities.

Also, Naomi Oreskes writes about the need for government intervention in the form of a carbon tax.

Update (December 26):  Michael Klare shows how the future belongs to renewables.

Update (May 2, 2016):  In his monthly roundup, Dahr Jamail reiterates a warning from the U.N., "The future is happening now".

Update (October 5, 2016):  The Paris Agreement has now reached the threshold needed to go into effect.

Update (April 2, 2017):  A report from International Energy Agency and International Renewable Energy Agency examines the policy and investment requirements for implementing the Paris Agreement.

Update (June 1, 2017):  In one of the most short-sighted moves in the history of civilization, the United States has announced its intention to withdraw from the Paris Agreement.

Update (September 18, 2017):  Despite some noise about getting "pro-America" terms in the Paris Agreement, Joe Romm points out that the US always had the right to change our voluntary pledge.

Bottom Line: In the global deal to save a livable climate, America had committed to do the least we could possibly do, and [von Clownstick] won’t even do that. [Fuckface] is content with America the villain — the greedy and myopic rogue nation that killed humanity’s best hope of avoiding catastrophic climate change.

Update (November 20, 2017):  Curtis Doebbler reports on the latest climate talks.

Virtually no progress was made on taking action. Both the provision of resources and the mitigation of greenhouse gases must come from developed countries, but they showed no willingness to live up to this responsibility. ... Most delegates and the two dozen or so world leaders who attended are probably starting to wonder whether the climate action we need will ever be taken.

Update (February 17, 2018):  A draft report from IPCC suggests that meeting the 1.5 degree Celsius target is "extremely unlikely".

Fuck the NRA

The New York Times published a front page editorial, but this is better.

Update:  The Supreme Court declined to review a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals 7th Circuit that upheld a ban on assault weapons in Highland Park, Illinois.

Update (December 9):  Jill Lawrence quotes Justice Scalia from 2008, “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited."

Update (December 16):  House Democrats were unable to remove a budget rider called the Dickey Amendment which prevents the Centers for Disease Control from researching gun violence.

Update (January 5, 2016):  What kind of fascist monster sheds tears at the thought of murdered school children?

Update (May 11, 2018):  Pat Davis stole my line!

Update (June 12, 2018):  NRA could be getting desperate in Florida. Shannon Watts:

Since the Parkland shooting, everyone who is opposed to the NRA agenda feels comfortable coming out against it, and I think that shows that it’s not a third-rail issue anymore. Lawmakers are looking at the polls and they know they can get elected by opposing the NRA, not by being silenced or even pretending to tolerate their extremist agenda.

Update (March 28, 2019):  NRA seems to have a connection to spreading conspiracy theories.

NRA officer Mark Richardson emailed Wolfgang Halbig, a noted harasser of parents of Sandy Hook Elementary School victims, to float a conspiracy theory about the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, where 17 people were killed last year.

Update (April 30, 2019):  Couldn't happen to a bigger bunch of assholes.

The National Rifle Association is facing collapse. Membership is plummeting. Investigations are opening. And victims of gun violence are holding the organization accountable for deaths all across the country.

Update (May 11, 2019):  The NRA has $24 million of legal bills.