stay connected

FrumForum Facebook FrumForum YouTube Update Twitter FrumForum Flickr

Why Aren’t The Unemployed Protesting Here?

February 2nd, 2011 at 10:29 am David Frum | 65 Comments |

Share
| Print

Jon Stewart has some fun with Fox News personalities like Glenn Beck who worry that “we might become Egypt.” Yes silly obviously. But behind the silliness is a serious question: Isn’t the most remarkable thing about the US in 2011 precisely the absence of protest by the unemployed and foreclosed? Here we’ve gone through the most protracted economic crisis since World War II – in many ways the most severe crisis – a crisis directly attributable to terrible business decisions supported by government policies bought-and-paid-for by powerful financial interests – a crisis out of which so many of the authors have escaped unscathed (unlike say 1929-33) and indeed richer than before. And yet … the only populist movement the country has seen is a movement of the right, in defense of the existing rules and arrangements? I can think of many explanations, and yet at a deeper level I remain baffled. I expected otherwise.

Recent Posts by David Frum



65 Comments so far ↓

  • anniemargret // Feb 2, 2011 at 10:32 pm

    If food and water were suddenly to become in short supply, we would see mass rebellion. If, God Forbid, we have another massive terrorist attack, there could be an uprising because FEAR is always at the root of rebellion.

    And I agree about our social safety nets…and why this has made this country stronger, not weaker. Because we have always had a built-in foundation for protection for the minorities and the poor and abject poor. Because we are a decent sane sensible people who have compassion.

    So it is extremely unlikely that we will see anything like what we are seeing in Egypt. There are more options available to Americans when the bottom falls out, but if Republicans get too much power, we will see those options, those protective measures, disappear.

    And if safety nets go, and there is no escape, no measure of calm to fill despair, we will see much more than an aggrieved population.

    I agree with the others here about the Tea Party. It was a reaction to the Presidency of Barack Obama, with all the bias and prejudice that came with it. They were silent for two terms during the Bush/Cheney years. This is nothing but political warfare, with a pretense about caring for the economy. Because if they did, as “armstp” and others already pointed out, cutting spending plus raising taxes would be on their lips…and not just, ‘No More Taxes, Ever!”

    !!

  • lessadoabouteverything // Feb 2, 2011 at 10:43 pm

    Jen: Here is the entire relevant paragraph: The American social safety net was seen by someone here (armstp, for one) as bypassing illegal immigrants. I merely pointed out that by having children they received the benefit of citizenship and everything that accompanies it.

    The sentence is not clear as to whom the “they” is, so I have indeed been “keeping up.” I can not help it if your English is sloppy, since the pronoun they seems to be clearly indicating the parents since obviously it is the parents who are having children and not the children having themselves.
    Here, I will break it down for you: I merely pointed out that by having children (the parents) they (the parents) received the benefit of citizenship and everything that accompanies it. For clarity’s sake you should have written “I merely pointed out that illegal immigrants having children confer upon their children the benefit of citizenship and everything that accompanies it.” Granted, this is not the best sentence but it is clear to whom we are referring.

    Look, don’t get defensive but I read the sentence as you wrote it, not as you intended the meaning to be understood by the reader. You are obviously a bright woman (though I might disagree with your politics) so if you want your meaning to be clear, then take the necessary steps to make it so, and don’t get defensive when the reader is not a mind reader.

    You say it is a post about Children, but surely you can see you what wrote as rebuttal to armstp was about “bypassing illegal aliens.” and the benefits they receive by having children.

  • pnumi2 // Feb 3, 2011 at 1:46 am

    balconesfault // Feb 2, 2011 at 10:42 am

    “Had the GOP successfully stopped the extension of unemployment benefits, you’d better believe that it wouldn’t take long for the protests to start – particularly with tons of newly unemployed to be dumped onto the job markets over the coming months as states begin their layoffs.”

    And just imagine where we would be without TARP, QE1&2, the bank bailouts, GM bailout and a stock market only 2000 points (18%) from it’s all time high. Only the politically motivated, the chronically insane, and those suffering from tertiary syphilis could believe the country would not be as well off as it is today without the work of Obama and Bernanke.

  • jerry ebert // Feb 3, 2011 at 2:41 am

    In earlier days, our unemployed could afford the time to rally. Now, the unemployed are nevertheless plugged into mortgages, credit cards, bank loans etc. that force them to hustle every day, even without work. They are more pinned down, and have no time to demonstrate. Their lives are far more complicated than, say, the unemployed of the 1930’s. Also, what are they going to rally for? More jobs? More unemployment benefits? More responsible regulation of Big Business? It might seem a bit of a waste of time, I think, what with folks such as Beck and Limbaugh shouting them down, and the mortgage company calling every other day.

  • To the Barricades! - Big Tent Revue // Feb 3, 2011 at 12:04 pm

    [...] David Frum wonders why with a 9 percent unemployment rate, people in the States aren’t taking to the streets ala Egypt: Jon Stewart has some fun with Fox News personalities like Glenn Beck who worry that “we might become Egypt.” Yes silly obviously. But behind the silliness is a serious question: Isn’t the most remarkable thing about the US in 2011 precisely the absence of protest by the unemployed and foreclosed? Here we’ve gone through the most protracted economic crisis since World War II – in many ways the most severe crisis – a crisis directly attributable to terrible business decisions supported by government policies bought-and-paid-for by powerful financial interests – a crisis out of which so many of the authors have escaped unscathed (unlike say 1929-33) and indeed richer than before. And yet … the only populist movement the country has seen is a movement of the right, in defense of the existing rules and arrangements? I can think of many explanations, and yet at a deeper level I remain baffled. I expected otherwise. [...]

  • KBKY // Feb 3, 2011 at 1:06 pm

    @lessadoabouteverything
    “Kbky, sorry but this simply is not true. Our poorest 5% lives pretty damn miserably with a number of them homeless. I have lived and worked in the 3rd world for 15 years, I can easily state that the majority of Chinese people live better than our poorest 5%, the same with Indians.”

    In my original post, I cited this article: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/the-haves-and-the-have-nots/?scp=4&sq=economix&st=cse, which I found pretty convincing (and surprising). It is not at all my intention to negate the challenges and obstacles facing the poor in this country. My point was only that, in terms of standardized purchasing power, our lowest 5% are wealthier and have better standards of living than the vast majorities from the other countries discussed in the chart (Brazil, China, and India), not taking into account any safety nets (i.e. Medicaid, Social Security, etc.). This absolutely does not factor in the other issues that you raised (family cohesiveness or happiness) and you may indeed prefer to be middle class in China than poor in the United States. This doesn’t negate the fact, however, that you would technically be poorer and have a lower standard of living.

  • JeninCT // Feb 3, 2011 at 4:53 pm

    lessadoabouteverything: point taken.

  • rockstar // Feb 3, 2011 at 9:02 pm

    There are no protests here because America’s unemployed aren’t outraged by the situation, they’re disgusted by the situation.

  1. Pages:
  3. 1
  4. 2
  5. 3

Leave a Comment

You must log in to post a comment.