What ever happened to the Populist Movement since I think if we tweaked it now we could run some of the crooks?

[Leslie Goudy]

Out of Washington

What liberals can learn from the author of The Culture of Narcissism
Christopher Lasch's books offer a counter-narrative of historical decline and dissolution that should make the Left think twice about its progressive achievements

In place of the familiar story about the steady rise of progressive ideology from the late 19th century through 1933, and then its triumph in the New Deal and the postwar political and economic order, with a few minor latter-day setbacks (Ronald Reagan and the New Right), Lasch constructed a narrative of decline and dissolution.
the Left came to valorize ideals of consumption and meritocratic striving. Along the way, it also fetishized efficiency and productivity as measures of the good life, and bought into the notion that the nation should strive for constantly expanding economic growth, with individuals chasing endlessly after a standard of abundance that's always just out of reach.

His idea constructing a tradition that could serve as an alternative to progressivism and its ill-fated role as facilitator to capitalism. The term he used to describe this alternative tradition was populism. It's a vision rooted in a lower-middle-class ethic that holds up a view of the good life tied to family and local community. Like the Farmers of old Populism
http://www.isidewith.com/news/article/wh...-of-narcis
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/jimcrow/stories_...ulist.html

[Goatnuts]

it wasn't popular

[Socialjustice]

hypocrisy truly is a conservatives bread, and racism their butter. U talk of narcissism? Wats more narcissistic than demonizing the poor, the weakest among us, u are cowards. Lying cowards. America sees u for the cowards u are, paul ryan's plan solidified that belief. Your time is done

[Erich]

i didn't read the book to which you refer, but i can opinionate on some things in that question.
You talk about consumerism and pursuit of creature comforts, but this is not "left" or "progressive." It's the standard interpretation of the American Dream, pushed by both parties. Hoover promised a chicken in every pot and a car in every garage. Harding and Coolidge promised prosperity and material gain. So did Reagan. This is not liberal or conservative. It's standard American politicking.
Workers struggled to make a living in the 1800s and early 1900s. Wanting a social safety net and wage increases and pensions were not mindless materialism and consumerism. It was an attempt to have a more comfortable life. That's hugely different from middle-class people today buying the latest cellphone or vacationing for three weeks in the Caribbean. Back then, people worked 10 and 12 hours a day. Kids worked. Both husband and wife often worked. Houses were small and cramped. They lived in overcrowded urban neighborhoods full of pollution and dirty streets. It was a different world. don't project today's issues on to the past.
As for challenging materialism, Jimmy Carter, who is regularly mocked by the Right, urged Americans to quiet their demands for ever increasing prosperity. He advised Americans to put on warmers clothes and turn down the thermostat to conserve energy during the energy crisis. The media and many Americans lashed out in an uproar. There you have a liberal Democratic president urging self-discipline, and most Americans couldn't stand it. The so-called conservative, Reagan, promised Americans they could have everything.
The Populists were condemned by many Americans as backward farm country socialists. They wanted government ownership of railroads, banking at post offices, and they often blamed the country's problems on big banks and big business. I don't see how many conservatives would agree with them.

[Weasel McWeasel]

all I saw here was "LIBERALS blah blah blah blah blah blah blah................"

Kiddie table is that way--------------------------->.

[Answer]

No -- You see here's the deal -- BUSH and his administration almost DECIMATED this country.
Obama came in and we wabnted him to wave his magic wand because we NEEDED something like that.
He got OBSTRUCTED - The CONS focused everything they had at hurting him.
He pushed through -- Meanwhile CONS had some success in losing OBAMA supporters which is what they wanted - In turn those who could see through it all continue to support our PRESIDENT and you roll in and say it's some kind of blind worship -- Nothing to do with that at all. This country was F*U*C*K*E*D by the time Obama rolled in and some of us understand if we truly want to rebuild it then it takes more then chucking tomatoes at the guy that was voted in whose trying very hard to shovel up the 8 years of massive piles of S*H*I*T by the our former President Cheney/Bush