The American proletariat: The real reason why Ron Paul's chances are slimSubmitted by Desert Rat on Tue, 03/13/2012 - 11:34
One of Two Outcomes
It may be that the biggest single problem confronting the liberty-minded is the existence of a large (and growing) American proletariat. There have always been poor people, of course. But the proletariat is distinct from people who are merely lower down on the economic totem pole – or down on their luck.
I am just now finishing up a book about the Dust Bowl in the 1930s by Timothy Egan, The Worst Hard Time (see here). In it, you read of people who endured real poverty – as in, starvation poverty, living in a sod-walled, dirt-floored “dugout” in Oklahoma. No electricity – much less TeeVee (let alone a flat-screen TeeVee with Netflix streaming set up in front of a Rent-a-Center sofa in an air-conditioned Section 8 apartment with a refrigerator full of EBT-acquired food ). And of how reluctant – how ashamed – these people (most of them) were to even ask for government assistance. And when they did ask, in their utter desperation, all they wanted was enough help to keep them from literally dying – and to help them get back to work.
The gibs muh dat mentality so cancerously pervasive today was all-but-nonexistent then. People who could work but didn’t – and lived off those who did – were viewed as pariahs, as maggots. Even the most penniless sodbuster had moral standards rarely found today among the affluent middle classes. 1930s Americans had been raised to believe in a day’s work for a day’s pay – and viewed with suspicion and contempt people who didn’t work and yet still demanded a day’s pay.
Communism didn’t take root here then for that reason.: