Unfettered Capitalism vs. Class Warfare
Realities of Wealth, Income Inequality

By: Don Wycliff

Maybe it has always been there and I've just been looking past it at Iraq, the Middle East, Sept. 11, and such. But in serious ways and frivolous ones, the issue of economic class seems to have become unusually prominent in the media lately.

It has shown up most seriously in coverage of the debate over a "stimulus" for the American economy, as Republicans defend President Bush's package of tax law changes by blasting the Democrats for engaging in what they term "class warfare".

A bit less seriously, on Page 1 of the New York Times' Arts & Leisure section Sunday, writer Caryn James used Jennifer Lopez's cinematic Cinderella story, Maid in Manhattan, as the jumping-off point for a discourse on the treatment of class in movies and on TV.

And in the utterly frivolous category is the "reality" TV show Joe Millionaire, in which a $19,000-a-year Los Angeles construction worker fitted out to seem like he's rich is pursued by 20 young women.

Each of these offers a thought-provoking take on the class issue and the uses to which it is put.

In an analysis the day after Bush unveiled his stimulus package in Chicago, Tribune senior correspondent Michael Tackett pointed out that "class warfare" as a political strategy has a long history in America. It is, Tackett said, "perhaps the most durable subtext of presidential elections".

It was invoked most famously in 1896, when William Jennings Bryan and the Democrats decried the Republicans as the party of big business and the rich.

In recent years the term has become a favorite of Republicans, a device for parrying the rhetorical thrusts of Democrats who point out what invariably seems to be true: that Republican tax-cutting proposals favor the rich.

Cry "Class warfare!" and it summons up images of Madame Defarges knitting, tumbrils rolling, crimsoned guillotine blades falling, and an out-of-control rabble rioting, looting, and overturning the established order.

President Bush employed the term pre-emptively on Jan. 2, five days before his Chicago speech, when he mused within earshot of the press at his Texas ranch: "I understand the politics of economic stimulus. If some would like to turn this into class warfare - that's not how I think. I think about the overall economy and how best to help those folks who are looking for work."

Wiser minds than mine must determine which side has the better of the economic argument. But I find my teeth clenching involuntarily whenever I hear the term applied to Americans' public debates about issues of tax policy, income inequality, and the like.

It strikes me that those who use it must be ignorant of warfare and in denial about class. The very fact that Americans are debating policy and not firing weapons, seizing the levers of power, or staging general strikes suggests just how far we are from real class warfare.

And that invites the question: Given the realities of wealth and income inequality in our country, why do we not experience real class warfare?

Caryn James' article suggests the reason lies at least partly in fairy tales like Maid in Manhattan, which propagate "the Big Lie that class is meaningless in American life".

The Big Truth, she suggests, is far grimmer. She cites a recent analysis by Princeton economist Alan B. Krueger of scholarly studies on what is known in the economics trade as "intergenerational transmission of economic status".

In a November essay in the New York Times, Krueger concluded that: "Five or six generations are probably required, on average, to erase the advantages or disadvantages of one's economic origins." In other words, as he put it more colloquially: "The secret to success is to have a successful parent."

James was writing about movies and their messages, so she didn't mention another part of Krueger's essay that goes more directly to the current debate over Bush's tax proposals. "Even if the father-son correlation [in `heritability' of income] is high because traits that affect earning power are inherited, well-designed interventions could still be cost effective and improve the lot of the disadvantaged."

In this country, such "well-designed interventions" have included government programs like the GI Bill of Rights, free public schools, low-cost higher education, Head Start, and the Earned Income Tax Credit.

All of these have helped to soften the "savage inequalities" that result from unfettered capitalism. All have helped create the middle class that is the fulcrum of social stability in this country. All are better bets for social and economic advancement than is hoping to win the affections of even a legitimate Joe or Jane Millionaire.