Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

When were the wealthy NOT in power in the US?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 07:35 PM
Original message
When were the wealthy NOT in power in the US?
Really? When was the US government *ever* been made of a majority of ordinary people?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. We all know the answer
...is "never".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 07:45 PM
Response to Original message
2. Same answer as "When were the wealthy NOT in power?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izquierdista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Selected locations at selected times
France 1789-1800, Russia 1917-1991, China 1949-1980

Other than those aberrations, they pretty much have had a lock all through history.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-08-09 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. Those periods defined wealth differently, that's all.
The Bourgeoisie found a way to collectively squash the old nobility. They were periods of recognition of the shift of wealth. The wealthy were still in control.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izquierdista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-08-09 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Oh no, definitely no.
That's when the wealthy overplayed their hand and got their heads chopped off, shot, or sent to the farms to shovel shit. While the Revolution was going on, it was definitely hazardous to be wealthy and they had definitely lost control. But you are right in one sense, as the revolutionary fervor settled down, greedy people began to learn the new set of rules and use it to their advantage. A co-worker of mine was sent to work as a peasant instead of being able to go to middle and high school. But eventually he was able to go to college, emigrate to the United States and now he has a McMansion in a nice subdivision.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-08-09 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. That's too simplistic.
What you had was a shift in what consituted wealth. The nobility's wealth was based on land, but as the feudal system died out, money came to replace land as the basis of wealth. Land represented food and protection in the feudal eras of each of those nations, but as non-feudal governments began to emerge and people became safer and agricultural techniques became more productive and a diversity of trade and production developed, land became less about safety and food and more about power and control of the peasants. Nobles, who achieved their status by being the toughest fighters and/or the best agricultural administrators, by this revolutionary point (different teams, but the same developmental point for all three) had become superfluous. They were important only because the law claimed they were, and they used the law to exploit the workers. The real power of wealth, though, had shifted to the merchants and lenders and skilled professionals. Towns became more the center of real power, but the landed aristocracy still held legal control, and used that control to oppress rather than protect. It was better for peasants to move to towns and learn a trade than to stay on the farms.

Each of those revolutions was lead by the bourgeouisie, even if they were fueled by the furor of the peasants and proles. The new wealth was using the poor to defeat the old wealth. The definition of power and wealth shifted, but those in power were still in power because of their wealth. Now and then a talented peasant or prole became a leader, but they usually also became rich when they did.

Those revolutions, like most, weren't the poor against the rich. They were the new rich against the old rich, and the poor were the pawns used by both sides. Wealth still equaled power. Wealth was just redefined.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-08-09 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. The wealthy were certainly in control during those time periods.
The only difference was that wealth was concentrated in different hands than before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theoldman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
3. Before the White man came.
The leaders of Native American tribes were old wise men not old rich men.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lyric Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 08:46 PM
Response to Original message
5. When they were being taxed at 90-odd percent?
I find it difficult to believe that they were fully in power then, or they'd have never allowed such a thing.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 08:49 PM
Response to Original message
6. Wealthy always in power, but extent of inequality varies and that is what we
should be focused on. Thom Hartmann has spoken and written about this and about what inequality affects in society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 09:00 PM
Response to Original message
7. One brief afternoon on March 4th 1829

<snip>

"The White House was opened to all for a post-inaugural reception, and was filled by the public even before Jackson arrived on horseback.<1> Soon afterward, Jackson left by a window<1><4> or a side entrance,<5> and proceeded to Gadsby's Hotel in Old Town Alexandria, Virginia. The crowd continued to descend into a drunken mob, only dispersed when bowls of liquor and punch were placed on the front lawn of the White House.<4> "I never saw such a mixture," said Joseph Story, then a justice on the Supreme Court: "The reign of King Mob seemed triumphant."<1> The White House was left a mess, including several thousand dollars worth of broken china.<5>"

<snip>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Jackson_1829_presidential_inauguration

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 03:50 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC