The Conscience of a Liberal

As baby boomers, we grew up with products "Made in the USA" and scoffed at trinkets from Japan. Our parents enjoyed life-long employment, health care, affordable education, Social Security and pensions that made the golden years more golden. This is what author Paul Krugman describes in his new book "Conscience of a Liberal." He calls this the "Great Compression" where the politics of equality was borne from the New Deal in which Franklin Delano Roosevelt defied the laws of Adam Smith and his invisible hand, and redistributed the wealth of a nation, effectively killing the "Gilded Age" where society was comprised of the very wealthy and the poor. FDR's New Deal saw the minimum wage becoming half of the average wage earner, the rise of unions, and the mansions of the nation's wealthiest becoming museum attractions. This was the creation of the middle class that was vehemently opposed by Republicans who believed that government intervention would turn the country communist and ruin the economy. It didn't. By the time Dwight Eisenhower, Republican, became president most in the party had made their peace with the New Deal and only a fringe of an extremist element, known as movement conservatives, still opposed it. These conservatives made a brief, unsuccessful surge with the nomination of Barry Goldwater in 1964. They got a break when Democrats embraced civil rights, which broke the Solid South away from them. Racism and the wrath of the angry white male were exploited, and the message of Ronald Reagan could not be missed when he launched his campaign in Philadelphia, MS. Sound familiar? Through skillful marketing of ideas, conservatives were able to exploit racism and frame themselves as strong on defense, tough on crime, and opponents of big government and taxes, even though they lacked the record to support any of these assertions. Once again, we returned to a Gilded Age with a rising disparity between the have's and the have nots, and a declining middle class. Middle class income is less than it was under President Lyndon Johnson, and bankruptcies and mortgage foreclosures have increased because of crushing medical debt and jobs being shipped overseas. And this is where Paul Krugman claims that conservatism is running on its last pint of gas. With record low unemployment and a booming economy, Americans are still uncertain about the their future and their prospects. They have had no tax relief, no job security, income failing to keep pace with cost of living increases, rising health care insurance costs, no end to an unpopular war, rising education costs, and companies repudiating their pension promises. With forty-five million Americans having no health insurance and sixteen million being under-insured, conservatives are no longer able to convince them that they are better off with tax relief going to the richest companies, while they are trying to dismantle Medicare and Social Security, in other words, the New Deal. In spite of the curre

As baby boomers, we grew up with products "Made in the USA," parents who enjoyed life-long employment, health care, affordable education, Social Security and pensions that make the golden years more golden. This is what author, Paul Krugman describes in his new book "Conscience of a Liberal." He calls this the "Great Compression" where the politics of equality was borne from the New Deal in which Franklin Delano Roosevelt defied the laws of Adam Smith and his invisible hand, and redistributed the wealth of a nation, effectively killing the "Gilded Age" where society was comprised of the very wealthy and the poor. FDR's New Deal saw the minimum wage becoming half of the average wage earner, the rise of unions, and the mansions of the nation's wealthiest becoming museum attractions. This was the creation of the middle class that was vehemently opposed by Republicans who believed that government intervention would turn the country communist and ruin the economy. It didn't. By the time Dwight Eisenhower, republican, became president most republicans had made their peace with the New Deal and only a fringe of extremist republicans, known as movement conservatives, still opposed it. The movement conservatives made a brief, unsuccessful surge with the nomination of Barry Goldwater in 1964. They got a break when democrats embraced civil rights, which broke the Solid South away from the democrats. Racism and the wrath of the angry white male were exploited and the message of Ronald Reagan could not be missed when he launched his campaign in Philadelphia, MS. Sound familiar? Through skillful marketing of ideas, conservatives were able to exploit racism and frame themselves as strong on defense, tough on crime, and opponents of big government and taxes even though they lacked the record to support any of these assertions. Once again, we returned to a Gilded Age with a rising disparity between the have's and the have nots, and a declining middle class. Middle class income is less than it was under President Lyndon Johnson, and bankruptcies and mortgage foreclosures have increased because of crushing medical debt and jobs being shipped overseas. And this is where Paul Krugman claims that conservatism is running on its last pint of gas. With record low unemployment and a booming economy, Americans are still uncertain about the their future and their prospects. They have had no tax relief, no job security, income failing to keep pace with cost of living increases, rising health care insurance costs, no end to an unpopular war, rising education costs, and companies repudiating their pension promises. With forty-five million Americans having no health insurance and sixteen million being under-insured, conservatives are no longer able to convince Americans that they are better off with tax relief going to the richest companies, while they are trying to dismantle Medicare and Social Security, in other words, the New Deal. In spite of the current widening

Krugman does it again with an impeccably reasoned history of the interaction between US politics and economics. I wasn't expecting much new, but Krugman repeatedly opened my eyes by putting our current political conflicts in the context of 140 years worth of economic and political history. He documents how the distribution of economic resources are guided not only by Adam Smith's invisible hand but also by politics. He describes how we achieved relative equality with high productivity growth during the 1940-60s, analyzes how political decisions led to our current moderate growth with most of the benefits accruing to a small fraction of the population, and discusses the way movement conservatives have achieved and maintained political power while furthering the economic interests of a small minority. The second half of the book suggests a modest plan for liberals to achieve when they regain political power--beginning with universal health insurance. I've often found it hard to understand what motivates conservatives. I now understand their history and ideas much better. Compromising with them isn't going to work. It will be interesting to see how conservatives respond to this book. They will clearly quibble, attack, and distract, but it is hard to see how they could counteract Krugman's carefully documented main points. This book is a must read for everybody concerned about the direction our country is moving. The timing is propitious as it arrives just as the radical conservative movement is beginning to falter. It refutes essentially every argument radical conservatives use to advance their cause and distort discussions. And it will be the book of the decade if it does begin the process of getting our political discussions about the undoing our social safety nets back to where they were in the 1950s. Krugman quotes Eisenhower as writing of those who would "attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs...." that "Their number is negligible and they are stupid." Radical conservatives will always be with us, but they do not need to remain in political power.

I've been waiting for this book. I read through 1/2 of it last evening. It is a well-thought out book that well-written and more tightly argued than his weekly columns. The books even exercises some retraint in dealing with the Republicans, probably because he has to differentiate between the Republican economic ideology and the current Republican fiasco that is George W. Bush. He makes a cogent argument that the government solutions to the Depression and to managing W.W. 2 created both a thriving economy and a thriving middle class that was sustained until 1970. He makes it clear that the middle-class hasn't done nearly as well since. In his NY TIMES columns, Krugman holds the view that the Bush admin is a rogue government, working against the interest of the majority of it citizens, putting forth policies that the majority of Americans object to. The sense of contempt, of outrage that is present in the columns is missing here. As I said, the book is restrained: I would have liked a thoughtful attack on the Hooverites and their designs on the future of this country: some critical venom for these bizarre people would have been very entertaining. It is telling when Krugman mentions that his collegues at the Times encouraged him to soften his attacks on Bush after the election in 2004. The conformism of the New York Times has not always been helpful to this country. That is why it took the Washington Post to pursue Watergate: it was a story that that needed to be pursued, not managed.

With his uniquely stylish prose( which is a rarity for an economist) and hard hitting facts, Paul Krugman has come out with an excellent book in defense of liberalism. Krugman examines the past 80 years of American history, focusing on economic reforms and achievements and what he sees as increased inequality in our society. He argues that America's post-war middle-class society was not a product of a free-market economy, but was created by the policies like strengthening labor unions and taxing the rich to fund Social Security and Medicare, which as a result, narrowed the income gap and moved the working class upwards out of poverty. Bill O'Reilly once called Krugman a quasi-socialist. Not sure if he would have the time to read this book. Call Krugman whatever you may, but I am pretty sure even O'Reilly would agree that "The Conscience of a Liberal" is a delightful and easy read, just like Krugman's blog. N.Sivakumar Author of: America Misunderstood: What a Second Bush Victory Meant to the Rest of the World