°µĶų½ūĒų

Skip to main content

Democratic Party has lost touch with working folks, author says

Democratic Party has lost touch with working folks, author says

Authorā€™s CU Boulder appearance first of two events highlighting diverse perspectives from media professionals and public intellectuals

The Democratic Party, which presents itself as a vanguard of working people, has become an elite meritocracy that has lost touch with its roots, argues Thomas Frank, a journalist and author of the bestselling book Whatā€™s the Matter with Kansas?

Frank will give a talk titled ā€œWhat Ever Happened to the Party of the People?ā€ on Monday, Oct. 3, at 7 p.m. in on the °µĶų½ūĒų campus.

His appearance is the first of hosted by CU this fall that aim to highlight diverse perspectives from media professionals and public intellectuals. The second is an appearance by author, columnist, talk-radio host and Fox News contributor Meghan McCain, who will speak at a town hall on Monday, Nov. 14 at 7:30 p.m. in Math 100.

In Frankā€™s view, well-educated Democratic leaders have lost touch with working-class people and tend to be unduly sympathetic to comparably learned elites.

ā€œYou talk to a certain kind of Democrat about economic problems that weā€™re having in the country, which are in high relief now, and the conversation automatically for them gravitates to education,ā€ Frank said in a recent interview.

ā€œEverything for them is an education problem.ā€

One thing we know about the meritocracy is that the people on top respect one another.ā€

The lives of such Democrats are ā€œdefined by education, so they naturally think that education will play a similar role for everybody,ā€ Frank continued.

But that view tends to shift the topicā€™s focus back onto the individual. ā€œPeople are falling behind because they didnā€™t study the right subject, or they didnā€™t go to college, or their field is obsolete,ā€ Frank argued.

Such Democrats ā€œhave real trouble talking about grand, sweeping economic changes, and this makes it easy.ā€

To buttress his view that the Democratic party has become fixated on well-credentialed elites, Frank compares the Obama administrationā€™s cabinet with that of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

The Obama administration did not ā€œget tough with Wall Streetā€ after the 2008 crash and ā€œdropped the ballā€ in several ways, Frank said. President Obamaā€™s cabinet and inner circle of advisers has been packed with Ivy Leaguers and Rhodes Scholars and included ā€œsome of the best-credentialed people whoā€™ve ever been in government, taken as a whole.ā€

ā€œYet they delivered these shabby results,ā€ Frank said, noting a similar phenomenon in the LBJ administration, which was chronicled in the David Halberstamā€™s landmark book The Best and the Brightest.

Halberstam highlighted the fact that Presidentā€™s Johnsonā€™s defense advisers were ā€œthe most brilliant people around,ā€ many from Harvard. ā€œAnd they dreamed up the Vietnam War, this incredible catastrophe,ā€ Frank said.

The Obama and Johnson administration examples might prompt one to wonder if ā€œthereā€™s something wrong with government by expert,ā€ Frank said, before quickly adding, ā€œBut that canā€™t be right.ā€

The golden age of ā€œgovernment by expert,ā€ by contrast, was FDRā€™s New Deal. But President Rooseveltā€™s advisers had broad expertise without the same ā€œconcentrated collection of credentialsā€ seen today.

What constituted expertise ā€œwasnā€™t always answered by the word ā€˜Harvard,ā€™ā€ Frank said. While Roosevelt himself was a Harvard man, he enlisted the help of people from a broad range of experience.

For instance, Roosevelt appointed Robert Jackson, former chief U.S. prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials and associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, as solicitor general and attorney general. But Jackson did not have a degree in law.

The Roosevelt administration ā€œgot toughā€ with the bankers after the crash, Frank said, adding that the Obama administration declined to do so. ā€œOne thing we know about the meritocracy is that the people on top respect one another.ā€

So when the governmentā€™s top watchdogs view the titans of the financial sector ā€œthey see peers. They see people they are automatically sympathetic with, people whose concerns they understand. They are willing not just to forgive these people but to give them the benefit of the doubt in every imaginable way.ā€

That mindset makes it difficult for the government elite to grasp that fraud on a massive scale was perpetrated at the top of the financial sector,ĢżFrank said, suggesting that the government elite viewed the financial meltdown this way: ā€œIf there was an epidemic of fraud, it was committed by people at the bottom, people who are signing the loan documents, people who are borrowing money to buy houses.ā€

Frankā€™s articles have appeared in the Financial Times, Harperā€™s Magazine, Los Angeles Times, New York Times, Salon, The American Prospect, The Guardian, The NationĢż²¹²Ō»å Wall Street Journal.

He is the author of eight books, including the aforementioned New York Times bestseller Whatā€™s the Matter with Kansas? His most recent bookā€”Listen, Liberal: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People?ā€”was published in March.

Frankā€™s appearance is sponsored by the CU Boulder , the Ģż²¹²Ō»å .