Making The Poor Visible

[question everything]

(Apologies if already posted, I just found this)

washingtonpost.com

Making The Poor Visible

By E. J. Dionne Jr.
Friday, July 20, 2007; A19

John Edwards may be running third in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, but he has already changed the national conversation on a crucial issue. Poverty is no longer a hidden subject in American politics. Be as skeptical of Edwards as you want to be. Yes, he has had some trouble since he joined the 3-H Club -- the $400 haircut, building a 28,000-square-foot house and taking $500,000 in payments from a hedge fund. Yes, he has gotten political traction among liberals out of saying endlessly that ending poverty is "the cause of my life." Moreover, Barack Obama was right to say Wednesday that his early community organizing work shows that poverty "is not an issue I just discovered for the purposes of a campaign." For that matter, Hillary Clinton began her professional life laboring to eradicate child poverty.

The difference is that by harping on the issue, Edwards -- whatever his motivations -- has forced Democrats to abandon their fear of being seen as too focused on the needs of the poor and has thus opened political space for his rivals. Since the late 1980s, Democrats have been obsessed with the middle class for reasons of simple math: no middle-class votes, no electoral victories. But focusing on the middle class is one thing. Keeping the poor in the political closet is another. Must appealing to the self-interest of the middle class preclude appealing to its conscience?

Democrats have lost enormous ground by allowing a myth to take hold that Lyndon Johnson's Great Society was a failure. "In the 1960s, we waged war on poverty, and poverty won" is one of the most powerful bits of rhetoric in the conservative arsenal. Edwards took on this falsehood directly in his speech Wednesday in Prestonsburg, Ky., at the end of his tour of impoverished regions. "We accomplished a lot," he said of LBJ's time, "civil rights laws, Medicare and Medicaid, food stamps and Head Start and Title I aid for poor schools. The Great Society and other safety-net programs have cut the number of people living in poverty in half." Edwards understands that unless the country is given hard evidence that government can succeed, it will never embrace government-led efforts at social reform.

(snip)

As one of the shrewdest students of poverty has said, "the poor are politically invisible," removed as they are "from the living, emotional experience of millions upon millions of middle-class Americans." Those words were written in 1962 by the late Michael Harrington in "The Other America," the book that helped launch the War on Poverty. In 2007, the poor are less politically invisible than they have been in a long time. That gives a new war on poverty at least a fighting chance. Edwards deserves some credit for that.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/19/AR2007071901968.html

[mrcheerful]

1. The reason the poor are invisible in 2007 comes from Reagan's lies about the poor

in 1979. He declared that poverty was a thing of the past and the only ones left were lazy welfare queens that had been living on government aid for generations, though the welfare Reagan was talking about didn't really start until after he got in office. After 1969 welfare improved but the massive welfare that started after Reagan was elected and allowed union busting that was followed by down sizing then later out sourcing pretty much made the poor visible and fair targets for the right wing nuts to blame for all of the countries wrongs.

Also the homeless are now seen as a public nuisance and not a problem. Plus the way cities keep running them out of their city or relocating them to other cities no one really see's the whole picture and shrug it off as just more lazy people unwilling to get a job. The american empathy is pretty much gone. Young people blame the old and disabled for SS problems while ignoring that the government has been using their retirement fund to spend on their war and war toys. This Reagan me me me generation is the down fall of the country.

[question everything]

3. One problem is that we lumped "the homeless" in one category

many suffer from mental illness and cannot get a job. In the 70s, I think, it was decided to release all the mental patients to the outside world without ever thinking of the consequences. Yes, "One Flew over the Cuckoo's nest" was a horrible way to treat people, but by now we know better on how to treat them and when they need to be hospitalized.

We blame illegal immigrants on taxing the health system but I don't know that anyone has ever bothered to find out, of the ones that come to the ER, how many are really illegal immigrants and how many are homeless with no health insurance.

Recent stories about "dumping" by hospitals clearly showed that we are dealing with poor Americans.

No doubt, there are people on welfare who abuse the system. This happens everywhere. But perhaps if we helped the poor with jobs, with child care with housing and health care, if we looked at them as individuals who need personalized approach, we could stop the general lumping of them as "Homeless" and stop thinking about them.

[bobbolink]

6. So, "liberals" are still believing Raygun's lies, then?

Why?

If they are such great liberals, why did they ever believe it in the first place?

Why do they continue to believe it?

Raygun wasn't liberal. Why were liberals fooled?

[dropkickpa]

7. They started to believe it

Because it helped them feel better about their racism, classism, and bigotry. Continues to this day. Tell a liberal about a woman on welfare, 95% of the time, they are going to picture a black woman, even though they are NOT the majority on welfare. Raygun's fucked up welfare queen bullshit still persists to this day.

[bobbolink]

9. Thank you for your honesty! I very much appreciate the detour from denial!

I see it so much, including at DU, and I have despaired.

Really, thank you for the lift to my spirits today!

[dropkickpa]

10. Rasicm is so ingrained in white america

It's damn hard to unlearn it, especially the subconcious aspects. I'm a white girl, but my parents made a very conscious effort to NOT teach it to us in the home (liberal hippyish types). Even then, my out-of-home environment had some influence, which I try to work to overcome as much as I can. So many liberals are ashamed to admit that they carry this crap around, but you can't really get rid of it if you don't acknowledge it's presence.

[bobbolink]

11. And I'm a white woman in deep poverty, and that isn't heard, either.

Some things just don't change.

I no longer have hope for that change.

Liberals, caring about poverty? pppffftttthhh!

I appreciate your wider view.

I wish it would spread.

[Sapphire Blue]

2. K&R

I'm glad you posted this here! I posted it in GD a few weeks ago (http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Sapphire%20Blue/425); it received one reply 9 recommendations, though).

Poverty seems to be easily ignored, doesn't it? It's discouraging.

[question everything]

4. Sorry I missed it

This is the fate of GD posts, they sink fast.

Either way, it is good to publicize this.

[Sapphire Blue]

5. Yes, GD posts often sink fast, while Poverty Forum posts don't get as much traffic, so...

... are just as likely not to be read. :dilemma:

Speaking of publicizing this (& other articles about poverty), what do you think about enlisting 50-100 DUers to post/repost worthwhile articles every hour, on the hour, in numerous forums all over DU? :evilgrin:

[question everything]

8. It seems that right now articles about Clinton and Obama

and, to a lesser extent - Edwards, Kucinich and Biden - are what get people attention. And, of course, the ones about the war, impeachment and Rove.

And, I suspect, some of us don't spend much time online, preferring to enjoy the summer, instead.

But I think that your suggestion is a good one. Perhaps to post the stories here, first, and then to repost them on GD..

(Sorry that it took me so long to reply, had several busy days and did not log in at all)

[Naturyl]

12. Hey, I'm visible...

Yep, poor guy right here... yoo-hoo "progressives," poor guy at 12 o' clock...

Oops, what's that, I need to "stop whining?" I'm "just jealous?" Class issues are "a distraction?" I ought to "get a jawb?" I ought to be looking for a "hand up instead of a handout?"

Oh, okay, gotcha. I thought "progressives" wouldn't be mindlessly spouting Hannity talking points, but I guess I was wrong. My bad. :P