Readers: some of the dialogue in this blog is set in the future (sometime after the year 2020). Entries addressing events in the the future assume there has been a 5th revolution in the US — the Revenge Revolution. More about the Revenge Revolution, a list of earlier revolutions and the author, Entry #1.
Periodically I write a “sense check” to assess whether in the next few years, a revolution in the US is still possible or whether the entire exercise is based on a statistical aberration — i.e., a roughly 50-year cycle between major upheavals in the US. This entry is a sense check.
Some of the entries are part of a series. Several series are available as easy-to-read booklets for download:
- Coming technology tsunami and the implications for the US, Tech Tsunami Booklet with Supplement
- Trump Supporters Brainwashed? A series discussing why Republics have abandoned basic principals, Are Trump Republicans Brainwashed 2020Q1 Related article published 10/07/20. Op-Ed piece in NYT about how people bend their thinking to justify beliefs. Example is Fox News Information about Covid-19, 20 10 07 Fox News Still in Coronavirus Bubble aka Brainwashed
- Who took out the Donald? Who/what groups are most likely to “take out” Trump? The booklet was written early in the Trump administration but still worth a read. Who Took Out the Donald Entries with Update
- Revenge Revolution — description of what form the revolution might take, 20 01 07 Start of Revolution
- Working with Lee Iacocca after he left Chrysler, 2019Q3 Iacocca Personal Observations.
- GM EV1 — behind-the-scenes events affecting development and introduction of the GM EV1, the first modern electric vehicle. 2020Q1 GM EV-1 Story Behind the Story Booklet
Beginning #378 the entries began focusing on a post-Trump administration and a post-Coronavirus world. We’re headed to a post-Trump world and post-COVID world, even if a ways away. Comments and suggestions welcome.
ENTRY #400: SENSE CHECK. The first entry in this blog was the fall 2013, just over seven years ago. The theme of the blog evolved 9-10 years ago when I began drafting a thesis for an unfinished degree at the University of Michigan. The degree was a masters of liberal studies in American culture.
I started the degree program a few years after we relocated to Michigan. The degree courses were interesting and unlike any I’d taken in undergrad or graduate school. One of the benefits of the program was becoming much better at the TV show “Jeopardy.”
I finished the thesis and submitted to U of M. Then learned I was a couple of courses short. After a number of years in Michigan, we had moved to California, then to Charlotte. I hadn’t been enrolled for some time but thought the coursework was completed. Although U of M indicated the two courses could be taken on line, I decided enough formal education.
However, I didn’t put the thesis on the shelf. When researching material for the thesis, I “discovered” the US seemed to experience a revolution about every 50 years. I assume like many discoveries, this “discovery” was quite by accident.
The working title of the thesis was “The American Revolution.” “The American Revolution” didn’t refer to the traditional American Revolution but a tagline from an old Chevrolet commercial. Much of the content of the thesis focused on how to rebuild US manufacturing (yes, long before the Donald made such a claim), with particular emphasis on how Southeast Michigan could leverage knowledge of the auto industry to become a worldwide center for other products. One example was leveraging skills in product design and electromechanical engineering to develop computer-aided prosthetics, which thankfully are now coming to market.
Because of the title, I wondered how many revolutions had America experienced. Obviously, the American Revolution and the Civil War, but were there others? As an early Baby Boomer, I considered the changes in music, hairstyles, attitudes toward sex, etc. in the late 1960s, early 1970s as a “cultural revolution.” In addition to cultural change, that period included domestic violence with the assassinations of JFK, RFK and MLK as well as major civil disruptions in Newark, Detroit and Los Angeles.
After a bit more analysis, I decided there have been four (4) revolutions so far in US history with each occurring roughly every 50 years. Since the mid-point of the last revolution was about 1970, if the 50-year cycle was correct, then the fifth US revolution would be sometime after 2020. (More information about the four revolutions and how the timing was calculated in Entry #1.)
Well, here we are just having finished 2020. Time to have a sense check and ask, “Is a 5th US revolution likely?” Unless you’ve been in a cave or on Mars the last few years, I think most people would say “Yes, a revolution of some type seems likely.”
The country seems as divided emotionally and politically as any time since the years leading up to the Civil War. The Donald and the Trump Administration with all the craziness were contributors to this split. But the divide in the country started long before Trump.
OK, Trump was outlandish, arrogant, stupid, childlike and a host of other psychological “isms.” Despite the behavior, Trump was not the first to cause the split. There’s always been some split but the movement toward a chasm started with Ronald Reagan.
Reagan kept proclaiming, even after becoming president that “government is the problem, not the solution.” Reagan would also promote private industry as the solution. While government is clearly not the solution to every problem, private Industry is not the solution to many problems either.
How many private companies would be willing to develop a product or build a system for which there was no known market? The answer is zero, nada, none. So, then how did railroads, the highway system, air travel, ground and satellite communications systems and the internet get funded? Mmm, must have been that incompetent government. There is not a single company that would risk the capital necessary for the development and introduction of these larger scale programs.
At the same time, at some point the government needs to get out of the business it helped develop and let the private sector take over. While one can debate the timing, the government has been diligent about allowing, even encouraging, private industry to take over these industries.
One of Reagan’s strength was communications – after all he was an actor. Reagan should be given an Academy Award for convincing so many Republicans he was a fiscal conservative. In truth Reagan was a spendthrift whose administration ran up huge federal budget deficits. By the end of Reagan’s term in office, federal debt as a percentage of GDP had increased about the same relative amount as under FDR’s New Deal program in the 1930s. (There are number of entries in this blog with more charts and explanations supporting the contention that Reagan started the split in attitudes among the populace.)
Another factor helping split the country was the introduction of cable news, then the internet. Cable news and the internet, combined with a decline in the circulation of daily newspapers, resulted in the proliferation of alleged credible news sources, with emphasis on “alleged.” Unlike old-line mainstream network TV channels and mainstream newspapers, the cable and so-called internet news outlets were not subject to the same FCC standards.
The lack of oversight has allowed supposed news outlets to either radically distort the truth or simply create stories with no basis whatsoever in fact. Without another source of information – daily newspaper, e.g. – many believe the cable channel or social media. Worse still is many people cannot seem to separate commentary from the talking heads on these channels and the real news. Further, some high-profile cable channels, notably Fox, until recently were openly distorting the news to support a certain political position and ignoring the truth. For most of the last four years Fox should have been labeled “Trump TV.”
Back to the sense check about the possibility of a 5th US revolution. If the past pattern holds true and there is a revolution in the next few years, then what form of revolution is going to take? Cultural? Shooting? A bit of both?
Almost certainly there’s going to be a cultural revolution. Just as the Baby Boomers created the cultural revolution in late 60s, early 70s the now teens and twenty-somethings – Generation Z — are going to force cultural changes.
What the Vietnam War was for the Baby Boomers, climate change is for Gen Z. And unlike the Baby Boomers, where jobs were relatively plentiful, most everyone in Gen Z faces a bleak job market, even for many who are college educated.
Gen Zers feel trapped economically and trapped by an ever bleaker outlook for the environment. And some in Gen Z point the finger at Baby Boomers for making these problems worse.
The coffee shop I visit most every morning is staffed with many Gen Zers. One young lady, an excellent college student, said the other day when we chatted about solving social problems, “We’ve got to get rid of these old politicians. They’re too rigid and set in their ways.”
If you are a Baby Boomer, or even a bit older, watch out. The light at the end of the tunnel is a Gen Z freight train that is picking up speed.
The Gen Zers are not alone. High-school grads, whether recent or older are frustrated as well. Where do they find employment in this new world?
Covid-19 demonstrated that many critical societal jobs are being filled by less-educated, lower-paid workers. All of a sudden, the US seemed to depend on those previously invisible grocery-store clerks, hospital aides, delivery-truck drivers, transit staff, etc. But what else can these workers do?
Covid-19 also demonstrated how vulnerable other entry-level jobs were, especially in restaurants, hotels, retail stores and office buildings. Their jobs disappeared almost overnight. And, even with the Covid-19 vaccine, it may be a decade or more before many of their jobs return.
Such service workers, along with lower-paid manufacturing workers, seem to be the most likely to be involved in an armed revolt. By revolting, what does a group have to lose? As a group, they are underpaid; they have no real prospects for upward mobility; they are not adequately educated for, and therefore not qualified for higher-paying technology-focused jobs.
What about support from the political parties? Interestingly, many in this group have been ardent Trump supporters. Yet, Trump and the Republican Party have repeatedly dumped on this group economically. Just this past week Republicans in the Senate refused to consider bumping up the Covid-19 stimulus checks from $600 to $2,000. Did the same group of Senate Republicans resist providing more Covod-19 funds to business? Of course not, the Republicans were glad to do so.
When this disadvantaged group finally wakes up, they will be angry and want revenge. That’s why I labeled the anticipated 5th US revolution as the Revenge Revolution. This group will seek revenge for past injustices. As noted in previous entries, many in this group are well-armed.
When there is a group that feels deprived, has no savings, has no job prospects, and has nothing to lose, and that is well-armed, you have an ideal core for starting a revolution. My take on the probability of a revolution? The Gen-Zers will drive a cultural revolution for sure. Probability the deprived start an armed revolution of some type? 75%. To be continued.
As noted in #310, my reference point is a Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln, Everett Dirksen and Jacob Javits. The attitude of that Republican Party could best be described using a slogan from Bush 43’s 2000 presidential campaign, “compassionate conservatism.”
In our particular town – population approaching 50,000 – the public school system was top-notch with quality teachers in all grades. High-school students had a choice of three tracks and could switch between tracks for a limited number of classes – college prep, general education, technical training. The town produced a disproportionate number of famous and successful people in a wide range of occupations – education, entertainment, medicine, military (early astronaut), science and industry.
So that’s a description of the Republican Party I grew up with and use as a reference point for those running for political office. Such a Republican Party no longer exists. When I hear a Republican call it the party of Lincoln, I shake my head and want to scream. Most of today’s Republicans have no clue about the values of the party of Lincoln.
I share the view of many economists that a very good way to assess the potential impact of debt for a country is to measure outstanding debt as a percent of GDP (gross domestic product). Think of it this way. Pretend you’re a banker. Two people walk into a bank and want to borrow $25,000,000. One of them is someone like you…and the other is Warren Buffet. The bank decides on loans based on income and assets. For someone like you, the $25,000,000 is likely to be multiples higher than your income and assets. For Warren Buffet, the $25,000,000 is considered chump change. Thus, a large amount of debt isn’t necessarily bad if you have a large income and/or large asset base, which the US does. The US government owns lots of land and buildings.
Following WWII and up to the Reagan Administration, debt as a percent of GDP declined. During the Reagan Administration debt as a percent of GDP increased from about 30% to about 50% — a relative increase of 60%. Under Reagan, the relative increase in debt was only somewhat less than experienced during the New Deal under FDR. Under Bush 41 relative debt percent increased over 25% beyond Reagan. Under Bush 43, relative debt increased over 40% from the Clinton years. Under Trump, despite a very strong economy the Federal debt for FY2018 was the highest in 6 years. The deficit under Trump is expected to balloon to over $1,000,000,000,000 annually because of the gigantic tax cut that reduced taxes primarily for the wealthy.
What about debt increases under Democrats? They were even worse, right? Well, no. Throughout the Clinton Administration, debt as a percent of GDP decreased a little over 12%. During some years under Clinton, the US ran a surplus. Under Obama, relative debt climbed about 35%, even with the combination of fiscal stimulus required to avoid another Great Depression and the introduction of the Affordable Care Act. Debt under Obama, despite all the cries from Republicans increased less than under either Regan or Bush 43. So, which party is more fiscally conservative? If you look at fiscal policies under Republicans, one term comes to mind – red ink.
Further, Republican have resisted increasing the minimum wage. When Reagan was inaugurated, the minimum wage in real terms (adjusted for inflation) was about $10.00 per hour. Today’s minim wage is $7.75 per hour, a decrease in real terms of more than 20%. The decrease reduces further the ability of lower-skilled, entry-level workers to earn enough to exceed the poverty line. What happened to the “compassion” of the Republican Party?
Just in case today’s Republicans have not read the Constitution, as is abundantly clear from listening to President Trump, the First Amendment reads as follows, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press (see the press is not your enemy but protected!), or the right of people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
At the time the Constitution was written…for all the “Constitutionalists in the crowd” that was 225+ years ago…the United States had a very small “standing army.” The defense of the country relied on “well-regulated” state militia – think National Guard. Members of the well-regulated militia were “citizen soldiers” and expected to provide firearms, as implied in the Second Amendment. Over time the US created a permanent military for “the security of the free state,” thus the standing army eliminated the need for citizen soldiers.
As a result actions during the confirmation process, I increased the chances of a 5th US revolution to “highly likely.” However, my reasons for changing to “highly likely” may be different from what many others have stated or written about the Kavanaugh nomination/confirmation process.
Further, there is no requirement that the president nominate, or the Senate confirm, candidates to ensure a balance of opinion on SCOTUS. While the situation unlikely, say if all liberal-leaning justices left the Court during the term of one president, the president could nominate and the Senate could approve, justices so the entire Court supported rulings considered far right.
Over the decades, what has allowed SCOTUS rulings to be recognized as law of the land by the populace? Obviously not everyone has supported every decision but why have even controversial decisions become the law of the land? Trust by the people in the objectivity of the justices. In parallel, the Court’s decisions likely have been moderated to a degree by public opinion. Justices have recognized the need to create trust and acknowledge public opinion so the vast majority of SCOTUS rulings have not been too far left or right.
Let’s take a closer look at McConnell’s greatest achievement. The initial phase of this latest “great achievement” was McConnell denying president Obama the right to have the Senate consider a nominee to fill an open seat on SCOTUS. According to McConnell the vacancy should be filled “after the people vote.” Forget the Constitution, forget precedent, McConnell alone should decide when a vacancy on SCOTUS should be filled.
To further build public trust…or maybe that’s distrust…in Kavanaugh, McConnell (this time thru Grassley and Trump), stonewalled efforts to dig deeper into Kavanaugh’s past. Charges ranged from sexual assault to excessive gambling. Rather than let the FBI explore a series of allegations fully, the Judiciary Committee allowed only one key witness to testify – yes, only one – Dr. Christine Blasey Ford. Kavanaugh followed Dr. Ford and managed to create even more concern about his truthfulness and demeanor as publicly insulted Senators seeking answers to some basic questions and even lied about what he should have dismissed as youthful indiscretions.
While those on the political right might view with great satisfaction McConnell’s tactics of attempting to hide the truth about Kavanaugh, thereby giving the finger to the left, how would the right react if a nominee from a Democratic president had the same questionable background and exhibited the same rude behavior as Kavanaugh? I can hear the cries now, “Lock him up! Lock him up!”
Senator Susan Collins is among the brainwashed or brain-dead. Collins gave a 45-minute talk justifying support of Kavanaugh. Her remarks included some truly nonsensical statements. For example, she claimed that as a sitting judge, Kavanaugh has consistently supported legal precedent…unless he considered the precedent wrong. Huh, Susan? In real speak that means precedent plays no part in Kavanaugh’s decisions. Why would anyone ever make such an inane claim? Collins was also interviewed on “60 Minutes” the day after the confirmation. Based on her comments during “60 Minutes,” no one would ever accuse her of being a deep thinker. Enough about Collins.
Then we have Senator Lindsey Graham. Graham’s behavior of late could be compared to that of Stormy Daniels in one of her movies – constantly taking on new positions and new partners, including cuddling up to president Trump. At least Stormy Daniels has been straightforward with the public about her beliefs. No so for Graham. Say Lindsey, do you not remember any lessons from John McCain?
Among people who have principles, there is an adage that most learned early in life. Mitch you must have missed the class…again and again and again. The adage is, “What goes around, comes around.” The follow-on part of that adage is when it comes back, the intensity is usually much greater. My suggestion Mitch? Be on the lookout because your life is about to begin heading down a very steep hill.
Is there any hope? Yes, there’s some. While we probably can’t avoid the Revenge Revolution, the intensity could be moderated by one person – Chief Justice John Roberts. Roberts is a smart guy. Roberts knows his legacy will be determined by how credible the public views decisions of SCOTUS. Roberts also knows he’s got two justices who are considered illegitimate by many people – Thomas and Kavanaugh.
mafia. The Russians, like the mafia, play serious hardball when it comes to collecting debts. Trump and Manafort seem to be aware of the dirt bath they might get if they don’t cooperate with the Russians.
While you might ignore all the shenanigans and secrecy with the Russians, claiming the “Trump haters” just don’t understand and are overreacting as usual, I’ll bet you begin to pause when Trump’s so-called “economic policies” hit your pocketbook hard. Without getting into a wonkish discussion about economics, several of Trump’s so-called economic policies – tariffs, even on countries even where we have a trade surplus, massive tax cuts for business and the wealthy, promoting a weak dollar, promoting low interest rates and a couple of others – are at cross purposes. First and maybe most important is the tariffs will raise prices and reduce employment – and your pocketbook will be affected.
There’s more to discuss but enough for now. The final thought of this “sense check” entry. When all the lower-income Trump supporters finally realize they’ve been had, we will see the tipping point for the revolution. Remember, hell hath no fury like a (former Trump supporter) scorned. So Republicans, be prepared and make sure to enjoy the ride to the Revenge Revolution.
Since today is part of a long weekend celebrating July 4 and the nation’s declaration of independence, what better time to step back and assess the premise of this blog. I’ve been writing the blog for about five (5) years with a few months between starting writing and publishing the initial entry. What has surprised me the most the past five years is not that a revolution seems likely…but the path to the 5th revolution.
Five years ago (2013), Barack Obama was in the second term of this presidency. Some key points of that time: (i) the economy was slowly but steadily recovering from the Great Recession of 2008; (ii) even with the economic recovery median household income was flat (not unexpected given the depth of the recession); (iii) the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, was just beginning to be fully implemented; (iv) Republicans were making every effort to thwart legislation of nearly any action proposed by president Obama. Recall Mitch McConnell declared about two years into Obama’s term that his job and the job of Republicans in Congress 
was to make Obama a one-term president. In addition to attempting to thwart any legislative action, Republicans were holding what became endless hearings on Benghazi. The pattern of these type hearings continued throughout Obama’s presidency. None of the hearings produced any substantive evidence of intentional wrongdoing.
As noted in 
The unexpected catalyst for the 5th revolution, at least what seems to be so far, was the unexpected and unlikely 2016 Republican presidential nominee – Donald Trump. Trump ran a very unconventional campaign, capitalizing on what seems to be his major strength – being a highly effective bully. But a bully not in the tradition of the presidency, which is often referred to as having a “bully pulpit,” but a bully that one might have experienced in say grammar school or middle school.
During the campaign for the Republican nomination Trump was relentless in taunting fellow Republican candidates. After earning the nomination, he was relentless in taunting the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton. While in “normal times” one would expect such school-yard tactics to result in a resounding defeat,” Trump won the Electoral College vote even though losing the popular vote by more than three (3) million votes.
Why expect the hard-core right to revolt? Aren’t they Trump’s biggest supporters? Yes, but the hard right will be the most negatively affected by Trump’s policies. Believe what you will but the coal industry is never coming back. Use of other fossil fuels is going to drop sharply. Two of Trump’s favorite industries – steel and aluminum – are highly automated and don’t need many more workers to increase output.
The other group likely to revolt is farmers, who also were big Trump supporters. Exports have become a huge money-maker for family and corporate farms. Retaliatory tariffs on farm products by China and other nations will decrease demand for soybeans, corn and wheat. The US produces far more foodstuff than it can possibly consume. A decrease in farm production translates into a decrease in farm income.
One day in the next five years or so, the hard-core Trumpsters will wake up and realize not only are the promised jobs not coming back but Trump and Congressional Republicans are on a determined path to cut Social Security and Medicare. Why? Because the Federal deficit is too high. Why is the deficit too high? Because the Trump tax cuts benefitted the rich and the promised “trickle-down” effect never occurred. Raising taxes on the rich is out of the question, of course, so these “entitlement” programs must be cut.
theory “voodoo economics.” Trump’s tax cuts were pure voodoo economics.
As noted in the early entries to this blog, the scorned (hard right Trumpsters) begin to exact revenge on the more affluent. How widespread is such an armed revolt? Hard to predict. But what I do know is there are not enough police and not enough military personnel to stop geographically dispersed guerilla raids on single homes and/or neighborhoods, especially if invaders are armed with AR15’s and the like.