SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:var(--button-bg-color);padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_1_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The prevailing issue that demands consensus is the economic exploitation and deprivation of our economic model for working people of all demographics.
The oligarchs are laughing. The corporatists are laughing.
They are laughing at working people as the big con continues. They are laughing at the corporate Democratic Party whose genetic code lacks the heart to challenge the autocracy now unfolding. “Good billionaires vs. bad billionaires.” Really?
The political left spectrum is largely catatonic. Progressives lament the ineffectiveness of their wing of the Democratic Party. “Outsider” leftists are skeptical of both political parties, but too small in numbers yet to pose a threat to corporate Democrats.
The time of milquetoasts is over. It is time to recognize what must be done.
Liberals on the left spectrum are flummoxed; some stalwarts attribute their recent political debacle to the inability of the Democratic Party to distribute a cogent message of their accomplishments.
It was not the message that flopped. Rather economic numbers proved that our economic model continued to squash the interests of working people. They then sent a clear message that they were not buying the corporate Democratic dose of doldrums. They voted for President Donald Trump.
Working people are comprised of the middle-working class and working class. The middle-working class identifies itself as “middle class.” The term is designed to divide working people.
Economic class has nothing to do with salaries or wages; it is about economic power. “Middle class” interests are closer to the working class than the dominant economic class.
Michael Zweig pointed this out in an insightful book in 2000 and revised in 2012. He identified the working class at 63% and the middle class at 35%. The combination presents a significant percentage of Americans who live and work largely by the undemocratic capriciousness of the 2%.
The income disparity in our country is at record levels as reported by the Congressional Budget Office. The income gap between the rich and everyone else is stunning. Income disparities are now so pronounced that America’s richest 1% of households averaged 139 times as much income as the bottom 20% in 2021.
The wealth disparity is just as shameful. Statista reported that in the first quarter of 2024, almost two-thirds of the total wealth in the United States was owned by the top 10%; the lowest 50% only owned 2.5% of the total wealth.
Make no mistake, If Americans do not take seriously the activities of the dominant economic class, it will be too late for working people.
The Ludwig Institute for Shared Prosperity (LISEP) reported an actual unemployment rate. LISEP tracks the percentage of the U.S. labor force that does not have a full-time job, wants one, has no job, or does not earn a living wage, conservatively pegged at $25,000 annually before taxes.
Their actual unemployment rate for this January was 23.3%.
Shadow Government Statistics (SGS) reported another actual unemployment rate. A significant demographic was mysteriously defined out of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) in 1994. Those discouraged workers who searched for work for more than one year simply vanished from the BLS unemployed numbers.
SGS reported that the actual unemployment rate for this January was 26.8%.
The government’s Consumer Price Index (CPI) is a measure of the cost of maintaining a constant standard of living and measuring the cost of out-of-pocket expenses. However, since the 1980s the BLS has been altering its methodologies to decrease the actual inflation rate provided to the public.
The BLS ignores food and energy prices in “core” inflation numbers as if food and energy are not basic necessities for living.
The BLS transitioned from their historic fixed-weight basket of goods and services to a quasi-substitution-based basket of goods.
It also changed from arithmetic weighting to geometric weighting and to owners’ equivalent rent (OER) numbers.
Another BLS method to decrease the real inflation rate was a transition to hedonic measures, which actually attempts to measure how much enjoyment a person receives from changing from one product to another.
These changes reflected the BLS intentional artificial deflation of accurate CPI numbers from the American public.
SGS reported that the actual inflation rate for this January was 10.81%.
Naturally, working people are seeking relief from this economic suffocation; according to the Council on Foreign Relations we have the largest disparity in wealth and income than any other developed country.
Good paying manufacturing jobs with other benefits left the country in dramatic numbers in the 1960s and 70s. How did this happen?
We can begin with an abysmal fact:
The economic empire of the U.S. is presently over, done, finished.
Our demise began when corporations moved to countries with low wages, regulations were minimal or nonexistent, and unions were absent. This was paradise for the corporate owner class.
This trend is continuing, and those good paying jobs are gone with no reason to return despite the bluster and gibberish emanating from the Trump administration.
The Economic Policy Institute reported that the U.S. lost 5 million manufacturing jobs in the last 25 years. To place our country in an advantageous position again will require transformation to a different economic model with smart negotiations and intelligent diplomacy with other countries.
A troubling result of the massive exodus of manufacturing jobs is the U.S. declining Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Consider in 2024, the GDP of the U.S. grew 2.8%; the GDP of China grew 5%. India, another member of the BRICS economic bloc, grew 5.6%.
It is not that complicated here.
Our economic model is characterized by an economic tree for working people. At the root of the tree is the primary issue of wages and salaries.
Moving up the tree are branches that comprise secondary issues. They are viable employment opportunities; effective, affordable healthcare; comprehensive educational opportunities; comfortable, secure housing opportunities; wholesome nutrition; safe, reliable transportation; environmentally clean water, air, and land.
Will progressive organizations coalesce into a national movement for economic and political democracy and seize the Democratic Party?
The third branch are cultural issues: They are reasonable gun control, effective immigration reform, women’s healthcare rights, and LGBTQ rights. These issues are important to their demographics; however, they have been manipulated into wedge issues that distract working people from the real source of their discontent—that is the political power that maintains the privilege and power of the dominant economic class.
Working people must accept cultural issues without necessarily agreeing with them. The prevailing issue that demands consensus is the economic exploitation and deprivation of our economic model for working people of all demographics.
Emphasizing cultural issues with so called “woke” identity politics over economic class politics has resulted in the grotesque policies of Mr. Trump and the Republican Party cult.
It is these tertiary issues that Mr. Trump used to provoke and frighten MAGA working people. It distracted them into ignoring their economic class malaise.
An effective political party must work to transform primary issues into an inclusive party. Until then, cultural issues will be little but distractions for marginalized groups without actual progress for their causes; Democrats will continue to bay in the wind and lose elections while an autocratic political model is established. Project 2025 is that model and a blueprint financed by the corporate and oligarch class.
The shelf life is over for assorted corporate Democrats and corporate union leaders. Their vapid strategies and tactics unwittingly encouraged working people to support Mr. Trump. Consider that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) defeated Mr. Trump in polls in 2016 and 2020. Yet the Democratic Party corporate sycophants denied Sen. Sanders the nomination.
The time of milquetoasts is over. It is time to recognize what must be done.
The arc of our progressive history includes the abolitionists, labor rights, women’s suffrage, civil rights, anti-war activities, and environmental movements. All had a common theme: They were mass movements that began as large groups of people who knew they could do better.
This may be what it requires to shake us free from the dehumanizing, exploitative crimes and corruption of neofascism that Mr. Trump and his MAGA cabal have been implementing. As contradictions sharpen and immiseration increases, the choices are stark.
Make no mistake, If Americans do not take seriously the activities of the dominant economic class, it will be too late for working people. The flurry of political attacks on our Constitution are not some frivolous actions that will be remedied in two or four years. The Trump cabal is playing the long game. Even the legal foundation of American democracy, Marbury v. Madison, is in jeopardy.
The judicial branch may strike down some of the more absurd legal and constitutional excesses of Mr. Trump’s supporters. However, his cult leaders of Project 2025 are preparing for a permanent autocratic model to replace our democratic republic. It will have the veneer of democracy, but will be an autocracy in form.
Each day, the administration plows ahead with truculent policies chipping away at the lives of working people. Will the time arrive for working people to create a national database of progressive organizations as an informational foundation for an authentic progressive movement? Will it facilitate petitions, mass demonstrations, civil disobedience, and general strikes?
Will progressive organizations coalesce into a national movement for economic and political democracy and seize the Democratic Party? Third-party options, while advancing democracy, are chimerical at this time. ICE is the new Gestapo, and waiting for a new political party to emerge is delusional.
Will our spiritual and secular organizations lead a movement or remain docile?
Pope Paul VI wrote Populorism Progressio in 1967. He stated that the restructuring of society was a welcome possibility. Though he admonished against violent means, he acknowledged a form of violence was an option:
Everyone knows, however, that revolutionary uprisings—except where there is manifest, longstanding tyranny which would do great damage to fundamental personal rights and dangerous harm to the common good of the country—engender new injustices, introduce new inequities, and bring new disasters. The evil situation that exists, and it surely is evil, may not be dealt with in such a way that an even worse situation results.
The question must be asked about a time table for ameliorating the poverty, deprivation, and suffering that will surely follow the scabrous policies of Mr. Trump. Each day is a new attack on our political and social norms; neofascist laws appear like a new head regenerated on a hydra. The courts may strike one down and another one is hatched immediately by the Trump cult.
This is addressed in a quote from Mexican poet Homero Aridjis in 1991: “There are centuries in which nothing happens and years in which centuries pass.”
We will certainly find out soon enough. We must ask ourselves are we Americans willing to take the risk; as Victor Hugo stated in an essay in 1845: “You have enemies, Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.”
Trump winning twice is not an accident. It’s the result of the abject failure of a left political strategy that ignores financial reform and attempts to nudge the Democratic Party forward based more on identity than class.
“What the Democrats are not saying is how they propose to fix what was wrong with the system Trump is destroying. I won’t repeat the numbers here. But the richest country on Earth is also one of the most unequal, unhealthy, and unhappy countries on Earth—probably half the nation is again ‘ill-fed, ill-clothed, and ill-housed,’ to quote FDR. Is it any wonder many people are fed up? Is it any wonder they grasp at straws? The most radical proposal I have heard from the establishment Democrats is to shut the government down. In other words, the best they can come up with is what the Republicans have been demanding for years. Shoot me now!” —Professor Mike Merrill, Rutgers University, February 2025
Democrats and the Left are terrified of the threat to democracy posed by the Trump administration and by his assault on needed government programs. But so far, the public doesn’t seem to care all that much.
U.S. President Donald Trump’s approval rating is at 49%, three points higher than his disapproval rating, (according to fivethirtyeight.com). Former President Joe Biden’s end of term approval rating was only 37%.
Build a worker political movement outside the Democratic Party—a movement, an association, an organization by and for working people.
Flailing away at every perceived Trump transgression isn’t working any better now than it did during the Harris campaign. The Center for Working Class Politics demonstrated that focusing on Trump and the threat to democracy was the least effective message for Pennsylvania voters, while a bold populist message was the strongest. Which supports Merrill’s point—voters, especially working-class voters, want proposals “to fix what was wrong with the system Trump is destroying.”
But aren’t working people the problem? Aren’t they getting what they really want? A dictator to own the libs? An enforcer to put America first? An attacker of DEI, transgender people, and criminal immigrants who bedevil the country? Don’t they really crave a sexist, racist leader willing to play footsie with authoritarians the world over? Isn’t this just another populist uprising, like others which have historically been threats to democracy and liberty?
That’s not what we’ve found in the hundreds of day-long Reversing Runaway Inequality workshops we’ve conducted for working-class union members. (See curriculum here.) We ask, during these sessions, rather than tell, and we listen to what the participants say.
After spending much of the workshop day reviewing materials on the economy and having small group discussions about the causes of rising inequality, the participants are asked:
“What would the world look like if we were able to reverse runaway inequality? How is your vision different from the world we live in today?”
The trainers then give each small group a piece of easel paper and some markers and ask them to create a map or drawing of what a community would look like in a world without runaway inequality. After they finish the drawings each group in turn goes to the front of the room and describes their vision.
In workshop after workshop, workers all along the blue-red political spectrum come up with joyful expressions of the world they want. When shared with the class, applause always breaks out, eyes water, there’s hope bursting out all over the room. (Full disclosure: At first, I thought this exercise would be hokey. But my colleagues, thankfully, ignored me. I was wrong.)
While every picture is different, the common elements are predictable. The groups want job security, better pay, vacation time, responsive institutions, reliable and affordable healthcare, and a safe environment. The drawings represent a party platform of ideas supported by the working class across party lines.
Here’s my version of what a working-class agenda would include:
Why isn’t the Democratic Party vigorously supporting these kinds of policies? They certainly fall within the Roosevelt and Truman agendas and are akin to the Freedom Budget developed by A. Philip Randolph and Bayard Rustin in 1966. Full employment legislation was once a cause celeb for the Democrats. Not any longer. Why is that?
Today, far too many Democrats are no longer interested in radically changing the institutions that are reproducing rising inequality and job insecurity. They support a system that has served them well. Change would require more than messaging and branding. It would require going after Wall Street and large corporations through much tougher regulations, higher taxes on the wealthy, price controls on price gougers, ending stock buybacks, and more.
Many Democrats also believe that the pendulum will swing their way without major changes. The inevitable rise of the knowledge economy, pushed forward by AI, means that more and more educated workers will replace those without degrees, they think. As those more educated voters flock to the Democrats, the party will gain an electoral advantage. So best to stay the course and not panic!
That’s not exactly an inspirational call to working people. As educated voters turn to the Dems, workers and business owners without degrees have turned to the Republicans. At some point progressive Democrats and the Left need to face up to reality. Trump winning twice is not an accident. It’s the result of the abject failure of a left political strategy that ignores financial reform and attempts to nudge the Democratic Party forward based more on identity than class.
What should we do?
We should do what working-class activists have done for the last 150 years. Build a worker political movement outside the Democratic Party—a movement, an association, an organization by and for working people.
That’s a tall order and will require a great deal of debate, discussion, and planning. It will require dozens of pilot programs to find a model that can scale up. It will require most of all a belief and commitment to the idea that something new needs to be built. Working people are desperate for a political voice independent from the two major parties.
The alternative is more of the same: resist, resist, resist, while, in effect, defending the elite establishment that so many voters detest.
If that’s all we do, don’t be surprised if Trump’s wrecking ball makes him even more popular.
If we do have the courage to face up to our strategic failures, we may become as hopeful as the workers who share their depictions of a fair and just society.
Leaders must reject false choices rooted in the idea that social and economic advancement is a zero-sum game or that working-class people must spar over scraps while all the spoils go to the elite few.
Since the election, two themes have recurred in analyses of the current political moment: Pundits are calling on progressive political leaders to abandon so-called identity politics and center working-class concerns, and others are defining this election as a potential realignment of political parties.
We and our colleagues at Dēmos are laser-focused on this drumbeat because it strikes at the core of our mission to build a just, inclusive, multi-racial democracy and economy where ordinary people hold power.
Working class is as much an identity as gender, religious affiliation, immigrant status, place, race, and ethnicity. All of us hold multiple identities. But in the political context, “identity politics” is often a dog whistle for Black and brown communities or members of the LGBTQIA+ community. Political leaders and pundits’ calls to deprioritize communities of color and marginalized groups distort the nation’s power dynamic and risk sidelining voices working to build a more equitable society. Such takes also pretend the far-right offers credible solutions to pressing economic issues while minimizing the critical role progressives play in challenging the systems that drive economic inequality. Any critique of movement or “identity politics” without a power analysis misses the forest for the trees.
Average incomes will not increase as more corporations shut down their DEI offices.
Last month, Demos released its Power Scorecard, a data-driven tool that tests our core theory: Political and economic power are inextricably linked, and one is predictive of the other. The tool ranks and measures people power in all 50 states (called a power score) by examining 30 indicators of economic well-being and 30 indicators of civic and democratic vitality. Some economic measures include the percentage of households that can cover everyday costs, avoid debt, maintain stable housing, and access affordable childcare. Measures of civic vitality include voter turnout, percentage of unopposed elections, ease of voting, and descriptive representation in government.
Our findings shed light on how conditions in each state influence the agency and control ordinary people exert in our democracy and economy. Common threads among the highest-ranked states include lower rates of child poverty and incarceration, less concentrated poverty, a greater percentage of workers represented by unions, higher voter turnout rates, and more state checks on corporate contributions to political candidates.
We could not disaggregate data by race for all indicators, but a limited analysis reveals “identity groups” are most disempowered in all states. This is not surprising, and it’s precisely why progressive activists advocate for bold, structural changes such as living wages, access to healthcare as a human right, expanded labor rights and protections, and policies to curb corporate power. And yes, they also call for political leaders to address racial and gender inequalities. Movement activism is rooted in the understanding that economic disparity, systemic racism, and gender inequality are interconnected problems requiring interconnected solutions.
We are aware that opinion polling over the last couple of years continuously revealed voters’ worries about their ability to make ends meet and financially get ahead. Policymakers on all sides of the political spectrum should heed these concerns. But as political leaders assess their messaging failures and policy disconnects, they must avoid the convenience of tunnel vision or public discourse that falsely suggest “identity groups” wield undue or disproportionate influence. Working-class people of all races are constrained by a system in which economic and political power are concentrated in the hands of an elite few.
As much as progressives are agitating to dismantle economic and racial disparities, a well-funded opposition is invested in maintaining a power structure that bends to the will of the wealthy and powerful. The far-right may have successfully tapped into some voters’ frustrations, but their policy proposals will exacerbate economic polarization and diminish ordinary people’s political power. Their standard bearers continue to favor tax cuts for the wealthy, deregulation, weakening unions, and restricting access to the ballot. If progressive political leaders acquiesce to calls to sideline “identity groups,” they will alienate the very movement voices working to address root causes of economic insecurity. Culture wars are a divisive political tactic, not an economic policy solution.
To put a finer point on it, average incomes will not increase as more corporations shut down their DEI offices. Housing will not be more affordable due to mass deportation. Grocery prices will not decline due to state legislation banning transgender people from public bathrooms. And tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations will not and have never trickled down to ordinary people.
Black and brown communities bear a disproportionate share of economic hardship, from unaffordable housing and inflationary pressure on consumer goods to exploitative labor practices. There are historical and ongoing systemic reasons for this disparity—a historical record that the far-right is actively trying to erase with book bans and factually diluted K-12 curriculums. Ignoring these complicated truths in the name of appealing to an idealized working-class voter devoid of any identity is a failing strategy—and the people who will suffer most are working-class voters of all races and identities.
Progressive leaders must reject false choices rooted in the idea that social and economic advancement is a zero-sum game or that working-class people must spar over scraps while all the spoils go to the elite few. Instead, they should amplify the voices of those actively challenging systems that sustain social injustice and vast economic inequality.