While it is true that there always have been very powerful, successful, exploitive upper class, the diff is that the ratio twix the poor and the wealthy class is the greatest today in the USA since the 1880's. That diff is not a matter of degree but of kind, a kind worthy of analysis.
While gross consumerism is a problem; it is a problem as symptom, not the cause. Huxley has it right, consumerism is a means of control. The problem is deeper, and not found at the individual level. Furthermore, by claiming that the middle class ought to think for themselves seems to me to be blaming the victim.
More on the flip
So here are some sobering facts to think about, from 1973 to 2004 in adjusted dollars the median family income in the united states has grown from $44,381 to $54,244. But median individual income for males has stalled, $29,668 in adjusted dollars in 1973 to $30,513 in 2004.
Where does the difference in earning between family and individual earnings come from? Well in order to have a middle class life you need to have two earners, one person earning all of the money will not cut it any more.
More evidence of these kind of stresses in the family is found in the numbers of hours married people work and the changes of this statistic since 1979. In '79 men worked 2150 hours in a year while the women work 919 hours. In 2002 men work 2181 hours and women worked 1385 hours.
Now on top of that add 100 hours of commute time each year and it seems little wonder to me that the middle class is stressed out and is not capable of mounting that tea party raid. And where is there time for the care of children? I have no idea. A reasonable question is how does such a state of affairs come about?
In this time of greater stress, this is concurrent with the rise of conservatism. Inherent in conservative belief is social darwinism, that the poor are poor due to there own moral faults while the rich are rich due to their moral certitude.
This myth of social darwinism is a useful frame of reference that is easy for a stressed person to buy into, and doubly useful for the rich to withhold their gains from the community. The exploitive class has the power today in the government, in the work place and in the media in a manner that is similar to the days of the Robber Barons of the 1880's.
So in my thinking, the problem then is not the lazy consumeristic middle class, because there is only such a class is if social darwinism is true. The problem that middle class has been lead to believe that social darwinism is true and that belief is the controlling dialog in this country.
That is a big difference then a mere 30 years ago when there were strong unions and a Democratic party that cared about the middle class. What needs to change is the government which creates the rule and regulations that a capitalistic society requires to function. (No one wants true market capitalism, that is anarchy.)
What needs to change is that social darwinism needs to be replaced with a fairer idea of how a society is organized, one based on community and the role of the individual in that community. A rebuilding of the social contract in a historical Liberal manner. This paradigm needs to refute the Hobesian world view that the current conventional wisdom claims is the truth.
References:
Median Family income data here:
http://www.census.gov/...
Median Individual income data here:
http://www.census.gov/...
Work hours Data:
http://www.epinet.org/...
Commute times:
http://www.census.gov/...