Via Sullivan, himself via Matt Y., a fascinating column in the LA Times from Michael Hiltzik on the country’s changing view of the wealthy:

For decades, the wealthy have been held up as people to be admired, victors in the Darwinian economic struggle by virtue of their personal ingenuity and hard work.

Americans consistently supported fiscal policies that undermined middle- and working-class interests partially because they saw themselves as rich-people-in-waiting: Given time, toil and the magic of compound interest, anyone could retire a millionaire.

That mind-set has all but been eradicated by the damage sustained by the average worker’s nest egg, combined with the spectacle of bankers and financial engineers maintaining their lifestyles with multimillion-dollar bonuses while the submerged 99% struggle for oxygen. …

<snip>

One factor fueling the public fury over the AIG bonuses, so inescapably in the news this week, is the recognition that so many huge fortunes landed in the hands of the undeserving rich. Some of them added little value to the economy but merely moved money around in novel, excessively clever and ultimately destructive ways; others are corporate executives who were ridiculously overpaid whether they succeeded or failed at their jobs. …

<snip>

The shift in sentiment should surprise no one. As the management sage Peter Drucker once predicted, “In the next economic downturn there will be an outbreak of bitterness and contempt for the super-corporate chieftains who pay themselves millions. In every major economic downturn in U.S. history the ‘villains’ have been the ‘heroes’ during the preceding boom.” Drucker was speaking in 1997, two downturns ago.

I think Hiltzik is correct. But you have to appreciate the magnitude of what is occurring here.

Consider that Limbaugh - the entire tea party “movement” - is dedicated to the exact opposite of what Hiltzik is describing here. The notion that the rich remain heroes is an absolute cornerstone of the conservative Limbaughian ideology. It’s one of the tenets they believe the public will come ’round to once again, if only right-wingers keep the faith.

History, I think, is passing them by.

Understand that this isn’t meant as a blanket condemnation of “the rich.” But I think we are at a tipping point. If society has venerated “the rich,” then clearly some of the wealthy have venerated themselves. There is, as Hiltzik points out, a sense of entitlement that goes hand-in-hand with wealth and the power it produces. We’ve seen that sense of entitlement on display, in great neon lettering, in recent weeks. And the outrage this has produces is not going away quietly or quickly. It is an outrage Obama might harness if he is perceived as being legitimately on the side of the American people against the oligarchs; if he or his administration is perceived as acting on behalf of the oligarchs’ interetst, against the interests of the people - that’s when it gets interesting.

For the Republicans don’t seem to have an alternative beyond more veneration of the rich. Do they actually think that at a time when American anger with the “undeserving wealthy” is at an all time high - they can cut those people’s taxes? But that is what they want to do. It is a non-starter, but more than that - it’s the mother of all non-starters.

And so long as they remain wedded to that notion, the party, the movement itself ceases to be relevant in the least. They can snipe from the sidelines - witness Drudge’s OUTRAGE!!! at Obama’s “Special Olympics” comment - but little else. So long as the bedrock principle of venerating the rich remains in place - they are capable of little else.

But where does that leave the Democrats? The country elected Democrats to fix the problem, and the problem is not fixed by ceding more money and power to those who abused it so heartily last time around. We may say the Democrats “shocked, I’m shocked” routine of the past week was an act; but dammit, if there was ever a moment in modern history where outrage was the appropriate emotion, this was it. This is it.

And the economic elite - and here I include the Democratic Party, maybe first and foremost - make a fatal error if they think that business as has been usual over the course of the past decade or more can continue if we just pay lip service to the outrage. No; wrong; absolutely and utterly offensive. The game must stop. That may not entail slapping the old 91 percent tax rate on the rich and redistributing all that income; but it most certainly does include a realization that the taxpayer must not subsidize the lifestylees of the rich and famous, and will not.

Because if that message is not sent loud and clear, if those who venerate themselves continue to help themselves as they have - then we do get into a pitchfork situation. The Gatsbys either rein themselves in - or they will have the task done for them.