I WAS PART OF AN INTERESTING conversation on Facebook the other day, and it led to an even more interesting bit of research.
A friend had posted a link to the definitions of "American" in the Dictionary of Capital Letters and had received several comments.
One of those comments accused those who agreed with the Democrats on income tax rates for the wealthy of waging "class warfare".
I responded:
I question your use of the phrase "class warfare". I don't see anything adversarial (let alone war-like) about suggesting that those who reap disproportionate rewards because of the structure of our system have a responsibility to make a disproportionate contribution back to that system, and especially to the way it takes care of those who often work the hardest for disproportionately small rewards.
The top few percent in this country benefit immeasurably from living in a country with high education values, with a healthy populace, with less poverty, etc, and they benefit immeasurably from the economic freedoms and privileges the country provides for them.
Holding a fellow citizen responsible to do their fair part is not adversarial or war-like, it's a matter of respecting them as full fellow-citizens, and not just writing them off as leeches, whom we expect to take without giving back.
No one is suggesting the guillotine, or even eliminating great wealth--we're merely treating our very wealthy fellow citizens with the respect of asking them to play a part commensurate with their ability and rewards.
The other person replied that "class warfare" was not his invention, but the phrase used by Marx and his followers to describe their agenda for the rich to pay their fair share.
This piqued my interest.
I first heard the term, I believe, years ago from the mouth of Bill O'Reilly, as a disparagement of liberals, and I have since heard it multiple times, almost always from the mouths of conservatives.
The few times I've heard it on the lips of a liberal (including, at least once, my own lips) it has been as a sort of defensive strategy: labeling policies which greatly benefited the rich while harming the poor as the real class warfare.
So I doubted this person's claim, and decided to track the source of the phrase down for myself.
I started by Googling "Marx class warfare," without any real success.
The links I got were all either to conservative web sites which seemed to believe the story I was checking out (but without any evidence), or they were links to Marx, or links to class warfare, but not to both.
Finally I gave that up, and eliminated Marx from the search.
That was more productive.
After a little digging I came up with a reference to a book by William Safire, a former speech writer for President Nixon.
He had actually gone to the trouble (with the help of an assistant) of tracking the phrase down.
According to Safire, the earliest known use of the phrase is
...in London's Aug. 17, 1867, Spectator. The editorialist urged "some grand effort to settle the Irish question" and put forward a conservative idea about land reform, noting that there was "no confiscation in this plan, no plea for raising that cry, no summons to class warfare."
From that day to this, the charge of instigating class warfare has been used as an antidote to populist ideas.
So, next time one of your conservative friends (or Bill O'Reilly) starts complaining about how liberals are always trying to "stir up class warfare," you have the facts.
That chorus of voices we hear using the term is a conservative choir: singing to themselves.
At least, that's what I think today.
