Latest news with #UptonSinclair
Wall Street Journal
16-07-2025
- Politics
- Wall Street Journal
Upton Sinclair and Mamdani Aren't the Same
Steven F. Hayward is right when he writes in his op-ed ('Upton Sinclair Was 1934's Mamdani,' July 15) that Sinclair and Zohran Mamdani are both socialists. But the comparison between the campaigns stops there. Sinclair rose as a result of the worst depression America had ever seen and at a time when the country lacked a federal social safety net. Mr. Mamdani's support didn't come from the slums. It came mostly from young people dissatisfied that the excitement of New York comes with such a high cost of living.
Wall Street Journal
14-07-2025
- Politics
- Wall Street Journal
Upton Sinclair Was 1934's Mamdani
Socialist Zohran Mamdani's victory in the New York Democratic mayoral primary has rattled both parties. His opponents, especially in the divided Democratic Party, are scrambling for a strategy to defeat him but are floundering. California has seen this movie before, almost literally. In 1934 author Upton Sinclair came out of nowhere to win the Democratic primary for governor in a landslide. A dedicated socialist like Mr. Mamdani, Sinclair beat out the party establishment's favored candidate, George Creel, who had run Woodrow Wilson's World War I propaganda arm, the Committee on Public Information. Sinclair ran on a radical platform known by the acronym EPIC, for End Poverty in California. EPIC proposed universal old-age pensions (before Social Security), Soviet-style collective farms, state-run industries that would 'produce for use, not for profit,' and perhaps property confiscation.
Yahoo
11-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion: Will the ‘Abundance' agenda change politics?
Every few generations, a controversial book is published that sparks a dramatic shift in political trajectory. Upton Sinclair's 'The Jungle' (workplace and food safety reforms), Rachel Carson's 'Silent Spring' (environmental activism), and Milton and Rose Friedman's 'Free to Choose' (the Reagan Revolution) are a few examples. We suggest that 'Abundance,' authored by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson, may be such a tome. 'Abundance' dissects how progressivism has crippled innovation, housing and essential development. The liberal authors artfully recommend a liberalism that protects and builds. Although causing a rift in the Democratic Party, could this signal a shift in the trajectory of national politics? COWLEY: Reminiscent of Princess Leia's plea to Obi-Wan Kenobi, the Abundance agenda is Democrats' 'only hope.' Government is getting in their way, stifled by layers of self-imposed regulatory burdens. Government should be judged by its outcomes, not the rigid principles it follows. Process has been prioritized over product. Stymied public projects are merely symptoms of a larger illness within the Democratic Party. They have countless militant factions, each fighting for their niche issue to be pervasively included in all facets of government. Environmental activists demand prairie dog protection from new transmission lines. Clean air advocates want mass transit to be carbon-neutral. Even Biden saw how his infrastructure spending bills didn't have a meaningful impact because a large chunk was gobbled up by red tape and compliance costs. Imposing restrictions on their own desired outcomes results in money spent, time wasted and little to show for it. They cannot be all things to all people. Leadership is sometimes saying no. Although not entirely the fault of Democrats, upward mobility and the American Dream are becoming relics of the past. In 1940, children had a 92% chance of out-earning their parents. By 1980, it fell to 50%. If we don't build and innovate, economic opportunity dwindles. AI is the next frontier for discovery and development. This global race is one that Americans cannot afford to lose, and both parties should be paying attention. PIGNANELLI: 'The formation of ideological factions within political parties — starting among intellectuals and writers — is a staple of American history.' — Jonathan Chait, The Atlantic I remember when Friedman's program promoting the free market aired on PBS (that's right) in January 1980, when President Jimmy Carter was beating Ronald Reagan 65%-31 %. In November, Reagan won in a landslide. Ideas have power. Abundance philosophy has existed for years. But this book compiled supportive documentation into a mass communication vehicle. The well-intentioned government programs established 50 years ago are crippling housing and the implementation of technological innovations. The authors argue that progressives are focused on process and litigation rather than achieving results that benefit society. Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden passed massive legislation to fund projects in healthcare, technology and alternative fuels that were impossible to initiate due to regulatory barriers. Severe left-wing opposition to abundance advocates underscores their fear of losing influence. Indeed, pundits predict a civil war within the Democratic Party between the far left and moderates eager for a new ideology. This demand for competent, efficient government can attract independents and moderate Republicans. America is amidst a major political realignment, and abundance is a new dynamic. We are witnessing history. Utah is well governed. But are there aspects of 'Abundance' that could be utilized to promote the objectives of our state officials? COWLEY: Utah understands that less is more when it comes to government. The Legislature is actively removing government barriers to innovation. For example, Utah's regulatory sandbox allows entrepreneurs to seek regulatory relief in their businesses while serving as laboratories of innovation. Look at the speed with which nuclear power is coming to Utah. Yet, more could be done on permitting and zoning to address Utah's significant housing shortage. PIGNANELLI: Gov. Spencer Cox appropriately notes that Utah has performed DOGE-like functions for years. Senate President Stuart Adams is promoting clean nuclear energy. Speaker Mike Schultz and lawmakers pursued a similar objective by mandating that the Utah Higher Education reallocate 10% of state funds to more productive uses. Despite public grumbling, insiders are grateful for the political protection that compels them to readjust resources. These goals also apply to conservatives to discourage their policies that inhibit housing and economic development at the local government level. Abundance should not be beholden to any political party, but rather a mindset that if government is used, it must be practical and not an interference. Will 'Abundance' be a campaign issue in the future? COWLEY: The Abundance agenda may help Democrat candidates become more appealing to Utah voters as the battle between progressives and moderates wages on. The real question is if they see the existential crisis befalling them and what will they do to avoid extinction. Staying the course doesn't have an upside. There is no drama-filled Twitter spat or blunder big enough that Trump could commit for the millions of Americans who voted for him to suddenly support the progressive agenda. Democrats need to loosen the stranglehold activists have on their party in order to rack up wins. PIGNANELLI: Abundance will be weaponized against moderate Democrats by left-wing progressives in internal battles. Democrats and Republicans in swing districts will advocate for this philosophy.
Yahoo
08-03-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Before The FDA, American Meatpacking Plants Were Truly Horrifying
When you go to the supermarket to buy a rotisserie chicken (watch out for this red flag), or when you pick up a choice beef cut from the butcher or grocery store, you can be reasonably sure that those meat products won't make you horribly sick. Due to the nature of these things, the chances aren't zero, exactly, but they're low enough that you can go food shopping without needing to update your last will and testament. This is because the places that supply your food are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration -- which has been around for long enough that it's easy to take for granted. But, it's important to take stock and appreciate what we have. To do this, it is worth looking back at what the meatpacking industry was like before the FDA. The short answer: It was pretty bad! Even in ideal conditions, meatpacking is pretty gnarly; we're talking about slaughtering animals and butchering their bodies, after all. But in the early days of the 20th century, when the Industrial Revolution was in full swing, meatpacking plants were something close to hell on earth. The facilities were spattered with blood and guts, rotten meat was packaged and sold, rats were ground up into sausage, and meat processing was conducted mere feet away from filthy latrines. All of this was brought to light by the muckraking author Upton Sinclair, who horrified America and spurred change -- albeit not necessarily the kind of change he hoped for. Read more: American Burger Chains Ranked From Worst To Best Upton Sinclair was a Pulitzer Prize-winning author, a muckraking journalist, and an ardent socialist. You may know him as the author of "Oil!" This novel formed the (very) loose basis of Paul Thomas Anderson's classic film "There Will Be Blood." Or you may know him from his doomed 1934 campaign for Governor of California, which became an important plot point in David Fincher's film "Mank." But, you most likely know him for "The Jungle," a 1906 novel that exposed the horrors of the meatpacking industry in America and set into motion events that led to the founding of the Food and Drug Administration. Despite the book's lasting legacy, food safety was, at best, a secondary concern for Sinclair. After immersing himself in the world of meatpacking plants in Chicago, Sinclair wrote the novel to highlight how badly workers were being exploited -- sickened by unsanitary conditions, they nonetheless had to work grueling hours for little pay or otherwise face eviction. However, his book also contained memorable passages that depicted the horrific conditions present in meatpacking plants. While fiction, this piece of work clearly indicated that the unregulated nature of food manufacturing was a serious issue. "The Jungle" inspired disgust and outrage from the American people and most of it was focused on the unsanitary nature of the meatpacking plants. One famous scene, where a giant vat of lard is processed and sold while containing the flesh of drowned workers, was especially shocking. (Upton Sinclair heard about this second hand, and no one was able to verify that it actually happened.) Eventually, the outcry reached the point where somebody had to do something about it. While there was a mutual enmity between Sinclair and President Teddy Roosevelt, Roosevelt agreed to send inspectors to Chicago meatpacking plants -- which, even after having been cleaned and prepared in advance, were so vile that one inspector swore off meat altogether unless it came from a nearby farm. The Meat Inspection Act passed in 1906. Then, later that year, the Pure Food and Drug Act was passed. This act eventually led to the formation of the Food and Drug Administration and, over time, improved sanitary conditions at meatpacking plants. So, if you're ever frustrated by all the red tape, remember that the regulations set by the FDA are there for a reason. Were it not for the FDA, eating some recalled food would be the least of our problems. For more food and drink goodness, join The Takeout's newsletter. Get taste tests, food & drink news, deals from your favorite chains, recipes, cooking tips, and more! Read the original article on The Takeout.
