There’s a reason that “the classics” are so-named. No matter the period in which they’re written their themes are timeless and one can always find relevance to his or her present situation. Les Miserables is one of my favorites, made even better by a musical that made it palatable for those who might be reluctant to dive into the 1000-plus-page unabridged version, but still wanted to experience the beauty of the story and language (all set to a masterful score). For anyone unfamiliar, the story begins in 1815 following the defeat of Napoleon and after if the restoration of the monarchy. This is a period of French history marked by conflict between the ultra-royalists -- the haves -- and liberals -- who had a lot too, but still wanted more for the poor and basically just hated the monarchy. In 1830, Louis-Philippe overthrew Charles X and put in place a constitutional monarchy – which is, essentially, a form of monarchy in which the ruler (whether elected or inherited) is limited by a constitution. Usually the limitations take the form of a need to consult and representative body or religious authorities. Hmmmm… sounds familiar. After the Orleanists – led by Louis-Philippe – took power, the haute bourgeoisie (that’s the mid-1830’s version of the term WASP) were a dominant force in France leaving everyone in the middle-class and below to fend for themselves. Les Miserables also includes a fictional account of an 1832 uprising in Paris in which several aristocratic students led a revolt of working class and poor citizens after the death of Jean Maximilien Lamarque – a leader who had sympathy toward the working class. The uprising failed and hundreds of people were killed. The story paints a grim picture of what life was like for the poor and working classes in France – not that it had been any better under Charles X, but you got the idea that these people were fed up with being ignored and treated like second-class citizens. Hmmm… sounds familiar. I’m not a historian. But from what little I do know (and based on a firm belief that history DOES, in fact, repeat itself) there is a flavor to our current political – and financial – situation that reminds me of this story. The road to our own constitutional monarchy is somewhat different – a little less bloody (the 2000 election, notwithstanding) and with many more players. But what we have today – is a society that is dominated by the socio-cultural elite (haute bourgeoisie) made up of lawyers, doctors, denizens of Wall Street and the rest of the ultra-wealthy 2% of the population. And I’m not blaming a particular party for this – don’t misunderstand – there was plenty of Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Bush policies, coupled with Republican-controlled and Democratic-controlled Congresses that got us into this mess. But 30 years of sliding down a steep slope into poverty with plenty of people landing right on top of you as they hit bottom too can make for an angry working poor class. Now, I wouldn’t go so far as to call the defeat of the “bailout bill” a revolution, but perhaps it was an uprising? A shout from below that the working poor and forgotten in America are still here and they still count for something. And how suitable that the shout came by proxy from none other than the U.S. House of Representatives -- the very body that, in James Madison’s design, was intended to represent the people and public opinion. Now, I’ve said I’m not a historian – I’m also not a wizard about our financial system so I really don’t mean to comment on whether the bill was good or bad or right or wrong. I’m just sharing an observation that the events of yesterday might just have been worth noting as a mini-rebellion of sorts. The people are crying out to be heard by their government and I think they’re saying “You’re right, we DON’T understand, but you sanctioned the system that got us into this mess – the system that is incomprehensible to so many of us. So before you go and give all those financial institutions a big mulligan, I suggest you do a better job of HELPING us understand.” Maybe the brave “nays” were actually doing their jobs – which is just as surprising to them as most of them thought they were just trying to KEEP their jobs.