Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Real Class War

americanaffairsjournal.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 634 posts

Re: The Real Class War

#341

Post by Bartweiss »

snowwrestler wrote: post #265
tvanantwerp wrote: post #159

I've spent my career working in public policy circles, and this rings true to me. > At most, working-class voters can cast their ballots for an “un­acceptable” candidate, but they can exercise no influence on policy formation or agency personnel, much less on governance areas that have been transferred to technocratic bodies. > Unlike the work­ing class, the professional managerial class is still capable of, and re­q…

Have you never heard of the labor movement? The grassroots activism by working class people that forced the federal government to develop an entire arm of federal law, with its own Cabinet-level agency, to protect them from the professional managerial class? How have you spent your career working in public policy circles and come away with so little understanding of what grassroots activism is, and the impact it has…

I think we're reading the parent comment in very different ways. I think the key word was seen, just like the quote from the article says the managerial class is still capable of wielding power.

Basically anyone in public policy circles, even on the right, should know some labor history. But America hasn't seen a major private-sector strike victory in 20 years, and the 1997 UPS strike was a rare exception: "traditional" mass strikes haven't been a major force since the 1980s at best. It's true that pattern bargaining and labor laws have decreased the need for mass strikes since the bad old days, and people sometimes forget that OSHA and the NLRB are not a replacement for labor power but a consequence of it. But it's also true that union membership, labor bargaining power, and the union 'edge' over nonunion labor have been in decline for decades. The heyday of the UAW, the AFL-CIO, and the UFW was over by the 1980s, and even where labor has made substantial gains since they've come through courts and legislation rather than grassroots action. Even for someone who's been in public policy for 30 years, grassroots labor action has basically been a historical topic, not an active concern.

Harlan County was the cradle of the modern labor movement, but for 30 years its only political relevance has been as a symbol of the Democrats losing their labor support. I only know how things used to feel from movies and songs, not from anything that's happened in my lifetime. Maybe that'll change, the miners struck just months ago, but they haven't won yet. I've never seen grassroots labor wield power either, but that's not the same question as asking whether I know what it used to be like, or whether I want it to come back.

Re: The Real Class War

#342

Post by Draiken »

kazagistar wrote: post #333
tc wrote: post #321

George Orwell covered this basic point in `1984` (published in 1949): > The aims of these three groups are entirely irreconcilable. The aim of the High is to remain where they are. The aim of the Middle is to change places with the High. The aim of the Low, when they have an aim -- for it is an abiding characteristic of the Low that they are too much crushed by drudgery to be more than intermittently conscious of any…

So the idea behind this is what? That you shouldn't trust the revolutionaries because they dont have your interests in mind? That its hopeless? This model of the world is just run of the mill statusquoism trying to make people too despondent to tear down hierarchy, not some deep truth. To be honest I dont know if Orwell agreed with the position of the high or not, but the fact people repeat this propaganda of the "hi…

On the large scale, I think Orwell's view is correct. The pattern always repeats itself.

However on the individual level, you can reap the benefits of the revolutions and will die before the next cycle, so there's always at least some incentive to challenge the status quo.

It doesn't change the fact that it's hopeless on the large scale.

Re: The Real Class War

#343

Post by AnimalMuppet »

UncleSlacky wrote: post #73
neonate wrote: post #29

I read it, though not closely, and am still unclear what is the "real class war". The educated-but-alienated professional elite against the oligarchs? I'm just guessing. Also, he kind of loses it in the final paragraphs, which weakened my impression of the rest.

It reminds me of the saying that most "revolutions" tend to involve the aristocracy (the 0.1%) and the bourgeoisie (the top 10%), the French revolution is a classic example of this. The status of the remainder of the population never really changes as a result.

And if a revolution is the 10% trying to kick out the 0.1% so that they can replace them, well, only 1 out of 100 of the 10% can be the 0.1%...

Re: The Real Class War

#344

Post by war1025 »

viburnum wrote: post #258
tvanantwerp wrote: post #159

I've spent my career working in public policy circles, and this rings true to me. > At most, working-class voters can cast their ballots for an “un­acceptable” candidate, but they can exercise no influence on policy formation or agency personnel, much less on governance areas that have been transferred to technocratic bodies. > Unlike the work­ing class, the professional managerial class is still capable of, and re­q…

Gay people can get married in America, which was completely unthinkable a generation ago. 100% due to activists, many who risked their lives to make it happen.

Gay people are distributed throughout the various ranks of American society. No one really gives a care at a broad level about the rights of a poor gay person.

What actually brought about the change was that due entirely to the fact that people in power had relatives that were gay, or were gay themselves. And these people turned the wheels of society toward making it accepted.

Re: The Real Class War

#345

Post by dang »

blacksqr wrote: post #297
api wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As it stands any broad based working class revolt in the US can be effectively nullified by bringing up a culture war issue like abortion, homosexuality, etc. and using it to split the electorate. This has been true for a long time. These issues evoke emotional responses that easily override any rational concern for one's economic well being. Whether intentional or not, the culture war continues to be the most effect…

HN 2019: downvoted for noting plainly observable phenomenon.

Please don't break the site guidelines by posting like this.

Vote totals fluctuate. When users see an unfairly downvoted comment, they often give corrective upvotes. Then the comment goes back to positive, but a post like yours here lingers on, orphaned and inaccurate.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: The Real Class War

#346

Post by asjw »

mrzimmerman wrote: post #339
kazagistar wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the idea behind this is what? That you shouldn't trust the revolutionaries because they dont have your interests in mind? That its hopeless? This model of the world is just run of the mill statusquoism trying to make people too despondent to tear down hierarchy, not some deep truth. To be honest I dont know if Orwell agreed with the position of the high or not, but the fact people repeat this propaganda of the "hi…

I've read it as we repeat a cycle where people are always far up on top and the only way to break that cycle is to be content with more or less everyone being in or near the middle. Or put another way: So long as there is a high that people can day dream about becoming then there will never be equality for the majority of people. Otherwise people will get into the high places, slam the door shut as soon as they can,…

How would you avoid it?

I agree with your sentiment and I am probably on the lower end of the middle class now, coming from a working class family, but I can't find a way to avoid that someone will get more than me by simply not caring about obeying the rules.

If you have more resources you can buy your exemptions from the law. Probably from someone who can be "bought" because that money is a significant amount compared to what usually earns.

I hoped in this third Industrial revolution to free us up from labor, but it looks like people don't get it well when you tell them "your job doesn't exist anymore" even if it's generally a good thing.

Re: The Real Class War

#347

Post by aaron_m04 »

triceratops wrote: post #224
AlexandrB wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really hope they don't. Western IP laws have become suffocating to innovation (life of author +70 years copyright, software patents), and need to be weakened. Perhaps if China is successful with weaker IP laws it will get some politicians off their ass on the issue.

How is theft of trade secrets going to undermine draconian copyright laws? Two wrongs don't make a right.

What makes you think there are two wrongs?

Re: The Real Class War

#348

Post by dcolkitt »

danans wrote: post #332
dcolkitt wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Healthcare expenditures only makes up 6.3% of the average income of an American household. Education only makes up 1.8%. Vehicles and apparel alone, without even breaking out any other tradable sector, make up the same percent of household expenditures as healthcare and education. Housing makes up 25%. But the cost of housing, as measured by the median inflation-adjusted cost per square foot of a new house has actual…

> But the cost of housing, as measured by the median inflation-adjusted cost per square foot of a new house has actually fallen by 8% since 1992. That's a relatively meaningless statistic given that new houses don't account for a significant subset of the housing supply. A better measure of true housing costs is BLS's annual Consumer Expenditure Survey [1], which shows that just from 2013-2018, average annual housing…

Using that same source shows that after tax incomes increased from $56k to $67k over the exact same period. So housing expenditures actually grew at a slightly slower rate than income (17% vs. 19%). That proves the opposite: housing is actually become more affordable.

Moreover, according to the source shelter only made up about half the increase in expenditures in the category. Expenditures on shelter grew even slower than housing as a whole, 16%.

From the source, Americans spent 32% more on furniture and appliances (including a whooping 50% increase on major appliances), 28% more on housekeeping services, 30% more on their cell phone bill (which is weirdly part of of the housing category), 23% more on household products, and 20% more on their water bill. In other words Americans are splurging on smart fridges, maid service, mobile data plans, organic cleaners and long showers.

That doesn't really sound consistent with the story of cash-strapped workers struggling in an overpriced housing market. That sounds a lot more consistent with the macroeconomic data, which is tells us that since 2013, the economy has been booming and unemployment is at post-war lows.

Re: The Real Class War

#349

Post by mturmon »

jimbokun wrote: post #286
ryanong wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Marching is the first necessary step to get people organized. It is the lowest bar for starting to organize and to participate. It is where people can drum up support, awareness and donations.

Is this demonstrably, empirically true, or is it something you are just telling yourself because you desperately want it to be true?

I listened to an hour-long podcast in which Chris Hayes interviewed Alicia Garza, who co-founded Black Lives Matter (BLM). They talked specifically about this question and since you're interested, perhaps it would be one place to go to hear informed organizers/activists discussing it. It aired on June 4.

Besides BLM, one other recent place in which this question of "are demonstrations enough" comes up is, of course, Occupy. (In that case: no, demonstrations were not enough.)

One thing I remember Garza saying is that the ability to organize a large, nationwide march on Washington showcases the scope and depth (down to the grassroots level) of a movement. If your movement isn't broad and organized, your nationwide march will not succeed.

But that's a necessary condition for political action, not a sufficient condition. A movement can't let marches be the endpoint, and in the interview, Garza emphasized this.

Clearly the organizers of the 1993 "March on Washington for Lesbian, Gay and Bi Equal Rights and Liberation" (which I attended) did not view the march as an endpoint. Many of the roughly 600K (+/- 300K) people present had a lot at stake, including their jobs, at that time. The march was more of a focal point, a coming of age. A constituency made visible. But not an endpoint.

For more: https://www.dissentmagazine.org/online_articles/how-black-li...

Re: The Real Class War

#350

Post by neonate »

bambataa wrote: post #70
neonate wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't there something patronizing, even patrician, about saying "the propaganda machine has so effectively manipulated the working class"? Why aren't their views as legit as yours or mine? There seems to me a great assumption in saying that they are "manipulated". Who isn't? This is the idea of false consciousness ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_consciousness ), and it has always seemed questionable to me. Who…

It's a very tricky problem. My awareness of false consciousness is more from feminism. So what if a woman aspires to being nothing more than a good housewife? But what if she's been brought up in a culture where she has been told from early childhood that being a good housewife is all she every should aspire to? I don't think you can tell that person that their desires are wrong but you can point out what other optio…

(I don't mean to be rude or argumentative, just interested.)

Don't you think this is patronizing in the way I described above? By all means point out options, but if people decide not to choose those options, I don't see what entitles us to call that false consciousness. A caricature of this view might go as follows: "if you accept my political agenda then you have true consciousness and are entitled to your beliefs; if you do not then you have false consciousness and are not entitled to your beliefs." What is missing in that caricature?

Post reply on HN