US recession, Steel, rail, teachers, Israel

[Gordon Fitch]

Max Sawicky:
> GF: If I may skip over several steps of argument here, what I
> think you're saying in essence is that growth is a political
> need of the ruling class, rather than an economic need of
> the community as a whole.
>
> That being the case, the defect of the Greens' alleged
> desire for zero growth which J.H. disparaged is not the
> zero growth itself, but their omission of specifying the
> concomitant requirement -- the overthrow or dissolution of
> the class system and the class war that sustains it.
>
>
> mbs: On a), I would say that insofar as growth is an expectation
> of the masses, it becomes a 'need' for psychological
> reasons and to rulers for political reasons (stability,
> consent of the governed).
>
> On b), the defect of ZG is the fact that advances in economic
> justice usually require growth as a context -- since zero-
> sum disputes are typically resolved in favor of the relatively
> privileged.  "Overthrow or dissolution . . . etc." taken in
> isolation is just ultimatism, a substitute for politics in
> the here and now.  So this would be the exchange of one
> form of unreality for another.

The politics of the Left has to be the politics of the unreal.
Or should we say, the politics of the unreal confronting and
contesting the world against the politics of the real.  In
this contest, no matter what strategy one espoused, it would
be a good idea to keep an sharp eye on the real, in this case
understanding that the real requires growth not because nature
demands it -- nature is in fact rather fond of homeostases
and cycles -- but because the class war demands it.  That is,
the demand for growth is an artifact of the class system and
should be understood as such.  From that one may draw
various conclusions according to one's taste and interests.

Here's one: it seems to me that the more vigorous economic
growth is (up to a point), the more likely it is that economic
and political inequalities will increase, because the rate
and domain of change will be greater, and the better-off are
usually better positioned to take advantage of such changes.
So I am not persuaded that growth automatically conduces to
reduction of inequality, although the reverse may be certainly
be the case.  For example, social-welfare programs might
provoke increased commerce, but increased commerce is not
particularly likely to provoke social-welfare programs.