Tackling the political/economic issues certainly does require common action. But that action requires a solid left movement, which we all know doesn't exist at this point. (One of my main reasons for joining the list was the hope that someone would explain to me how we can do it -- I'm still hoping.) The logic of collective action, Prisoners' Dilemma-type situations, etc., make it clear that, when the system puts pressure on people, the pay-offs to individuals to sell each other out become very tempting. So, in sum, it's awfully tough to generate solidarity.
That being the case, when unemployment hits an individual family, it's pretty much the equivalent of being hit by lightening, or a flash flood, or a tornado -- almost like a force of nature. Some marriages/partnerships are strong and nurturing, and help the partners get through. Others become worse, and domestic violence and/or break-ups result.
On the other side of the coin, it's obvious that being wealthy doesn't guarantee a strong marriage or partnership. In fact, in some ways wealth can be more harmful to relationships than helpful.
So it would clearly would be grossly reductionistic to argue that economic problems are directly causative of relationship problems -- not that anyone on this list would be unsophisticated enough to hold that view.
Feminist practice and history does suggest ways in which communities larger than the nuclear family can be supportive, but so does working class history in general. Consider, for example, the rent parties and rent strikes of the Great Depression. Reading or hearing about stories like those makes it shockingly clear how deprived of solidarity contemporary U.S. society is. Hopefully we can reclaim some of that lost history.
Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org ______________________________ If I have seen further than others, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.-- Isaac Newton If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders.-- Hal Abelson, MIT professor