Michael McIntyre wrote:
>
> At the same time, they're very
> aware that middle-class incomes are stagnant, and most of them believe
> that capitalism is exploitative. It's just that each thinks that
> s/he, individually, will end up 2-3 standard deviations from the
> mean. This leaves us in a nasty vicious circle. These students quite
> rationally believe that collective movements for better conditions for
> all are unlikely to have much success. Rather than accept the grim
> reality, that this means that they face a future of stagnant salaries,
> increasingly unaffordable health care, declining public goods, etc.,
> they choose to believe that they will be the ones to escape to the
> valhalla of upper-class life. Thus identifying upward, they have less
> reason than ever to engage in collective movements for better
> conditions for all. And so the cycle continues.
This seems correct. And what follows from it is that actual leftists have as one of their main tasks over the coming decades changing this fact. And this, in itself, constitutes a nasty situation for the left. Were there more of us we could create the sense of possibility throug which we could grow. Until we grow we cannot grow!
Repeat: Until we grow we cannot grow. Strategic thinking for the future of the left must ground itself in a clear recognition of this contradiction. How are we, prior to any great growth of numbers, to create that sense of possibility which can generate massive growth.
Carrol