I do think it is real that economic anxiety and anger from working people is manifesting itself in our electoral politics more than in recent years right now. But this is a good point, that opposition to further trade deals alone isn't going to keep the factories here. But isn't teh focus on trade treaties partly our fault? The left has rallied around opposition to the trade deals by saying they are responsible for the loss of the manufacturing base, and to some degree that's caught on in mainstream thinking. The ugly reality is that even if we keep a single new one from getting signed; even if we repealed nafta; --- the steel plants aren't re-opening, GM ain't gonna be any less broke, and the remaining widget factories in indiana and wisconsin are still gonna get closed. The issue really is the declining transport costs and the industrialization of asia. And I don't know how you legislate around that stuff.
So, a question: are there any conceivable policies we could propose and possibly win in the short and medium terms that could sustain and bolster the manufacturing sector? I personally drive a ford but other than that really have no ideas.
I'm all for anything, anything, that keeps the factories open and the wages up and toledo and eerie and akron on life support. But the prospects seem so deeply doomed. Hence my own work in unionizing the service sector and turning those into the next generation of 'factory jobs'. Just seems like the best realistic hope there is for blue-collar wage levels in the industrial midwest (short of the revolutionary utopia that's right around the corner for sure).
Another point on this subject is the little-noted reality that being for protectionism or whatever in the midwest is easy for a politician--- because it's a stand on a working persons' issue that doesn't conflict with what the owners of the companies want. Sherrod Brown has an easy time being for govt support to domestic manufacturing because the companies like the sound of that idea. It's much harder to take stands on union issues where the boss is vehemntly opposed--- for instance, Sherrod was scheduled to speak to a town meeting of union nurses in Lorraine who were going into a contract fight last year, and the hospital association told him not to, and he did indeed punk out. I still think he's a good progressive dem, but what a coward. Easier to be a rust belt populist when the boss says its okay to be one.
Doug wrote:
>
> > Because the rise in imports is only partly
> > explained by trade agreements; it has a lot
> > more to do with declining transportation
> > and communications costs, and the spread
> > of technology to low-wage countries.
>
> Good point. Then the other side will reply -- "How come those lower
> costs don't make our exports, jobs, and wages rise just as fast?" And
> the answer is that lower transport and communication costs mean less
> friction slowing down the effects of arbitraging gaping world
> inequality.
Yes and no. I think we need a more sophisticated way of talking about socially conservative dems. Most of them, Murtha, Harry Reid, bob casey, etc, are indeed right-leaning on alot of issues like choice, but, they're not social reactionaries in the 'movement' sense, in that they are not in the party that is driving hard on overturning roe v wade etc; they are mostly not acting as agents for the right's agenda on these issues. They just assert their personal views on the matter, or pander to the conservatism of their constituents. I don't say this in defense of these shitty politics but because it's key to understanding why bob casey is better than rick santorum. Also, it's useful to draw this distinction, because some other right-leaning dems -are- actively participating in the assault on reproductive rights etc. Bob Casey's dad, ol governor casey of my pennsylvania youth, was like this--- hence the landlark abortion case is called "casey v planned parenthood of pennsylvania". He was actually running around filing lawsuits against clinics. Fucker.
Murtha is a total social reactionary, no?
>
> Doug
A further wrinkle in the murtha matter is that for decades he has been the most cynically effective dem vote trader, getting repub things passed with dem support in exchange for getting money pumped into his district. It sucks, yes; but have you ever been to johnstown? It's actually doing relatively well for an old steel town. Compared to alliquippa or lorraine its in great shape. Hence his great poppularity there, he really has delivered (in the limited scope possible under these conditions) for his people.
And he really does represent a major encourging social trend this election evinced: the decisive turn of most pro-military working class midwesterners away from the Iraq war for good. Very conservative folks, many many military families and veterans in the region, who time after time I find to have arrived at a firm position of just wanting this war to end, period. I think its largely regional--- I don't think the same shift has gone down in the south or west--- but I'm encouraged. Youngstown I think might have a higher per-capita yellow-flag decal on american-made cars than any other place I've ever been, but those folks are in favor of withdrawal now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20061111/2eafd19f/attachment.htm>