I googled the title and found references in list archives--but I can't find the actual essay. Is it posted anywhere?
I see at one point you call it "For a Constitutional Amendment for a Right to a Job *or Income*."
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/2006/2006-January/001617.html
Without reading the essay, I think that is the key--although why not "For a Constitutional Amendment for a Mandatory Livable Household Income"? Drop the "jobs" shit altogether? I mean, demanding a livable income isn't ultimately any less a threat to the system, but it allows its supporters to focus on the central point, which is that the system has the capability of providing everyone with a living (literally), so why not demand it directly? The other side can be perfectly happy with "providing jobs"--that don't provide a living wage, or that are an extension of the criminal "justice" system, like "workfare," or (the liberals' favorite) are so inadequate and piecemeal they effect the balance of class power not at all. Why risk fighting on that ground?
If seen as a viable short-term electoral-political goal, whether focused on jobs or income, such an effort can be expected to fail--but why apologize for that? If widespread and organized well enough, it may provide a base, or a spark, or a memory, for further left action. Wait--am I sounding like Carrol Cox? ;)
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 3:40 AM, c b <cb31450 at gmail.com> wrote:
> socialismorbarbarism
>
>
> 'any government which had both the power and the will to remedy the
> major defects of the capitalist system would have the will and the
> power to abolish it altogether.'"
>
> ^^^^^
> CB: Gee, this is kind of my secret self-criticism of my essay "For a
> Constitutional Amendment for a Right to a Job".
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>