On 9/3/2010 2:49 PM, Eric Beck wrote:
>
>> also increases the relative bargaining power of labor against capital.
> True, but at a cost, no? Wasn't that power gained at least in part
> through domestic slavery, Jim Crow, and the exporting of higher levels
> of exploitation? As you've said in the past, the only barrier
> capitalism can't overcome is polarization. This bargaining power for
> *segments* of labor was made possible by its assent to capital's
> stratifications.
What liberated blacks from Southern farm tenancy? Tight labor markets in northern cities during WWI, first off. Then, the effects of New Deal farm programs (admittedly an unforeseen result). Tight WWII labor markets had what effect on blacks? An unprecedented increase in economic bargaining power and political self-confidence - in the South, notably. The resulting social disruption, in fact, is what finally turned heretofore largely ambivalent Southern Congressmen against the Democratic Party's labor program.
For 20 years after the start of the New Deal - as Adolph Reed has pointed out - most politically conscious blacks saw the cause of equal rights as inseparable from the cause of full employment and New Deal-type labor rights. So this really doesn't make any sense. I mean, how do you expect *anyone* to have the confidence to rebel against exclusion when basic survival is a struggle?
SA