I'm sympathetic to Eric's position, but I'm not sure I can fully defend it. The basic argument, which strikes me as at least plausible, is that full employment looked like a plausible demand during a period when Keynesian policies seemed to be working. The move away from Keynesian policies was a fairly conscious strategy by (some) capitalists, but this strategy was, I think, predicated on, or required by, a) technical changes that made things like global supply chains more successful and b) political action from groups who had been excluded from the benefits of these policies, which made the particular way the policies had been implemented up to that point politically impossible to maintain. So, what I'm wondering is, does a demand for full employment necessarily include a demand for a return to Keynesianism and, if it does, are Keynesian policies compatible with economic and political changes since the 70s?
(As may be apparent, I'm sort of handwaving in the direction of a Regulation School analysis here).
> I'm a Nina Power fan and I like the Selma James line. I would fully
> support adding a demand for shorter work hours for those who want it.
> It's a misunderstanding that full employment means 'everybody must
> work full time'. It's a labour market condition in which anybody who
> wants a job can get one. Such conditions would increase people's
> freedom from any particular job, and increase worker power over
> conditions, hours, etc. Anything that helps spell that out increases
> the appeal of the demand - great.
Yeah, I really disliked the "jobs for all" demand when I first saw it, but that may have partly been an ultra-leftist allergy to anything that looks like workerism. I like the way the proposal talks about public works programs as a way of providing universal access to public goods, which cuts against a possible interpretation of "jobs for all" as a moralization of the value of work for its own sake, and mentioning working hours would go further in that direction. A basic income demand would be good, too, but I'm not sure how to phrase an argument for that which fits with a demand for full employment.
--
"When placed in value-relation to the linen, the coat signifies more
than when out of that relation, just as many a man strutting about
in a gorgeous uniform counts for more than when in mufti."
-- Marx, _Capital_ Voyou Desoeuvre http://blog.voyou.org/