On 2013-08-14, at 8:52 AM, Carrol Cox wrote:
> "This is mainly a consequence of the construction of the social safety net
> and collective bargaining system and the steady improvement in living
> standards in the wake of the economic depression and political instability
> of the 30's. This in turn has allowed union leaders to retain the loyalty of
> the majority of their active and passive members and to easily fend off
> challenges from left activists seeking a more radical direction. Where there
> have been rank-and-file rebellions, these have typically resulted in
> elevating leaders who have inevitably shared the worldview and replicated
> the behaviour of the faction which they replaced. The more recent decline in
> real wages and job security as a result of organizational and technological
> change and!
> outsourcing has made workers less rather than more inclined to join unions
> and challenge their employers."
>
> -----------
>
> Perhaps. But at least consider the possibility of exactly the reverse being
> true. Working-class militancy increased in the 1960s and early 1970s; it
> has decreased as conditions have worsened. It seems mere dogmatism rather
> than real historical analysis to assume that higher living standards promote
> satisfaction, lower living standards the opposite.
1. My reference was to the political militancy of the working class, ie. the extent to which they were prepared to break with their existing leaders and follow the lead of the anticapitalist radical left in confronting their employers and the state, frequently in defiance of the law and under assault from police and company thugs. That last happened in the 30's. What trade union struggles in the 60's and 70's are you referring to which matched these in character? Which left-wing tendencies or leaders came close to matching the CP or even the SWP of the earlier period in influence?
2. Neither did industrial militancy increase in the 60's and 70's. Measured by the incidence of strike activity, there was no significant departure from the 40's and 50's. There were throughout these decades of postwar expansion and rising living standards hundreds of large-scale strikes annually which saw workers scoring pay and benefit gains through a tightly-regulated collective bargaining system. But this was also accompanied by a consolidation of a pro-capitalist, pro-imperialist, conservative trade union leadership and the sharp decline of the radical left which can't be explained by Cold War repression alone. The workers tolerated the expulsion of the left and remained loyal to their anti-Communist leaders because they, and the institutionalized system of collective bargaining which their leaders utilized, were seen to be delivering the goods.
3. Economic conditions changed in the 80's and 90's through to the present day, and industrial militancy followed political militancy off a cliff. Massive organizational and technological change and the expansion of the global labour pool reduced the demand for labour which was characteristic of the postwar boom. Labour shortages were replaced by unemployment lines in the rust belt. In such conditions, trade union density and strike activity both plummeted. The number of major strikes per year, which numbered in the hundreds when US economic dominance was unchallenged, fell from hundreds to double and even single digits, as indicated in the BLS's annual series dating back to 1947. See: http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet
4. The expectation of higher living standards coming out of a downturn where an recovering economy, a renewed demand for labour, and improved job security increase working class self-confidence can produce the kind of economic and political instability that we saw at the tail end of the Depression in the 30's. But when the higher living standards were realized and the demands of the workers partially incorporated by the system, conservative tendencies reasserted themselves and the influence of the radical left receded.
5. It would seem that for the radical left to regain a foothold following the present downturn, there would have to be a similar economic recovery and labour shortages which, given the global labour market and challenges to US economic dominance which now exist, is somewhat problematic.
6. Nothing in the above places primary responsibility for the current doldrums on the left and within the working class, more broadly, on the quality of the leadership in each of these milieus.