Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
I remember doing a sociology essay in the 1970's where I coined the term "Salariat" to define a class of workers who did not own the means of production or the companies they worked for, but who were nevertheless closely allied to the capitalist class who did; by reason of ideological orientation, training, career progression and employment rewards.  It seemed to me that the term "bourgeoisie" was much to indiscriminate a term to include both the owners of capital and the many who worked for them at varying levels in management and trainee positions.

Of course one of the defining characteristics of the 40 years since has been the growth of the precariat, denied even the partial security of a long-term job, employment protection legislation, and union representation: The triumph of Thatcherism, Reaganism, and globalisation. A universal basic wage will be opposed by the capital class because it will be seen as reducing their relative power over workers, by reducing the absolute necessity to work to survive.

As Capital doesn't carry the costs of most education directly, it can be safely allowed, particularly insofar as it provides the skilled workers capital does need. However insofar as education raises expectations that capital does not wish to meet, it becomes not just superfluous, but dangerous.  The solution is not to reduce the level of education, but to improve the distribution of wealth to make it not only possible, but a factor adding to the quality of life which cannot be measured in capital created job opportunities alone.

But all of this requires a political structure not controlled by Capital.  Good luck with that, in the Europe and USA of 2015.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Sep 24th, 2015 at 03:19:46 PM EST
The main object of the Ueberklass for the last half century has been the reduction of salariats to precariats.  In the US, even the professions have been targeted.  Insurance companies have turned doctors into assembly line workers with strict production quotas.  A gross increase of law school grads has caused a glut forcing many attorneys to work on document review projects for less than $20/hour.  But nothing will change here because we have no poor people, just temporarily embarrassed millionaires.
by rifek on Mon Sep 28th, 2015 at 09:12:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]
See my response to your previous post regarding 'temporarily embarrassed millionaires'.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Mon Sep 28th, 2015 at 09:49:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I like that phrase because it captures the central conceit of capitalism - that we can all be millionaires if we work hard enough - and its just bad luck or laziness if we haven't quite made it yet.

Index of Frank's Diaries
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Mon Sep 28th, 2015 at 04:57:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It's the central myth of US culture: Horatio Alger and self-made men.  It's all crap and has mostly been a tool to control the working classes, but even the death of the middle class and all mobility but downward hasn't killed it.
by rifek on Mon Sep 28th, 2015 at 10:54:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Industry and productivity can make everyone prosperous, or to put it in other terms, "Confer upon all members of society goods, services, opportunities and choices".

Being rich is unfortunately very frequently defined as "Having much more than the average person" Which, obviously, is not something which everyone can achieve.

And policies meant to promote the first look very, very different from policies catering to people who want to achieve the second.

by Thomas on Tue Sep 29th, 2015 at 12:24:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series