Muddled Thinking on the Middle Class

As a heading, “Path leading to middle-class prosperity” seems harmless enough. The sub-head, however, conveys a very different message: “Canada must not follow the lead of the US, where income inequality has become an economically and socially devastating chasm”.  Globe and Mail columnist, and now aspiring Liberal party candidate for nomination in Toronto Central, Chrystia Freeland, then writes that “when it comes to today’s economic revolution, a very small and very lucky and very smart group of people is already benefiting. . . . But the other side of the coin is the devastating hollowing out of the middle class in the western industrial democracies. . . . Without a prosperous, secure middle class, our national economy can’t flourish in the long term. Our democratic society won’t endure either.”     – GM, 29/7/13

Such compartmentalized thinking is required to be able to discuss the erosion of the middle class without any consideration, or even mention, of the vast number of citizens who constitute what was once called the working class – or, indeed, any real examination of the tiny upper class elite of very wealthy people, those now described as ‘high net worth’  and  totalling about 300,000 in Canada. Despite the nod to increasing inequity, this discourse is designed to make us forget about the exploited working class and the exploiting upper class elite.

Thus ‘inequity’ can be mentioned without addressing the ethical issue of “today’s economic revolution” that is benefiting, according to Freeland, a “very small and very lucky and very smart group of people”. Lucky, yes, but very smart? Or do they just know how to game the system, hide their gains in tax havens, and expect outrageous benefits, as if they alone were responsible for the accumulation of wealth and power in ever fewer pockets. However, they are, sad to say, in good company. President Obama says, “More than some other countries, we expect people to be self-reliant. . . . We’ve tolerated a little more inequality for the sake of a more dynamic, more adaptable economy. That’s all to the good.”   – GM, 2/6/13     Obama does not say whose good.
           
Behind all this is the very popular notion that by some unexplained magic, growth of ‘the economy’ is the only way to keep the society functioning, however unfairly, even if this economic growth can only be short term, and is responsible for devastating climate change, most notable now in the vagaries and extremes of weather ‘events’.

The most depressing expression of this we have noted recently is the statement by the man expected to become the head of a new union, dedicating the union to the well-being of the Middle Class.

In early August, the merger of two of Canada’s biggest unions was announced by Canadian Autoworkers president Ken Lewenza and Dave Coles, president of the Communications and Energy and Paperworkers Union. Jerry Dias, assistant to Mr. Lewenza, is expected to become head of the new union, Unifor.

According to Mr Dias, “Our combined efforts between the two unions are to make the bold statement that we’re going to fight to maintain the middle class.”     – GM, 9/8/13

Silly us, we thought the whole point of trade unions was to amalgamate the power of the workers so as to restrict the capacity of their employers, otherwise known as capitalists, to exploit them. But maybe, like us, they have been reading Jodi Dean’s challenging little book, The Communist Horizon, in which she notes that the term “proletariat” no longer resonates (she suggests talking about “the rest of us”). She doesn’t, however, confuse middle income workers with the middle class.

Dean comments on the changes in the North American economy in recent decades, moving from manufacturing to finance, insurance, and real estate, so that only 16% of jobs in the US in 2007 were in goods-producing industries. While in the first industrial revolution, people were forced off their land and into factories, of the current situation, Dean says:
“If proletarianization initially designated the process by which those with land were disappropriated of it, contemporary proletarianization is the expropriation of secure, decently waged, skilled jobs and the creation of servants (who are required to smile, care, communicate, and be friendly).”

Doesn’t this remind you of agro-tourism?