LAST THURSDAY AND FRIDAY, we took the WTO-protest anniversary as an excuse to notice the Way-New Left and its ongoing efforts to bring positivity, vigor, and accomplishment back to the progressive movement; all while cyber-Libertarians and other big-money defenders use the language of “business revolution” to define the moneyed elites as today’s real populists and the critics of corporate rule as meddling reactionaries futilely fighting the inevitable triumph of the market plutocracy.
Meanwhile, a few lefty commentators, including Thomas Frank and Michael Moore, have peppered their critiques of the new corporate order with nostalgic references to the old corporate order, in which big industrial empires forged compromises with strong unions, workers got a predictable living wage with health and retirement benefits, and close-knit communities formed lasting bonds and took care of their members.
That’s a rather rosy depiction of the old America. Too rosy, as even Frank and Moore would admit.
It embodied the seeming end of history after WWII, the arrival of the American Century. Heavy industry was supposedly here to stay, as were the associated principles of permanence (or stuckness).
Industrial unionism rose as a counterforce to heavy industry, demanding that workers and their families get their fair shake from the setup.
The premise of AFL-CIO style unionism, especially in the Red-scare ’50s when the unions purged all lefty radicalism from their ideology, was that (1) big manufacturing companies with big permanent factory installations were the source of all wealth, and (2) the best way for individuals to make it under such a system was to group together to demand strong wages and job security.
It was a reactive ideology, one that acknowledged the centrality of the company.
But now the setup of big business is changing. The tactics for getting workers and their families a fair shake from it have to change too.
One possible, partial answer: Brand pressure.
Most every company (even Microsoft!) depends on good PR, on a healthy public image. Coffeehouse chains are discovering the image value of having organic beans and beans made under “fair trade” working conditions. Automakers, oil companies, and timber companies have long touted “green” business practices (or at least practices that can be passed off as “green” in fancy ads).
Eventually, shoe and garment companies will rediscover that the goodwill factor of making their stuff in North America, under decent wages and conditions, can be worth more than any sweatshop-borne cost savings.
Or, such a goodwill factor could be worth that much, if the anti-sweatshop activists keep working to make it so.
Another possible, partial answer: Re-redefining some of those “New Economy” buzzwords.
So the Wired Libertarians and the post-Gingrich Republicans and the Clinton Democrats and the business-motivation authors say people have to stop relying on big institutions and start fending for themselves?
OK, we will.
We’ll network (organize).
We’ll stop expecting to be taken care of by bureaucracies (corporations).
We’ll become more self-reliant (seize the means of production; albeit nonviolently).
We’ll dare to challenge the authority of old, tired institutions (the Fortune 500 and their media advocates).
TOMORROW: A guest columnist tries to not get arrested in the Son of WTO march.
ELSEWHERE:
