There’s been a lot of interest lately in the question of whether we need a socialist party in the US. Perhaps to put this in a way people might ask it: Do we need a socialist party in our time, and, if so, what would it look like? In one sense, it’s a surprising question. We have a socialist party in the US! In fact, we have lots of them.
Category: Class (Page 20 of 25)
You might have the idea I think and talk a lot about class. It’s true. But I tend to write about class in general. For example, I’ve argued against using ‘class’ as a marker of socioeconomic status (SES) and in favor of using it as a marker of certain relations of economic power. On the other hand, I haven’t written a great deal about specific classes, like the working class. I’ve said a bit about what the working class isn’t, namely Trump’s base. But a bit less about what it is.
Let’s remedy that. Specifically, let’s zoom in on the working class. Who’s in it? Is it smaller than it used to be? Did deindustrialization defeat it? And, if so, do we now use ‘working class’ as a marker of identity rather than economic relations?
I’ll work through some of these questions.
‘Prison abolition’ doesn’t sound complicated. It’s abolishing prison. Done. Put that shit through a spell check, clock out early, and fly a kite. But it is complicated. Go figure.
I recently saw a Twitter thread on the term ‘prison abolition’. Here’s the background. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wrote some tweets explaining and defending limits on the prison system, using ‘prison abolition’ as a hook. Carissa Byrne Hessick, a criminal law professor and director of the Prosecutors and Politics Project, responded.
Hessick largely agreed with AOC, but she objected to AOC’s use of ‘prison abolition’. She thought AOC misused the term. Why? Well, AOC doesn’t advocate abolishing all forms of imprisonment or confinement under a judicial system. Rather, she wants to close most prisons and release many prisoners. Since ‘prison abolition’, according to Hessick, means to eliminate all of those things, AOC misused the term. Perhaps in a politically motivated way?
Is Hessick right? I’ll argue she’s not. Or, at least, I think we can build a coherent concept of ‘prison abolition’ that doesn’t abolish all forms of confinement. Whether AOC’s on board with this is a separate issue.
So, social democracy and taxes? I’m going to approach this topic from a couple of angles. First, I’ve made some efforts in the past to distinguish between progressivism, social democracy, and socialism. But I want to say more about this. I think these terms, albeit unsettled, pick out importantly different political philosophies. Taxation forms an entry-point to thinking about these differences.
Second, Elizabeth Warren recently worked her way into a bit of a jam. She’s struggling with how to pay for Medicare for All, a set of bills proposed by Pramila Jayapal and Bernie Sanders that would create a robust, comprehensive, world-class single-payer health insurance system. Warren worked her way into this jam, I’ll argue, because she’s a progressive who backed her way in to endorsing a social democratic idea. The news endlessly covers the entire kerfuffle, but I think the press sees this less as a philosophical problem than a policy problem. On the contrary, I think it’s primarily a philosophical problem opening up over the topic of taxes.
The business literature says middle managers form an essential part of the company. But, really, why do companies have middle managers? Do they perform some essential task or service? Do they serve some rhetorical or ideological function? I’ll lay out some thoughts on middle managers, what they do, who they serve, and why the role exists.
