So, we know there’s a huge political space in the U.S. to the left of Joe Biden. Many of the groups in this space talk about how to build a political majority. Progressives talk about building a coalition majority. Leftists talk about building a working-class majority.
The DSA uses the term ‘multiracial working class’ to get at its target political group. But this term raises as many questions as it answers. Each DSA faction adopts it, and then uses it in varying ways.
Where does this leave us? We don’t know what a working-class majority looks like. At least, not in any settled way. Some leftists seem to think it’s already there for the taking. Others think we need to do far more work to form it. In this post, I’ll see what the data can tell us. Is there a working-class majority out there? What does a working-class majority look like?
The Leftist Landscape
I’ll start by taking a look at where things stand in the DSA, by far the U.S.’s largest leftist org.
Certain factions – notably Bread & Roses, but also perhaps Reform & Revolution, Class Unity, and outlets like Jacobin – take a ‘workplace central’ – or even ‘workplace only’ – view. That is to say, they pursue a working-class majority by organizing only those who currently hold working-class jobs. Perhaps they add to this the spouses or other family members of those who hold such jobs.
This sounds intuitive. But it’s a narrow vision. By contrast, the Communist caucus – and perhaps also Tempest and various local groups – argue that the left needs a broader coalition to reach a working-class majority. Not only those now employed, we need to also organize tenants, unemployed people, racially marginalized people, and so on. In contrast to ‘workplace central,’ these groups are ‘worker central,’ where the ‘worker’ may or may not operate in a formal workplace.
In addition, there are yet other segments of the DSA – notably Socialist Majority – that organize primarily outside of work. They want to build a progressive coalition that includes workers, but places progressive ideology over any class or actor. But, like the others, it embraces the term ‘multiracial working class.’ It’s also worth noting that the vast majority of DSA elected officials – especially in Congress – exist somewhere in this camp.
Each camp, then, presents a different vision for a working-class majority.
My Own View
I don’t mind disclosing my own view on these issues. In fact, I’ve written about this a number of times. But, for a recap: I mostly agree with the Communist caucus and the Libertarian Socialist caucus. That is to say, I think a ‘workplace central’ or ‘workplace only’ focus falls short of a working-class majority.
To get there, I think we need to expand far beyond people who currently hold working-class jobs. In addition, I far prefer a focus on reaching workers via other means (e.g., tenants unions, worker centers, anti-racist and anti-imperialist action, et al.) over a ‘broad coalition‘ or any issue-based focus (e.g., climate change policy action). Why? In short, I think those latter groups mostly draw in wealthier progressives and put them at the center of our orgs. While they’re a fine (small) part of a leftist coalition, they’re very unlikely to create change as the center of any coalition.
A Working-Class Majority?
With all that said, let’s take a look at the data. As we’ll see, it can tell us a lot about building a working-class majority. First, I’ll narrow down how many adults work. And then I’ll take a look at what they do.
How Many People Work?
Before the pandemic, about 63% of adults participated in the labor force. That declined in 2020, but it’ll likely return over the coming months. And so, I’ll start with 63%. It forms the maximum.
However, the labor force participation rate includes unemployed people. In other words, not everyone in the labor force actually works. We know from other sources that about 5-7% of people are unemployed. We have to subtract that 5-7% from our 63% starting point. I’ll call it about 58%.
Already – even at this point – readers should see the difficulty of forming a working-class majority. At least if we want it to consist only in people who work. Many Americans are unemployed, retired, disabled, or otherwise not a part of the labor force. Even on generous assumptions, we’re barely above a majority.
And we haven’t even gotten to what kinds of jobs they have.
And What Do They Do?
Hence our next step. If it were just a matter of putting together people who work, things don’t look too bad. It seems about half – and perhaps a bit more than half – of Americans work. But that includes everyone who works – even your boss! For leftists, that’s no good. We’re not forming a working-class majority that includes middle managers, executives, and so on.
If we use educational status as our criterion, only about 35% or so of U.S. adults are ‘working class’ (i.e., people who work and do not hold a college degree). However, as I’ve written elsewhere, we shouldn’t use educational status as our criterion. Class is about relationship to economic resources and power, not about raw socioeconomic indicators like education.
But when we look into that, things don’t get more promising. About 17% of the U.S. workforce works in management or related occupations like HR, management analysis, and so on. Another 23% works in the ‘professional’ classes – engineering, statistics, computer programming, and so on. Generally these are salaried jobs with good working conditions. These two categories make up 10% and 13%, respectively, of the total U.S. adult population.
If we remove these categories, we end up with…well, about the same 35% of U.S. adults in the ‘working class.’
So, Again, A Working-Class Majority?
We’re ready to return to our main topic. In a narrow sense, there’s no working-class majority in the U.S. Nor is there a potential one. If we define the ‘multiracial working class’ to include only those who hold working-class jobs, we’ll never build a majority out of it.
The DSA should take some lessons from this. One, we can’t focus exclusively (or arguably even primarily) on organizing current workers into unions. While it might create change in individual workplaces or even industries, it likely won’t lead to broader social or political change.
Two, strategies common to the sectarian left – creating a True Workers’ Party, and so on – won’t work, either.
However, three, this doesn’t mean the left should give up on the workplace. It simply means our organizing must expand to include a broader range of people: the unemployed, gig workers, sex workers, retired workers, and people marginalized by race or gender. We can even include wealthier progressives, so long as they form a small minority.
Four, we do this by organizing people where they are. That means workers in the workplace, tenants in tenants unions, socialist feminist and anti-racist groups, worker centers that include unemployed people, sex workers, and gig workers, and other creative ways to reach people.
If we do these things well, working-class people will always stand at the center of movements. But they aren’t, on their own, a majority.
