5 ms·

What I find disappointing is that the left, who used to represent the working class, is missing this opportunity to address that class's needs explicitly. The

by badsock 10y ago

What I find disappointing is that the left, who used to represent the working class, is missing this opportunity to address that class's needs explicitly. The fact that this huge amount of dissatisfaction is being channelled into squabbles over immigration rather than, say, supporting massive upgrades to vocational training infrastructure, is a huge missed opportunity.

throwanem 10y ago
> the left, who used to represent the working class Commentators on the margins of the US left have recognized this problem, and been calling it out, for at least a decade - Joe Bageant, just to pick an example off the top of my head, was a powerful and persuasive voice on the subject, but for some reason, even as he achieved international prominence outside the US, he became ever more marginalized within. (Edited to add: Somebody elsewhere in this thread linked a Mark Ames piece in which he says the same thing. If even Mark Ames, whose major claim to fame is a multi-year exploration of street-level prostitution in newly post-Communist Russia, can see that it's a problem...)
CM30 10y ago
This is a really good point. The left seems to have switched from supporting the working class population and fighting for equality and better living conditions to basically supporting the 'wealthy college student' demographic and attacking their old supporters over identity politics. It used to be that parties like the UK's Labour party supported the working classes (while also supporting equality and being against prejudice). Now it seems like the average left wing political party/group mostly supports the upper middle class social media user demographic, the type who think complaints about trolling on Twitter are more important than class inequality, the lack of housing or wages stagnating.
- nikdaheratik 10y ago
  They've stopped doing that because it doesn't win them elections. The roots of it go back to Nixon's southern strategy to split the Democratic party based on race, but the 80s also walked back alot of the strength of unions and removed other protections due to deregulation, and the 90s were how this all got finished off with the rise of talk radio and cable news dominating the conversation on the right. There should be room for a broader party that is pro-labor, but you would have to ditch alot of the links to civil rights or make a move to pick up the social conservatives in order to bring in many of the current GOP voters. It's possible, but I think the GOP as it currently exists needs to collapse before you can lose its grip on those voters.
Futurebot 10y ago
The Left has been calling it out non-stop. In the US, it's establishment liberals (in Europe, they'd mostly qualify as right-of-center) that have been defenders of the status quo. Take a look at: https://www.jacobinmag.com/ https://www.jacobinmag.com/ http://fredrikdeboer.com/published-writing/ http://fredrikdeboer.com/published-writing/ https://www.dissentmagazine.org/ https://www.dissentmagazine.org/ http://coreyrobin.com/ http://coreyrobin.com/ Just to start with. There's a huge rift between what's called the Left, and what actually is the Left right now.
- noir_lord 10y ago
  Can see that in UK now, parliamentary labour party is about to go to war with its own general party members because they hate that the general members voted an actual socialist in.
- iofj 10y ago
  The left is currently identified with Hillary Clinton, for obvious reasons. The right is identified with Donald Trump, for the same reason. It's not going to be a good year for either of their images.
  - LBXrRkxx 10y ago
    The left is not the same as the US Democratic Party, and the right is not the same as the US Republican Party!
    - throwanem 10y ago
      No, but if you want to play the US electoral game, those are your options.
smsm42 10y ago
I don't think "missing" is the right word. If there's a system of charter schools which raises student's probability of getting out of poverty and having a good life, and the teachers union fights tooth and nail to destroy it, all while making it nearly impossible to fire a bad teacher - they are not "missing" anything. They just have completely different goals. > rather than, say, supporting massive upgrades to vocational training infrastructure, Given that the percentage of professions requiring licensing tripled since the 70s (used to be 10%, now 30%)[1] and many of the license requirements plain make no sense (like requiring 4-year veterinary degree to do dog massage) - and all these were created not by mistake, but on purpose to protect vested interests - vocational training may not solve the issue. What's the point of teaching people how to do stuff if they won't be able to do that stuff because they can't get through the red tape? [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/18/business/economy/job-licenses.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/18/business/economy/job-licen...
- undersuit 10y ago
  >They just have completely different goals. Not really. Teachers have every reason to fight for their life to be better too. If what you say of the UK teacher's union is true, maybe we should find out why the teachers, good and bad, are so intent on having a well paying secure job. >requiring 4-year veterinary degree to do dog massage No, that is not the rule, that is a exaggerated simplification.
  - smsm42 10y ago
    > Teachers have every reason to fight for their life to be better too. I Oh yes, they have. But one shouldn't be confused that their interests are in any way aligned with the interests of the students in getting better (and cheaper) education. It's not an omission, it's by design. And it's not the only example - there are hundreds, if not thousands, regulations and setups that do not help the last those they are supposedly designed to help, and instead help politicians, interest groups and cronies. > No, that is not the rule, that is a exaggerated simplification. What you mean "exaggerated"? Read the link, it's the actual demand made by actual regulators, and it's completely within the realm of what is routinely done. I personally know many examples where people coming in US with many years of experience in certain professions, and able to find many job offers, are unable to actually work because they require licenses, which require expensive education, teaching these people what they already know and in many cases can do much better than the license teachers. It is a rule, at least in the US. Maybe in UK it is not, congratulations if so.
internaut 10y ago
> supporting massive upgrades to vocational training infrastructure, is a huge missed opportunity. While I sympathize with the diagnosis, I wonder if this is true. There does not seem to be a lot of evidence for it. The key element as I see it is that the number of niches is not growing in society, which I partly blame on the education system itself. Supposing it wasn't true, what is your plan?

by badsock 10y ago

throwanem 10y ago

> the left, who used to represent the working class Commentators on the margins of the US left have recognized this problem, and been calling it out, for at least a decade - Joe Bageant, just to pick an example off the top of my head, was a powerful and persuasive voice on the subject, but for some reason, even as he achieved international prominence outside the US, he became ever more marginalized within. (Edited to add: Somebody elsewhere in this thread linked a Mark Ames piece in which he says the same thing. If even Mark Ames, whose major claim to fame is a multi-year exploration of street-level prostitution in newly post-Communist Russia, can see that it's a problem...)

CM30 10y ago

This is a really good point. The left seems to have switched from supporting the working class population and fighting for equality and better living conditions to basically supporting the 'wealthy college student' demographic and attacking their old supporters over identity politics. It used to be that parties like the UK's Labour party supported the working classes (while also supporting equality and being against prejudice). Now it seems like the average left wing political party/group mostly supports the upper middle class social media user demographic, the type who think complaints about trolling on Twitter are more important than class inequality, the lack of housing or wages stagnating.

nikdaheratik 10y ago
They've stopped doing that because it doesn't win them elections. The roots of it go back to Nixon's southern strategy to split the Democratic party based on race, but the 80s also walked back alot of the strength of unions and removed other protections due to deregulation, and the 90s were how this all got finished off with the rise of talk radio and cable news dominating the conversation on the right. There should be room for a broader party that is pro-labor, but you would have to ditch alot of the links to civil rights or make a move to pick up the social conservatives in order to bring in many of the current GOP voters. It's possible, but I think the GOP as it currently exists needs to collapse before you can lose its grip on those voters.

Futurebot 10y ago

The Left has been calling it out non-stop. In the US, it's establishment liberals (in Europe, they'd mostly qualify as right-of-center) that have been defenders of the status quo. Take a look at: https://www.jacobinmag.com/ https://www.jacobinmag.com/ http://fredrikdeboer.com/published-writing/ http://fredrikdeboer.com/published-writing/ https://www.dissentmagazine.org/ https://www.dissentmagazine.org/ http://coreyrobin.com/ http://coreyrobin.com/ Just to start with. There's a huge rift between what's called the Left, and what actually is the Left right now.

noir_lord 10y ago
Can see that in UK now, parliamentary labour party is about to go to war with its own general party members because they hate that the general members voted an actual socialist in.
iofj 10y ago
The left is currently identified with Hillary Clinton, for obvious reasons. The right is identified with Donald Trump, for the same reason. It's not going to be a good year for either of their images.
- LBXrRkxx 10y ago
  The left is not the same as the US Democratic Party, and the right is not the same as the US Republican Party!
  - throwanem 10y ago
    No, but if you want to play the US electoral game, those are your options.

smsm42 10y ago

I don't think "missing" is the right word. If there's a system of charter schools which raises student's probability of getting out of poverty and having a good life, and the teachers union fights tooth and nail to destroy it, all while making it nearly impossible to fire a bad teacher - they are not "missing" anything. They just have completely different goals. > rather than, say, supporting massive upgrades to vocational training infrastructure, Given that the percentage of professions requiring licensing tripled since the 70s (used to be 10%, now 30%)[1] and many of the license requirements plain make no sense (like requiring 4-year veterinary degree to do dog massage) - and all these were created not by mistake, but on purpose to protect vested interests - vocational training may not solve the issue. What's the point of teaching people how to do stuff if they won't be able to do that stuff because they can't get through the red tape? [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/18/business/economy/job-licenses.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/18/business/economy/job-licen...

undersuit 10y ago
>They just have completely different goals. Not really. Teachers have every reason to fight for their life to be better too. If what you say of the UK teacher's union is true, maybe we should find out why the teachers, good and bad, are so intent on having a well paying secure job. >requiring 4-year veterinary degree to do dog massage No, that is not the rule, that is a exaggerated simplification.
- smsm42 10y ago
  > Teachers have every reason to fight for their life to be better too. I Oh yes, they have. But one shouldn't be confused that their interests are in any way aligned with the interests of the students in getting better (and cheaper) education. It's not an omission, it's by design. And it's not the only example - there are hundreds, if not thousands, regulations and setups that do not help the last those they are supposedly designed to help, and instead help politicians, interest groups and cronies. > No, that is not the rule, that is a exaggerated simplification. What you mean "exaggerated"? Read the link, it's the actual demand made by actual regulators, and it's completely within the realm of what is routinely done. I personally know many examples where people coming in US with many years of experience in certain professions, and able to find many job offers, are unable to actually work because they require licenses, which require expensive education, teaching these people what they already know and in many cases can do much better than the license teachers. It is a rule, at least in the US. Maybe in UK it is not, congratulations if so.

internaut 10y ago

> supporting massive upgrades to vocational training infrastructure, is a huge missed opportunity. While I sympathize with the diagnosis, I wonder if this is true. There does not seem to be a lot of evidence for it. The key element as I see it is that the number of niches is not growing in society, which I partly blame on the education system itself. Supposing it wasn't true, what is your plan?