|
|
|
Book Review
| Michael Zweig, The Working Class Majority: America's Best Kept Secret, ILR Press/Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London, 2000. pp. + 208. US $15.95 paper.
|
| During the 2004 United States presidential election, Democratic Party nominee John Kerry often spoke about his desire to help the struggling middle class — a group he envisioned as representative of most Americans' social and economic background. On the Today Show, for instance, a morning news program, Kerry vowed he 'would fight for the middle class'. Senator Kerry chose his words to take advantage of how most Americans think of themselves. His rhetoric affirmed the widespread assumption that the USA is a middle-class society. Kerry neglected an opportunity to discuss how the majority of Americans are working class, not middle class. He failed to talk about the working-class majority in a meaningful way, missing the chance to construct a new working-class politics and perhaps take the Democrats back to the White House. John Kerry probably did not read Michael Zweig's The Working Class Majority. In this well-written and provocative book, Zweig challenges Americans' assumptions about social classes and identifies new foundations for working-class participation in politics. His elucidating discussion of the working class as the predominant social group in the US, as well as the political power it could potentially wield, should foster new discussions of class among academics, unionists, and social justice advocates. |
1
|
|
Using newspapers, periodicals, collections of statistics, secondary readings, and personal observations, Zweig skilfully analyses three overriding factors that have hindered a deeper understanding of class and marginalised working people in American society. First, he debunks the myth of the United States as a society of upwardly mobile men and women who inhabit a broad middle class. Recasting 'class' to mean individuals' relationships to power in the workplace, instead of one's occupation, lifestyle, or income, Zweig estimates that over 62 per cent of the workforce in the USA are 'working class'. Zweig defines the working class as blue-collar and white-collar workers who carry out capitalists' orders. The working class 'works' at the whim of an employer who sets the terms of work and pay, enforces work rules, and has the authority to hire and fire. Working-class women and men have 'a basic powerlessness' (p. 13). In factories and offices, most Americans carry out, rather than give, orders. Due to this relationship, Zweig insists that the bulk of the labour force should be thought of as working class. |
2
|
|
Second, Zweig challenges Americans' assumptions about poverty and the poor, arguing that 'the underclass' should not be thought of as a socially and economically distinct 'other'. Instead, poor people should be recognised as struggling members of the working-class majority. Poverty, Zweig points out, is created by low-wage jobs and de-industrialisation — not laziness. Most Americans' disdain for welfare recipients worsens the situation. Zweig shows how attacks on welfare constitute an attack on working people. Those who receive welfare are not shiftless 'welfare queens'; rather, they are children, the disabled, and low-wage workers who cannot secure economic stability. |
3
|
|
Third, Zweig challenges Americans' faith in individualism and 'family values'. Capitalists emphasise individualism to protect their economic power. However, capitalists' focus on self-interest has systematically damaged communities, families, and the environment. Zweig criticises cultural conservatives for aligning with capitalists' interests. As Zweig points out, the Christian Right's focus on 'family values' is self-defeating. On one hand, conservatives lament 'the decline in family values' (p. 109). But on the other, their political alliance with capitalists prevents them from recognising capitalist exploitation as a major source of family instability. How can poor people achieve domestic bliss? The Christian Right's focus on moral codes does nothing to actually help families achieve respectability. To more effectively challenge the erosion of communities and the environment, Zweig asserts that Americans need to understand how peoples' lives are interconnected. Americans need to recognise their 'mutual involvement' in each others' lives and work to improve their communities (p. 100). Capitalists' exploitation of the economy and the environment tears at individuals' lives and ultimately at society. |
4
|
|
In order to challenge employers' power, Zweig supports the continued revitalisation of the labour movement. Furthermore, he endorses third-party politics through the Labor Party. Only independent institution building, Zweig suggests, can promote workers' political participation. While Zweig's arguments are commonsensical and appealing, he avoids placing any blame for the working class' predicament among workers themselves. For instance, is the Christian Right's success a product of top-down misinformation, or is it fuelled by a bottom-up groundswell of workers' support? Religious conservatism can be understood as a popular reaction to the corporate-capitalist ethos and secular values that capitalists have so rigorously promoted. Also, are third-party politics the best way to promote social justice? Could working people benefit more from a lobbying presence in Washington? Can labour build an organisation modelled after the powerful National Rifle Association (NRA) and ultimately use it against the Right? Finally, a future edition of this book might address how the September 11 attacks, the war in Iraq, and the 2005 AFL-CIO split have affected (and will affect) conservatives' political hegemony in the US. |
5
|
|
Michael Zweig's study is an excellent discussion of class in recent American history. It would work very well as an assigned reading in a variety of history, sociology, and political science courses. |
6
|
| | | | |
| University of Pittsburgh |
GREGORY WOOD | |
|
Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.
|