So, if we’re assuming that what I can find is representative of what the real issues are, it sounds to me like it’s a little less about “LGBTQ issues versus economic issues” than I was saying, and more about “work with the Democrats versus abandon the Democrats” which causes the rift between the activist left and the established union membership.
We can help any grouping and gather support from any grouping, without needing to say we need to put the brakes on and help some other more virtuous-to-advocate-for grouping instead.
I’m interested in what examples you are thinking of, for this.
Any Democrat? They talk frequently about issues of social justice, race, LGBTQ (with trans issues as maybe an outlier they hesitate to touch on), and very very rarely do they touch on economic justice with anything but the most oblique of “we have to get inflation under control” references.
The Democratic Party are neoliberal. The party doesn’t have an issue, by and large, with Capitalism. That’s why you don’t hear salient discussions of economic justice from them.
Ground-level, Democratic voters are usually just as indoctrinated about Capitalism as Republicans, though that’s changed somewhat in the last 4-5 years. But Socialism is still a dirty word for many of them, because pro-Capitalist propaganda is completely pervasive in the US.
Labour unions are made up of these exact ground-level voters (and obviously, not all or even a strong majority of union members are Democrats). It’s tough to convince them that economic system change is necessary, because so many of them staunchly believe that Capitalism is the Great Uplifter, and that their ticket would come in if these rich people would just stop being so damn greedy (without really asking what allows them to act on their greed successfully).
Personally, I think unions and young voters will get on board with economic reform before the Democratic Party will, but that also leaves them no one at the Executive level to vote for, since the DNC will actively quash anyone who isn’t on board with neoliberal economics.
Wrt economic vs social progressivism, I agree that we shouldn’t have purity tests for working to dismantle Capitalism, but solidarity has to be two-way. Economics aren’t unbiased, and it’s very possible to make gains/ changes that benefit some groups and not others, especially in a system like ours that is already stratified along e.g. racial lines, economically. You don’t want people who are going to abandon the movement the second they get what they want (having benefitted from the full force of the movement), and leave the rest to fend for themselves with a now diminished bargaining ability.
Maybe not. The leftist people I know definitely do, to the point that it’s pretty obnoxious, but they are also not involved in any protest.
I read up about whether there’s any reality to this issue I imagine, and found this kind of stuff:
https://jacobin.com/2021/09/occupy-wall-street-ows-zuccotti-park-nyc-labor-movement-unions-collaboration
https://newrepublic.com/article/175645/left-labor-emerging-political-coalition
So, if we’re assuming that what I can find is representative of what the real issues are, it sounds to me like it’s a little less about “LGBTQ issues versus economic issues” than I was saying, and more about “work with the Democrats versus abandon the Democrats” which causes the rift between the activist left and the established union membership.
Any Democrat? They talk frequently about issues of social justice, race, LGBTQ (with trans issues as maybe an outlier they hesitate to touch on), and very very rarely do they touch on economic justice with anything but the most oblique of “we have to get inflation under control” references.
The Democratic Party are neoliberal. The party doesn’t have an issue, by and large, with Capitalism. That’s why you don’t hear salient discussions of economic justice from them.
Ground-level, Democratic voters are usually just as indoctrinated about Capitalism as Republicans, though that’s changed somewhat in the last 4-5 years. But Socialism is still a dirty word for many of them, because pro-Capitalist propaganda is completely pervasive in the US.
Labour unions are made up of these exact ground-level voters (and obviously, not all or even a strong majority of union members are Democrats). It’s tough to convince them that economic system change is necessary, because so many of them staunchly believe that Capitalism is the Great Uplifter, and that their ticket would come in if these rich people would just stop being so damn greedy (without really asking what allows them to act on their greed successfully).
Personally, I think unions and young voters will get on board with economic reform before the Democratic Party will, but that also leaves them no one at the Executive level to vote for, since the DNC will actively quash anyone who isn’t on board with neoliberal economics.
Wrt economic vs social progressivism, I agree that we shouldn’t have purity tests for working to dismantle Capitalism, but solidarity has to be two-way. Economics aren’t unbiased, and it’s very possible to make gains/ changes that benefit some groups and not others, especially in a system like ours that is already stratified along e.g. racial lines, economically. You don’t want people who are going to abandon the movement the second they get what they want (having benefitted from the full force of the movement), and leave the rest to fend for themselves with a now diminished bargaining ability.