Robert, Sorry, I didn't intend to imply that anything was settled just that the matters were discussed. It's difficult for me to access evidence on that subject at this point in my life. I studied those matters a long time ago and no longer have my Marxist and Leftist libraries, but I remain convinced of the matters I recall. How can I not unless presented with something conclusively to the contrary? If someone later adopted polices that Marx previously advocated it might be a coincidence, but it cannot be proved that it is, and Marx was such an influential force I tend to discount the coincidences. Also, I have read Marxists, better studied on the subject than I am who take credit (for Marx) for many of these influences in American life. Here is another quote about Marx and the eight hour day. This one from http://www.workers.org/cm/ch08.html "Not less skillfully did the London delegates defend Marx's resolution concerning the eight-hour day. In contradistinction to the French delegates, they maintained together with Marx that a condition precedent to any further efforts to improve and liberate the working class and without which all efforts would be futile was a legislative limitation of the length of the working day. It was essential to restore the health and the physical energy of the working class -- the vast majority of each nation -- and also to insure them the possibility of intellectual development, social communion, and political activity. The Congress, on the recommendation of the General Council, declared the eight-hour day as the legislative maximum. This limiting of the workday to eight hours was one of the demands of the workers in the United States. The Geneva Congress incorporated this demand into the platform of the working class of the whole world. Night work was allowed only in exceptional cases, in branches of industry and certain professions definitely specified by the law. The ideal was the elimination of all night work." [Italics added] In the American labor movement in the early decades of the 20th century, Marx's ideas were out there in the form of pamphlets and word of mouth. Communists attempted to capture the American labor movement. Big Bill Haywood organized a home-grown Marxist labor Union which was overthrown by Hoover. The Communists never did very well here because our labor movements were convinced that they could succeed on their own, and they did. Thugs hired by Capitalist enterprises to break up unions and strikes and intimidate or kill union leaders were extremely vicious. Business policies were equally ruthless and vicious. I grew up in a union family. My father was a member of the Operating Engineers. He drove a lumber carrier on the docks in the L.A. Harbor. When I was going to college, I was a member of the Teamster's Union and worked part time out of the Teamster's Hiring Hall. Things were much mellower by that time, but I grew up knowing about Unions and the ruthlessness of Big Business. In modern times, businesses understand that "Parkinson's Law" is at work: Businesses grow (in numbers) in direct proportion to the length of time they have been in existence rather than in terms of the amount of work to be done, so they all, if they are to remain successful have periodic "layoffs." I worked in Aerospace for 39 years and "survived" a great number of them. They were supposed to be based upon merit. That is, managers were told to layoff a certain percentage of their workers, say 10%. The best workers were to be retained. The manager didn't need to be told this, because the best workers would make him look better than the worst workers. The workers had an incentive to work hard to make sure they were never at the bottom of a "totem poll" for they knew that another layoff was eventually coming. There was a time when I was in my late 50s working on the C-17 and the company modified the layoff philosophy slightly. The emphasis wasn't just on the poorest performers. It also included the oldest and higher paid workers. Since I was in that category I thought it likely I would be laid off at that time, but the Air Force sent our management a formal letter "viewing with alarm" the rate at which the experience level was dropping at the company. If it dropped any further, our management was told, the Air Force could not retain its current high degree of confidence in our ability to design, produce, deliver and maintain the superior product they were paying for and expected. Thus, I was not laid off after all. Interestingly, and very much to the point, in the last few years before I (voluntarily) retired (at age 64)I received very poor "merit" increases, despite the fact that I was doing some very responsible work representing engineering on a Change Review Board and getting glowing reviews by the Managers familiar with my work. The management I technically worked for was young (paid less than I was) and unfamiliar with what I did. I doubted they could understand it. They said "The managers over there say you are the best thing since sliced bread. We find that hard to believe." At the same time my pay was not increasing very rapidly, my 401 was growing by leaps and bounds as a result of Boeing stock increasing because of their ruthless management practices (something investors are very fond of). So I was suffering and benefiting at the same time. Lawrence -----Original Message----- From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Robert Paul Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 12:39 PM To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Nation Building Lawrence wrote: > As we've discussed elsewhere, some Marxist ideals like the 8 hour > working day have been incorporated into American Society. I believe > the last time I mentioned this some scoffed, and thought it was > FDR. I was basing my statement on having struggled through most of > /Das Kapital /years ago. Here is Marx on the "Working Day." http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch10.htm Lawrence, we did not 'discuss' this earlier. You asserted that various social and economic benefits enjoyed in Western democracies were derived from Marx, e.g. 'old age insurance,' the eight hour day. However, you simply asserted this and provided no evidence at all that this was so. I replied to you in brief detail. You did not reply, and write now as if the matter were settled. The section from Marx you supply, interesting as it is, is an analysis of the competing claims between workers (paid by the hour or day) and their employers. It points out, quite reasonably that the interests of these parties are going to be at odds. It does not mention the eight hour day: it points out the reasonableness of limiting the work day, in terms of mutual self interest. "We see then, that, apart from extremely elastic bounds, the nature of the exchange of commodities itself imposes no limit to the working-day, no limit to surplus-labour. The capitalist maintains his rights as a purchaser when he tries to make the working-day as long as possible, and to make, whenever possible, two working-days out of one. On the other hand, the peculiar nature of the commodity sold implies a limit to its consumption by the purchaser, and the labourer maintains his right as seller when he wishes to reduce the working-day to one of definite normal duration. There is here, therefore, an antinomy, right against right, both equally bearing the seal of the law of exchanges. Between equal rights force decides. Hence is it that in the history of capitalist production, the determination of what is a working-day, presents itself as the result of a struggle, a struggle between collective capital, i.e., the class of capitalists, and collective labour, i.e., the working-class." I think you may have forgotten, if you ever knew, how vicious capitalism was during the time Marx wrote. Given that, it's surprising to me that Marx was as temperate as he was. Although it's clear that Marx believed that there should be a rational constraint upon how many hours workers should be required to work, this notion is not by any means peculiar to him and the push for an eight hour day by the groups I mentioned earlier was not an outgrowth of Communist doctrine. 'Eight hours for work, eight hours for rest, and eight hours for what we will,' was the rallying cry of workers who did not want their lives to be 'sweated from birth until life closes.' Robert Paul The Reed Institute ------------------------------------------------------------------