[lit-ideas] Re: Marxi's influence in America
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 15:18:11 -0800
Irene,
I can see you put a cake out in the rain, but it isn't mine. I was talking
about Marxist influence in America, not Communist, in the previous note. I
mentioned the Communists in passing and then said that they weren't very
influential in our labor movements. It's all right there in the note you
quote beneath your own.
The Civil War was begun over States Rights and not Slavery. Lincoln became
convinced during the Civil War that slavery should be abolished..
I wouldn't call the present day Chinese "quite Communist." They are
totalitarian but are allowing freedom in business matters. Whether this
freedom in part will work in the long run is doubtful.
Lawrence
_____
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Andy Amago
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 3:06 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Marxi's influence in America
I hate to keep putting your cake out in the rain, but when these so called
Marxists were so influential, the U.S. was a great power. Since the 80's
the U.S. gradually went downhill and since the neocons it plummeted with
soaring debt, misguided use of power, cities that literally need other
countries to help them out and a military run ragged by an insurgency. You
conflate Marxism with the Soviet system. The Soviet state may have had
stated Marxist goals, but they were just a totalitarian horror story. It's
a stretch to even call them a government. Also, Lawrence, how do you
explain that the Chinese are wielding capitalism like they were born into
it, and they are quite Communist. We can skip the Iraq part, since we all
know your thoughts on that. BTW, the Civil War was about slavery, not
states rights, or states rights to have slavery if you insist.
----- Original Message -----
From: Lawrence <mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Helm
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 2/7/2006 5:21:27 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Marxi's influence in America
Robert,
Sorry, I didn't intend to imply that anything was settled just that the
matters were discussed. Its 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.< /SPAN>
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 incorpo rated 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,
Marxs 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 Teamsters Union and worked part time out of the Teamsters 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 Parkinsons 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 didnt 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 wasnt 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
Other related posts:
