[microsound] history of the middle class

[Kim Cascone <kim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> I think that the 'Middle Class' was a tactical construction to combat
> the growing threat of Marxism in the Post-WWII Western world.
well it's a complex issue
post WWII american businesses found that there would be difficulty in  
'opening' european markets due to the proliferation of workers unions
which was an outgrowth of and directly influenced by communist/ 
socialist/anarchist/marxist (I'll call this 'leftist' for ease of  
typing) parties
so the US devised this program called the Marshall Plan
which had two purposes:
one was the help rebuild europe (in our own likeness) thereby  
establishing markets for the US overproduction of goods
the other was to bust the unions and discourage 'leftist' political  
philosophy from spreading in europe
thus making it cheaper for american businesses to operate there

in order to understand the US situation you need to read a little  
about labor unions in the US
most unions were rank and file pretty much 'leftist'

while leftists have always had problems here in the US post- 
industrial revolution
it wasn't until after WWII and the start of the cold war
that the US started to bust the unions here as well
witness the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947

shortly afterwards McCarthy was made the head witch-hunter of the red  
scare
and further made it verboten to be a leftist and/or join a union  
without suspicion of being a communist

so when you use the term 'middle class'
you have to realize that the term changed its meaning over the years  
(~20C onwards)
from meaning blue collar/working class
to a more inclusive term meaning blue and white collar workers
so middle class was not something that was invented in the US
but rather is a stratification which occurs under capitalism


> Because socialist trends were developing and outright during the first
> half of the 20th Century, there was a growing concern that the unruly
> masses would rebel and take down the Bourgeoisie class.
not really the bourgeoisie but the elite, ruling class, the  
capitalists, the wealthy, the captains of industry

> The easiest solution to this was to extend the concept of 'property
> ownership' to include niceties like washing machines, personal
> vehicles, houses, and the like.
in marxism the phrase 'private property' doesn't refer to cars,  
appliances, etc
this often confuses people
'private property' refers to the 'means of production' owned by  
capitalists
i.e., it is privately owned and not state owned
private property refers to the printing presses, assembly lines,  
automotive plants, steel foundries, etc owned by private corporations
the items you mention are better termed 'commodities'
the phenomenon you refer to is called 'commodity fetishism' (the  
desire to own goods aroused by marketing rather than need)

> Then the dominant class could point to
> these trinkets (which by no means match the real idea of property
> ownership in terms of means of production)
see above

> and say, 'the Commies want
> to take away your right to own these things,' and thus scare the lowly
> serfs into protecting their minuscule treasures from the Red Devils.
yes...but this is because they twisted the meaning of private property
this is often used to further try and spread misinformation about  
leftist politics
it is the means of production that should belong to the state which  
is made up of the people
which we have mini-me versions of in the US in the form of workers  
collectives and cooperatives



> So, in a sense, Marx DID predict the future.
marx wasn't the first to have figured out where all this was  
headed...there were other thinkers in England and France who had  
covered similar ground but were less well known


> But by writing it down,
> the elite power structure was able to hedge the flow of history by
> offering a palatable alternative by leveraging marketing, debt, and
> greed.
that all depends on what you mean by a palatable alternative...?
is capitalism really a palatable alternative to self-governed autonomy?

you also have to figure into this the aspect of societal control  
exercised by religion which set a precedent in offering consolation  
to the down-trodden and needy
while it kept aristocracy and merchants and church elite fat and  
powerful for many years before capitalism evolved (due to mass  
production via machines)
once a system of control is in place is it easy to replace or expand  
that system

capitalism is anathema to what it started out to be: a system of self- 
correcting free markets which would benefit all citizens who  
participated
it has turned into corporate feudalism in which only the top 2%  
benefit at the expense of the rest




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org