On 6/4/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Cue the Sandwichman . . .
"Cue" the S'man? This dude's CHANNELIN' me, man (although much of what he recounts is from my Iowa pal, Ben Hunnicutt). I will add one thing, though. Note the role of the National Association of Manufacturers in opposing leisure (Edgerton), enlisting "scholars" as propaganda dupes and generally pimping the Gospel of Consumption. To which I would like to append: lumpoflabor. The economics textbooks of the 1920s, 30s and 40s positively brimmed with TOTALLY BOGUS tales about the unions' rationale for shorter working time. How does a false claim get such wide circulation (over a hundred textbooks, several hundred other books)? Or, more precisely, how does a false claim that echoes a specific organization's ideological agenda get such wide circulation? Or to be even more precise: how does a false claim that echoes a specific organization's ideological agenda -- said organization having set up vast facilities and resources dedicated to propaganda -- get such wide circulation? Why this should matter to progressive economists. The big lumpoflabor libel/lie may today seem like mere anachronistic background noise. That is only half the story. The other half of the story is the suppression of the ACTUAL AFofL union theory (Steward/Gunton) and the ACTUAL neoclassical analysis of the hours of labor (Chapman). The whole point of the lumpoflabor claim, in my estimation, was simply to create enough noise to drown out an unwelcome truth (which I might add, corroborates a central element of Marx's analysis, albeit from a non-revolutionary, non-socialist perspective). The NAM will have achieved its purpose as long as progressive economists, labor activists and the left in general doesn't revisit and recuperate the Steward/Gunton and Chapman theories. "It may be that the world's needs ultimately will be produced by three days' > work a week". > > John E Edgerton, president of the National Association of Manufacturers, > typified their > response when he declared: "I am for everything that will make work happier > but against everything that will further subordinate its importance. The > emphasis should be put on work - more work and better work." "Nothing", he > claimed, "breeds radicalism more than unhappiness > unless it is leisure". > > In response, the industrial elite represented by NAM, including General > Motors, the big steel companies, General Foods, DuPont, and others, decided > to create their own propaganda. An internal NAM memo called for "re-selling > all of the individual Joe Doakes on the advantages and > benefits he enjoys under a competitive economy". NAM launched a massive > public relations campaign it called the "American Way". As the minutes of a > NAM meeting described it, the purpose of the campaign was to link "free > enterprise in the public consciousness with free speech, free press and free > religion as integral parts of democracy". > > NAM formed a national network of groups to ensure that the booklet from J > Walter Thompson and similar material appeared in libraries and school > curricula across the country. The campaign also placed favorable articles in > newspapers (often citing "independent" scholars who were paid secretly) and > created popular magazines and film shorts directed to children and adults > with such titles as "Building Better Americans", "The Business of America's > People Is Selling", and "America Marching On". > > If we want to save the Earth, we must also save ourselves from ourselves. > We can start by sharing the work and the wealth. We may just find that there > is plenty of both to go around. > -- Sandwichman
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
