."
Edwards has, correctly, focused on the decline in U.S. factory work. Such
employment with union membership means higher wages and benefits.
He has faulted trade pacts such as the NAFTA that Democratic senator and
leading presidential contender John Kerry has backed. NAFTA and other trade
agreements have helped U.S. corporations to move factories out of the nation
to poor countries.
Think that Kerry's voting record on trade deterred the leadership of the
AFL-CIO, the big labor organization, from endorsing him to beat President
Bush in the fall? Then think again.
"The time has come to unite behind one man, one leader, one candidate," said
John Sweeny, AFL-CIO president. That man is Kerry.
Along with him, President Bush backs the expansion of NAFTA-like trade
agreements. Presumably, such pacts are the path to prosperity.
Just ask Bush's top economist, N. Gregory Mankiw. He recently praised the
outsourcing of U.S. jobs abroad to low-wage nations such as China and India.
Mankiw oversaw a yearly report to Congress that forecast the U.S economy
would create 2.6 million new jobs by the end of 2004. That same report also
asks (but does not answer) a question about the federal government
redefining fast food work as manufacturing work.
Fast food jobs are likely to be non-union in contrast to unionized factory
employment. Thus wages and benefits in the former sector are usually lower
than in the latter sector.
Crucially, the Bush White House's forecast of 2.6 million new jobs to be
created this year is about the same number of jobs, largely in
manufacturing, that have been lost during the past three years. Supposedly
in the president's fourth year, the U.S. is on the cusp of a jobs boom.
Well, backing more equality and less poverty for U.S. workers, in unions or
not, means that there is an opponent to struggle against. Identifying this
adversary, corporate America, is key to building a politics of working-class
unity.
On that note, Americans' support for Edwards' "economic populism" is
revealing. Part of what we see forming is a national identity based on the
living and working standards of the many.
Trying to weaken this trend is a domesticated media. It excels in creating
mystification about the capitalist system.
Likewise, the privatizing of public schools can be a way to create confusion
about the system. Education should not be a way to make people accept
corporate domination.
Back to Kerry. His support of trade agreements that have put U.S.
manufacturing and service workers into direct competition with lower-paid
foreign labor has helped the profitability of corporate America.
It benefits in this way from policies of government intervention in the
market under Democratic and GOP administrations. That is how unity works
between corporate America and national politicians.
If the struggle to reduce inequality is a battle to expand democracy, then
the forces on the other side of the American majority are reactionary. In
that spirit, the AFL-CIO's strategy of endorsing Kerry for the Democratic
presidential nomination has its limitations.
For example, the labor organization is now limited in its ability to force
Kerry to pursue a policy that stems the corporate-led attack on the American
working class. It must not fault Chinese and Indian workers on the payrolls
of corporate America.
Seth Sandronsky is a member of Sacramento Area Peace Action and co-editor with 'Because People Matter', Sacramento's progressive paper. He can be reached at: ssandron@hotmail.com
###