• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -312 hours ago

    What relevance does this have to James Carville?

    Worth noting almost the totality of the increase of productivity from the late 1970s- present are tied to technological improvements in the factory. The worker hasn’t become more productive the machines have which is why it is important for the workers to own the means of production as it avoids this payment issue.

    • @grue
      link
      English
      411 hours ago

      The relevancy it has is his strategy was successful when the US was still riding on the coattails of the New Deal and Great Society and was still perceived as being relatively egalitarian. But as inequality and worker exploitation got worse and worse and worse and worse AND WORSE, electing third-way neoliberal fuckwads doesn’t work quite so well anymore!

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        010 hours ago

        That’s a massive stretch given these things happened 14 years before Carville was running Clinton’s campaign.

        • @grue
          link
          English
          410 hours ago

          The point is not that the problem started with Clinton (because it obviously didn’t); the point is that Clinton running on “third way” neoliberalism was still a viable strategy because the effects weren’t being widely felt yet.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            010 hours ago

            Which is also not true and doesn’t align with the economic history of the late 1970-early 1980s in the USA.

            Why do you keep misusing the term “third way”? Are you under the impression that neoliberalism and fascist economics are intertwined?