Class Privilege

I thought about class privilege when I saw the film, The Titanic, last night. Again. I was struck by Spielberg's 1997 depiction of class in the early 20th Century--and how that society, so separated by class (First Class to Steerage) was the image, exactly, of what the radical conservatives would like to return to, now, in this 21st century.

The attitude of class privilege that would lock access gates from steerage to the higher decks on the Titanic was again on display in the US Senate last week, where Republicans refused to consider a simple minimum wage bill, and tried to load it down with amendments that would cut taxes for their constituents, the wealthy corporations (although they call it "tax relief for small business"), knowing they could kill the bill entirely--but they don't care; it's just those poor people! We've come a long way from the New Deal, which passed the first minimum wage in 1938, contained within the Fair Labor Standards Act.

However, the minimum wage is only one of the many legal landmarks set by the New Deal and other Democratic, or progressive administrations that were acts to break down the barriers of class privilege. Republicans have either tried to dismantle them, or to ignore them (the minimum wage fits the latter, since Republicans have allowed its value to erode, rather than do anything about it): there is a whole list of items, but prominent among them is Social Security, Anti-trust (passed by the Republican Roosevelt), and banking regulations.

This page is not about that long list, but about an attitude, a perception that was well expressed by Spielberg in The Titanic: men of class privilege and wealth believed then that they deserved the class privilege, deserved the wealth. They actively suppressed any attempts by those without (since labeled "have-nots") to dismantle the handicaps set against them--like breaking down those steel gates that kept steerage passengers below decks even when the ship was sinking.

Parenthetically, the separation created by early 20th century class privilege, is also very reminiscent of the class privilege and separation enjoyed by the Senators of fifth century Rome. (See link class privilege) The "war on drugs," and the "war on terror," are partly aspects of the very skilled campaign of the better off to re-establish class privilege and to undo the progressive dismantling of it. Minimizing welfare was certainly part of this campaign, as are the attacks on affirmative action and the attempts to privatize virtually everything--including what remains of welfare--and to make prisons into a new private industrial sector.

Think about it: while every kind of scholarship program has been cut back, while welfare has been cut and cut, welfare for corporations is alive and well, and prison labor is one industry that is growing. Further, the US actually subsidizes corporate export of jobs (making workers vulnerable to exploitation), and the import of oil; its defense complex, larger than almost all other countries' combined, now takes over half a trillion dollars of taxpayers' money, much of it going into private pockets, huge amounts skimmed by the highest executives and the largest shareholders. Heard about Halliburton's cost-plus contracts, in which the corporation rakes off 10-20% of profits above what its subcontractors earn? Subcontractors, in turn, are encouraged to inflate costs, since 10% of a million is ten times 10% of 100,000 (or $100,000 and $10,000, respectively: either would fulfill the contract).

Class privilege however, has to have ever expanding horizons; that's why privatization in every sector is necessary.

Take education: while the No Child Left Behind Act mandates "measurable" improvements in education, the government doesn't adequately fund anything but the tests used in the "measurement," thereby condemning inner city and poor rural children to inferior education, "failing schools" and leaky school roofs, but opening up a great new business sector for the testing companies. The act also skews the content of education, since schools on the edge are reduced to "teaching to the test." If they "fail" they can be privatized, another "business opportunity."

Leave No Child Behind makes a certain twisted sense, if you want to increase the advantages of the privileged, and also their wealth. It reduces the education given the masses to those discrete facts and skills that will enable them to pass a standardized test. Kids aren't taught to think for themselves, which could be dangerous to the privileged; they are taught "the answers." They are socialized to be passive and obedient, good skills for employers who want a subservient and compliant workforce.

Oh, we've made progress! The wealthy don't flaunt their wealth quite as openly as they did in 1900; driveways are much longer, and they don't have flamboyant dinners on horseback, like the robber barons of old. But the concentration of wealth is greater, apparently (measures of wealth are difficult to obtain), since, for the first time, in 2006, Forbes' 500 wealthiest included only billionaires.

But the privileged still have a lot of work to do. The "awful" unrest and turmoil unleashed in the 1960's has made it much more difficult to keep servants--unless they are illegal aliens--and poor people are still too uppity--they won't accept demeaning, mind-numbing and dangerous jobs, except for those in the military--

Hey, that's why we've got to increase the size of the army and marines! Yes, the Global War on Terra is Republican welfare--and the Republican response to raising the minimum wage, too. It's why we have to "stay the course" "forward" in Iraq, and why we should attack Iran, even if we have to manufacture the reasons--just as Bush did in Iraq.

After all, how else is the US going to employ all those people! And keep them down. People could be a clear and present danger--to Bush's "have-mores."

Better any policy that will teach those people to be afraid of sticking their necks out (The Patriot Act, torture, the power to detain even citizens indefinitely); we could have a full-fledged Revolution if we're not careful! It would really be better if people didn't "exercise their rights" like those measly hundred thousands marching on Washington, opposing the war and calling for Congress to stop funding it. But, ultimately, you can just hear the Republicans and their allies say of those peace protesters: "Pay no attention to them. Obviously they're not important; they haven't even enlisted "Democrat" leaders."

It is imperative, they say, that we stay the course, by maintaining the imperial war and its war machine. The reason they say that is that it's all part of the project to bring back the good old class system that their grandparents knew and loved. And to enrich their grandparents' descendants.