Class happens when some men, as a result of common experiences (inherited or shared), feel and articulate the identity of their interests as between themselves, and as against other men whose interests are different from (and usually opposed to) theirs.
“Class” is a touchy subject in American political parlance. Any talk of class – apart from the purely descriptive sense of the term whose main purpose is taxonomical, to tell you where you stand along the American hierarchy of values and our peculiar measure of success – is bound to be disturbing because it runs counter to the American Spirit, the idea that we can become whomever we want to become, that there’s no stopping us if we’re ambitious and enterprising enough, that the sky is the limit. But you know the rest. The American Dream writ large is the incarnation.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - S.T.M
Actually, now is the winter of our discount tents.
27 - roger nowosielski
Right, since OWS is hibernating.
28 - roger nowosielski
So Anarcissie, how far did you get with the Graeber book? What do you make of it thus far?
29 - S.T.M
El Bicho, yes that IS a great version of Richard III. I don't know whether you've spent any time in England, but the sttings are quite surreal as they use well-known landmarks that have been moved to different locations to suit the story.
Alternate history isn't my go generally but this is an excellent idea that works well with a great cast, and it has historiacl and cultural context given that Edward Mosely, the leader of the British Union of Fascists, was quite a powerful figure in British politics in the 1930s, mirroring as he did the rise of Hitler in Nazi Germany.
Mosely was never going to achieve what Hitler did, as the British are champions of personal freedoms, liberty and freedom of speech - but there WAS a divide in that period and many aristocrats and members of the upper classes actually thought fascist ideology might have provided the answer to the woes besetting Vritain and the rest of the world at that time.
Of course, Mosely's support dropped to virtually nothing once Hitler started dropping bombs on Warsaw, Rotterdam, and London - but against that backdrop and in the context of this play, one could easily imagine the rise of a powerful far-right figure in Britain at that time had Hitler NOT sent his war machine across Europe.
Setting it to the battle between the houses of York and Lancaster is perfect as the big difference would have been in comparison to Germany, had such a scenario come about in Britain, there would almost certainly have been bloodshed between the two such diameterically opposed factions ... the oppressors and the freedom fighters.
There are different camps but I am one of those who likes the cross-cultural, trans-Atlantic reference within the film to Britain's closeness with the US, which is especially fitting for that period. Anette Bening is magic.
That is why the film works so well on so many levels. A fantastic Shakespeare what-if.
The cast and crew must have had a ball making it, too. I think that comes through in the film.
As a person immensely proud of my British heritage and a grateful inheritor of an extraordinary REAL history, such an eery alternate version of what might have been is very eery indeed. Magnificent stuff.
Thanks for reminding me: It's been a long time since I've seen it and I finish work late tonight so I'll be at a loose end for a few hours and will now watch it again.
Cheers.
30 - roger nowosielski
Revolution Through Banking."
One of OWS's projects.
31 - El Bicho
Spent about a week there doing touristy things plus have seen a bit from TV and movies over the years. I know a little of British history and the updated setting certainly seemed plausible, especially since this version was the first I had seen of the play.
Also, I am a huge fan of McKellan, who plays such a great villain here. I got to see him give a powerful performance in Ibsen's An Enemy of The People back in summer of '98 and was very impressed.
32 - roger nowosielski
Rather surprising that Bergman didn't do any films to speak of on Ibsen.
33 - roger nowosielski
Still, I think it was rather far fetched to cast Richard III, mod version, in England. Why not the pre-war Germany?
34 - El Bicho
Off the top of my head, I can't think of a film Bergman directed that he didn't write. He directed theater though so he might have worked on one of Ibsen's plays there.
McKellan's version works better than you think in its setting, so I'll be curious if you hold the same opinion after you see it.
35 - roger nowosielski
Thus far all I could access is some clips. I may order it from Netflix.
36 - S.T.M
It really does work, Rog. There are little nuances that people might miss if they are not thoroughly up to date on British history, which might be especially unofortunate if you were American because one actually relates to an American.
Annette Bening plays the American-born Queen of Edward. It's a hisorical reference as during that time in the real history, the real King Edward abdicated the throne to marry his american lover Wallis Simpson. The paradox here, though, is that the real Edward might have been an admirer of Hitler pre-war at least, while George, who took over the throne afterwards, hated the Nazis. But during that time in the 1930s, American and British society had a lot of cross-cultural mixing. Possibly the two nations were closer on that level than they'd ever been. Certainly, what went on in Britain in that era was heavily reported in the US media, and vice-versa. Even Churchill had an American mother.
So while it might look far fetched at first glance to have an American Queen in that setting, and her brother doing battle with Richard, it's actually not that far from the truth.
It's another little reason why it works on every level. You should get it Rog ... it's well worth it.
37 - roger nowosielski
Well, sure, many in the US were Nazi sympathizers too -- strong word -- and only reluctantly joined the war effort. Not to mention the strong linguistic and cultural ties between England and Germany, as well as industrial interests.
Hitler was hoping the British would be his allies. He considered them as part of the master race,
Happy New Years, Stan.
38 - S.T.M
Same to you Rog. Cheers. I'm off to work (It's 10.44am Wednesday here).
39 - S.T.M
And before I go, the one thing I'll always be proud of as a person of British background is that the Old Country not once but twice stood up and refused to back down to German militarism in the space of 25 years, and at enormous cost to her people. There were almost no families in Britain and what was left of its empire during the two world wars who hadn't lost someone.
In the case of Nazism, it wasn't a case of should we, but we have to. To me, that is what Britain will be remembered for in history ... not for having a global empire, but for standing up for what was right no matter how unpalatable.
It's also why Brits (and Aussies etc) still have a lot of time for their American cousins, who eventually did the same thing when the time finally came.
The Russians, not so much, but their entry into the war was slightly different. They had originally been allies of Germany and hopeful of getting a big slice of Europe in the carve up with the Nazis 'til Hitler turned around and bit them on the arse.
You lie down with dogs, you get fleas, as both Germany and Russia discovered to their mutual misery.
40 - roger nowosielski
I would be too if I were you, proud that is. But I've nothing to be ashamed of either. The Poles have always fought for liberty.
I'm rather less hard on the Russians, though. I don't think Stalin had militaristic ambitions insofar as "conquering the world." Forging a socialistic regime was headache enough. I think all he hoped to get from Hitler is a pact of non-aggression, that's all.
Don't forget, the Western powers have done all they could to boycott the post-revolutionary Russia so as to bring her on her knees.
41 - Glenn Contrarian
Roger -
I don't think Stalin had militaristic ambitions insofar as "conquering the world."
Before WWII, maybe he didn't - I don't recall any indication that he did. After WWII, however, I think it's pretty incontrovertible that he had every intention of doing so - not so much by military force, but by proxy as is evidenced by the many Soviet-funded and -supplied rebellions in Asia, Europe, Africa, and South America.
But you're right - the Poles have very few blemishes on their record.
42 - roger nowosielski
I was talking of the World War II era. The Cold War is another proposition, but even then, it was more a matter of exerting influence rather than conquest. Not to mention, China was another geopolitical enemy.
In any case, Stalin was long gone by then.
43 - Cindy
Roger,
I think I really get your article. Let me tell you that today, I was writing down some thoughts on matriarchy and what I was writing was about how when love is not a part of the decisions we make that involve other people, whatever we create is not humane or just or workable for all.
It seems to me whether we are speaking of simple opinions--whether or not the old should have pensions or people should have maternity leave--or we are making any other level of pronouncement, procedure, proclaimation, decree, rule, or law, it is not just if love is not considered the overruling guide by which we make the decision.
I read your article aloud to my mother and when I got to the last paragraph, needless to say I was amazed by the synchronicity.
Thanks, Roger, for being in my world.
44 - roger nowosielski
My goodness, Cindy, so happy you're back. Tell the truth, I never communicated online better than with you. You can't imagine how much I missed you.
Hope you're doing reasonably well.
45 - STM
Stalin joined in the carve up of Poland with Hitler.
The British Empire went to war in 1939 after warning Germany in an ultimatum that if it didn't withdraw its forces from Poland by a certain date and time, a state of war would exist between Britain and Germany.
Needless to say, the Germans didn't withdraw so Britain and France declared war on Germany. France could have nipped WWII in the bud there and then as it had one of the largest armed forces in the world at the time, and had they crossed the border, they would have forced Germany into a war on two fronts it couldn't have won with the resources it had at that time.
But the French had suffered two million dead in World War I so you can understand their reluctance at that stage to move beyond sabre rattling. When they did go to fight, in 1940, it was too late and theb Germans had built an unstoppable war machine. The only ones left to do the fighting were the British, and they were woefully unprepared except at sea and in the air.
Many tens of thousands of Poles fought the entire span of WWII with the British armed forces after escaping the German invasion of Poland. Some went to unbelievable lengths to do so, such as walking thousands of kilometres through occupied Europe.
All those who did were offered British citizenship afterwards, and given that Poland was forced to live under the Russian boot for decades during the Cold War, most chose to stay there. I went to school in England for a while in the 60s and one of my schoolmates was the son of a Pole who fought for the British.
There are plenty of your countrymen who found better lives in the UK and the US and Canada, Australia and New Zealand after the war. Many ended up working on a huge hydro-electric scheme here in the Snowy Mountains. Another schoolfriend here in Oz was of Polish background.
He was a whole lot madder and wilder than the other bloke, though. He was a very tough bugger too.
I have a mate of Italian background whose Dad grew tomatoes in his garden. One day he came home to find our Polish friend Stefan hiding in the garden scoffing down a whole lot of nice ripe tomatoes formerly destined for the cooking pot. He didn't know what to say, so he just said to him: "Aren't you going to put salt on those?"
To which our Polish friend replied: "You're right. Can I have some?"
Poles I have known and loved. Apart from my own.
46 - roger nowosielski
Well, yes. Pols and the Russkies were always at war. I still think the socialist's state main concern was to be let alone. They weren't in the position yet to make any world conquest.
The carving out of Poland wasn't a new idea anyway. It had happened on more than one occasion, us having been stuck between the barbaric East and the rapacious West.
The way I look at it, it's just an old meme.
47 - STM
Stalin was both barbaric AND rapacious. A very nast piece of work indeed. Stalinism and Nazism belong in the same dumpster of nasty ideologies that have been consigned to the wastebin of world history.
48 - roger nowosielski
Sure he was both. I wasn't talking however about his personal graces, only about that moment in the Soviet history.
But then again, being part Russian, perhaps I have a blind spot. I'm willing to admit it.
49 - roger nowosielski
@34
I checked the filmography, El Bicho, re: Ibsen's plays. Bergman didn't figure in any of the film productions, don't know about theater, though.
The one film I saw was Wild Duck. (Ugly Duckling is another rendition from Swedish. I believe I saw the German production, not the one with Liv Ulmann, and it was electrifying.
And here's the info on An Enemy of the People. I think I did see the Steve McQueen version.
50 - roger nowosielski
And here's a review on the Ulmann movie, and a good many references besides.
51 - roger nowosielski
Re: the Polish-English connection, Stan, yes, one of my uncles was flying for the RAF and at the end of the war, married a Scottish gal and settled in Edinburgh. So I do have relations in the UK, including the mainland as well.
52 - roger nowosielski
Just so you know I ain't lying, here's one:
Charles Nowosielski, so you know my handle is legit too.
Must be missing my calling, though, cranking our the stupid articles here for the hoi poloi.
It's time to write a play. Fuck the intellect. Go for the jugular.
53 - Glenn Contrarian
Roger -
At the Stephens Pass Ski Resort here in Washington, the restaurant has a sign posted: "No skis or poles allowed". Of course it's referring to the skiing equipment, but one of my closest friends (who is a -ski) got a belly-laugh out of it.
Also, his son is in the Army and used to hang out with the Polish NATO contingent in Afghanistan.
54 - roger nowosielski
I don't commend those fuckers, because the current Poles have sold their soul to the company store.
You know of course I was talking about the Hitler menace.
55 - roger nowosielski
But that's OK. "Ski" epithet was the mildest when I was in the service.
"Novascotia" and "alphabet" were far more common, especially among the Alabama boys.
56 - S.T.M
I just had a look at your link Rog ... a Scottish Pole. They're everywhere, the buggers. You can't keep a good Pole down.
They are still admired and remembered in the UK for their sacrifice and courage during the war. They didn't like the Germans much. I find it interesting that it was, what, 70 odd years ago now but it's such a huge part of our collective consciousness (in the US too) that we all still talk about it as if it were yesterday. Even my Gen Y son does, because of his grandfather.
The two longest-surviving WWII veterans in my family both died recently. One flew with the RAAF attached to the RAF in Europe and survived 32 night bombing raids over Germany at a time when the life expectancy of such aircrew was a few weeks; the other fought against the Japanese on a Royal Australian Navy ship attached to the US Pacific fleet. Both were in thick of it and lucky to see out the war. Neither of them liked to talk about it much so we all knew to shut up until they mentioned it.
With their passing, as there are fewer and fewer of those guys left, we lose a bit of living history. The last of the World War I veterans in Oz, a centenarian, died last year (which is remembered as our "greatest generation"), and all the WWII veterans who are left are now well into their eighties or beyond.
I hope when lunatics like OBL and his ilk are flying jets into skyscrapers in NYC or blowing up tourists in Bali or buses and trains in London we don't get lost in the politics of it - and remember why those people don't like us: because we have choice in our lives; because a lot of people gave up their lives or risked their lives to ensure that tyrants didn't rob us of our basic freedoms. That people who don't have those freedoms want to take them away again is a good reminder of the bi-partisan approach we should all be taking in this.
It's a good if painful reminder that the price of freedom really is eternal vigilance. I know it sounds really hokey, but it's as true today as it was in 1939.
Cheers Rog.
57 - roger nowosielski
Well yes, but I don't think he's into Scottish games, like a pole-throwing event, for instance.
58 - roger nowosielski
Fascinating first hour on today's Diane Rehm's show:
In interview with Richard White, the author of Railroaded, a must-listen podcast.
If you think corporate bailouts and political corruption such as we're experiencing today is anything new, brace yourself for a surprise.
The author is an optimist. Just as the events of the late nineteenth century led to a significant reform movement at the turn of the last century, he thinks we will be able to pull another rabbit out of the hat. One only wonders what it would take. Certainly more regulation is no longer the answer because the industries are already being "regulated." What then?
Another significant point of difference which defies drawing too strong a parallelism: we've already gone the full gamut of manufacturing/industrial development; these folks are doing that now in the Third World. Indeed, even most of the investments in new technologies take place in India and China, wherever the costs are the lowest and the return on capital promises to be the greatest.
So c'mmon now, it's one thing to say that the Yanks are innovative and very adept people, but you can't squeeze blood out of a turnip.
59 - roger nowosielski
A review of Richard White's book, as per link above.
A sample:
The excerpt from page 99 concerns the “friendship” that was at the center of so much Gilded Age politics, corruption, and business. Similar networks remain central to modern politics, business, and corruption today. The excerpt below captures much of this, but page 99 breaks off a paragraph that I will complete here: “The key figures of the Gilded Age networks of finance, government, journalism, and business had stumbled like so many vampires on a cultural form (friendship), drained it of its lifeblood (affection), and left it so that it still walked, talked, and served their purposes in the world. Friendship was a code: a network of social bonds that could organize political activity. Affection was not necessary.”
60 - Igor
Sounds about right.
61 - roger nowosielski
Keep on preaching the truth, brother. Human values must be made to prevail over the kind of mentality which puts profits, corporate efficiency and the politics of fear above all else.
62 - roger nowosielski
I'm compelled to provide a link to an article by Ms Rebecca Solnit, "Compassion Is Our New Currency: Notes On 2011s Preoccupied Hearts And Minds."
It should get the article of the year award.
63 - Glenn Contrarian
STM -
Your family still talks about it today because history is still more important to those outside the western hemisphere than it is to us. Why? Because (with the exception of Oz) there are places one can go in nearly any nation in Europe, Asia, and Africa that are a thousand years old or even much older than that, whereas the oldest in NA or SA that is connected to Western culture is no more than 500 y.o. and usually much younger.
Two Filipino friends of mine passed within the past two years - both of whom narrowly escaped being part of the Bataan Death March. I do feel it's a great tragedy when one who has seen and done and been through so much passes away, for so much history has been lost as well.
64 - Dr Dreadful
My wife's great-uncle was a US Army colonel during WW II - and did not escape the Death March.
He wrote a book about his experiences, but he was from Puerto Rico and it was unfortunately only ever published in Spanish.
We've suggested to my mother-in-law, who's bilingual, that she ought to have a go at translating it, but so far she hasn't been so inclined.
65 - One Australian's Apostrophe Rant
Rog: "a pole-throwing event".
Lol. Very funny Rog.
It find the actualy name hilarious too: "Tossing the caber".
Tossing, of course, having a sexual connotation in the UK. Auto eroticism isn't falling in love with yer new Beemer, although I suspect the two things are connected sometimes.
66 - roger nowosielski
Strange you say that, OAAR. The article I just linked to in #62 speaks to different meanings of the term "occupation." One of the usages, prior to the Victorian England, one must suppose, had sexual connotations as well, for which reason it was discontinued for a stretch.
67 - Cindy
Roger,
1) #12 - An important point from Graeber's videos is that if everyone's mortgages had been paid off with the bailout money, it would have served to bail out both the banks and the people.
2) #62 - Rebecca Solnit's article is amazing and a "should read".
3) Another "should see" I discovered after watching the Graeber video is 23 things they don't tell you about capitalism where: "Development economics expert Ha-Joon Chang dispels the myths and prejudices that have come to dominate our understanding of how the world works in a lecture at the RSA." He shows, for example, how there is never a "free market" and how when its proponents simply accept the rules of a market, they then call it a free market and when they do not accept the rules, they then consider the "free market" to be hampered. In essence what is envisioned as a "free market" then, has always only and ever come about through government and rules. Proponents then, appear to simply be in such agreement with the rules of whatever they call a free market, that they do not see that there are rules.
68 - roger nowosielski
Yes, and I'll look at the link in #3.
As a matter of fact, I was going to email you the link to Rebecca's article today, but I'm happy you got hold of it anyway.
BTW, look at the site which features her article in the first place. It's a real find. You can access it by clicking on the first-cited link in the article, which introduces Rebecca's article.
69 - roger nowosielski
Also, you owe it to yourself to listen to the podcast of Diane Rehm's show I linked to earlier. It's proof positive that this government has been corrupt and in collusion with either the propertied class and later, the industrialists, almost from the get-go.
So there's nothing really new about what we're witnessing today, except perhaps that we the people are becoming more and more aware of what's really going on in the corridors of power. Furthermore, I don't believe America can recover from this toxic capitalism-liberalism combo this time around (as it had after the railroad debacle); no amount of reforms can change the beast; and we certainly can't count on Mr. Capitalist to create another era of American prosperity to keep the people at bay: he'd already given up on on the good ole USA, having squeezed all the profit he possibly could, his investments are mostly in the "underdeveloped countries."
So as Mao would say, the situation is excellent.
70 - roger nowosielski
@67 #3
Right, Cindy. The entire RSA series is a good one.
I like this one even better, by Dave Harvey.
71 - roger nowosielski
Cindy,
You also want to look at this, Harvey on the Crisis, in two parts:
part one
part two
Interestingly, Harvey anticipates OWS here, especially when he talks of "democratization of our cities" as well as of there being a fertile ground for a wide reaching, global movement.
72 - Igor
I was surprised by Rogers apparent naivete in #58:
"Certainly more regulation is no longer the answer because the industries are already being "regulated."
Satisfactory regulation requires a constant effort by society, and constantly passing new regulations as industry lawyers find new ways around old regulations and more bribe friendly politicians to corrupt.
Of course industry is willing to hire more lawyers and bribe more officials because the ROI is VERY high. A little bit of bribe money buys a lot of influence and favors.
S.T.M. in #56 gives the answer as "eternal vigilance", etc., and he's right.
There is no end to this. The struggle between citizens and the corporations that would oppress them is constant and eternal. That's the way it is in a society, such as ours, that honors strife and competition above all else.
73 - roger nowosielski
@ 72
I'm quite present, no thank you, so you can address me in the first person.
It may be naivete if you're willing to have more of the same. In that case, eternal vigilance may be the answer, but it's a lame answer because you still haven't escaped the vicious circle.
So the trick is either to bypass the corporations (as they're presently structured), or to restructure them so they'd approximate what may be called a "public corporation," along the Marxian lines, so that the producers are the stockholders and total control.
In case you didn't know, I am a Marxist insofar as organization of the means of production is concerned.
So it's far from naive what I said. It would be naive were I to resign myself to the existing economic arrangements and praxis as though something inevitable and forever written in stone. Obviously I don't!
The moral of the story, you shouldn't judge the book by its cover.
74 - Paul Christoforo Jr
Roger, do run your own business? I assume not because if you did, you wouldn't be a Marxist. Why not get a job instead of being a bum?
75 - roger nowosielski
Yes, I have, Paul Jr., for over twenty five years. Have you?
And what makes you think I need a job?
Seems you're suffering from constipated thinking if all you can do is jump to conclusions on not a scintilla of evidence, or a very insecure person, probably both.