[[link removed]]

THE EFFECT OF CLASS CONSCIOUSNESS ON POLITICAL PREFERENCES  
[[link removed]]


 

D. W. Livingstone
June 30, 2024
Jacobin
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ Political preferences are often discussed through a
one-size-fits-all middle-class lens. But empirical data shows that
class significantly influences voting patterns, with growing class
consciousness driving dissatisfaction with established parties. _

Empirical studies suggest that more people have pro-labor than
pro-capital class consciousness. (Scott Olson / Getty Images), Scott
Olson / Getty Images

 

Karl Marx’s most profound insight was recognizing how commodity
fetishism — the fixation on simple commodities themselves —
obscures the ways that workers’ labor shapes most commodities and
generates the profits, or surplus value, that capitalists obsessively
compete for. This competition is the essential driving force of the
capitalist mode of production.

 

In advanced capitalist states, most mainstream political parties
engage in a form of political fetishism. These parties portray
themselves as constituted by and representing the general citizenry,
with policies and candidates addressing the social demands of the
majority. But it is now well documented from a range
[[link removed]] of critical
[[link removed]] political
perspectives
[[link removed]] that
ruling mainstream parties in many countries continually legislate
policies and allocate resources that largely serve the interests of
political elites, with minimal response to the needs of the majority.
The strategic political relations that shape many policies and
resource allocations are largely hidden from view and obscured from
most voters.

Marx’s early view that the modern state was merely the executive arm
of the bourgeoisie was later developed into a more complex
understanding of class relations within and against the state. With
the advent of mass production, the industrial working class attained a
critical mass sufficient to form its own organizations, including the
Chartists in England and the first labor party in the world, founded
in the United States in 1828
[[link removed]].
These parties directly pursued working-class agendas. Many leftists
then and since have acted in the hope that democratic class struggle
would lead to political transformation toward socialism.

Marx’s early view that the modern state was merely the executive arm
of the bourgeoisie was later developed into a more complex
understanding of class relations within and against the state.

For nearly two centuries, the capitalist state, established to protect
private property rights, has made concessions to social rights
demanded by hired workers, especially in places with highly organized
labor movements and social democratic political parties. Nevertheless,
massive resources continue to be devoted primarily to advertising and
promoting fetishized capitalist economic and political interests. In
the few cases where transformative movements have posed a political
threat, they have been diverted or undermined through the ideological
and coercive force of corporate capitalists and their allies.

Hidden Levels of Class Consciousness

Researchers and pundits from both the Left and the Right now assume
that class consciousness among workers is muted to the point of
irrelevance for political issues in advanced capitalism. The
prevailing assumptions are tautological: either there is little actual
class consciousness, so political parties have no constituency to
shape platforms around class issues, or established political parties
avoid class issues, so people have no popular forums to develop and
express class consciousness. Consequently, there is little research
attention given to the actual relationship between class consciousness
and political party preferences. Recent research
[[link removed]] has
found minimal associations between objective class positions or class
identity and party preferences, further perpetuating the tautology.

There is a growing consensus
[[link removed]] around
the tripartite character of the employment class structure in advanced
capitalism, including owners, managers and nonmanagerial employees.
The decline of industrial workers and the growth of professional
employees (or “knowledge workers”) are also now widely recognized.
Middle-class identity has become much more widespread in the wake of
mass commodity consumption and increasing visibility of both the
affluent rich and the destitute poor. But most empirical research on
class consciousness has largely ignored the most powerful corporate
capitalists and upper managers, conflated managers and professional
employees, and focused primarily on culturally hegemonic middle-class
identity. Little wonder that relations between class and class
consciousness have been found to be very modest.

We can distinguish two higher and often hidden levels of class
consciousness: oppositional consciousness and class-based visions of
society. Oppositional consciousness involves holding class interests
opposed to another class: primarily either pro-capital or pro-labor.
Class-based consciousness involves holding visions of society that
align with class interests, primarily either a hegemonic capitalist
vision of a continuing profit-driven, management-led economy, or a
revolutionary labor vision of a nonprofit economy with worker
self-management.

 

Many leftist intellectuals now believe that working people generally
hold a contradictory oppositional consciousness, enfeebled by dominant
bourgeois ideology, and are unable to conceive of any real alternative
to capitalism. This is far from the whole truth. The few national
surveys that have addressed these questions have found
[[link removed]]:

* People with a progressive pro-labor oppositional consciousness
(unconditionally supporting the right to strike and opposing profit
maximization) significantly outnumber those with pro-capital class
consciousness (unconditionally opposing the right to strike and
supporting profit maximization), and the number of pro-labor
supporters appears to be increasing.
* Those with a revolutionary labor consciousness (which combines
pro-labor oppositional consciousness with a vision of anonprofit
economy and worker self-management), comprise a small but growing
group. This group is much larger than those whose visions clearly
defend existing capitalist conditions.

The proportions of people with pro-labor oppositional consciousness
are likely minorities in all advanced capitalist countries currently,
and those with revolutionary labor consciousness are likely less than
20 percent everywhere. However, these numbers are substantial and
appear to be increasing amid current ecological, economic, and
political crises. They significantly outnumber defenders of capitalism
who hold a class-conscious position.

The capitalist state has made concessions to social rights demanded by
hired workers, especially in places with highly organized labor
movements and social democratic political parties.

The reproduction of the liberal democratic capitalist state is less
reliant on class-conscious defenders and more on working people with
pragmatic class consciousness — those who may accept profit
maximization with certain conditions or support the right to strike
under specific circumstances, and perceive no viable alternative to
capitalism. However, small groups with coherent progressive visions
and commitment to sustained nonviolent political action have
been very successful
[[link removed]] in
leading political movements for change on many issues over the past
century. The central question remains: How is class consciousness
related to views on political issues and support for political
parties?

Class Consciousness and Politics

This issue of poverty reduction has historically been highly divisive
in many advanced capitalist countries. The affluent tend to view
poverty as an individual responsibility, while the less well-to-do
point to general economic conditions. In recent decades, with
increasingly conspicuous wealth and visible impoverishment, there has
been a general increase in support for poverty reduction in many
countries. The relations between broader forms of class consciousness
and such sentiments of support for the poor in Canada in 1982 and 2016
show pronounced and increasing differences, as summarized below.

Support for poverty reduction by class consciousness in Canada, 1982
and 2016.

Over the period, general agreement on need for poverty support
measures increased from two-thirds to over 80 percent. A small
minority, comprising about 2 percent, who saw themselves at the upper
level of the class structure and believed in the rightness of its
profit-driven nature, resisted measures that might diminish
competition among potential hired labor. In contrast, a much larger
group, encompassing over a third, with varying degrees of sympathetic,
oppositional, or revolutionary labor consciousness, increasingly
supported initiatives aimed at improving the living conditions of the
poor.

Similar patterns were observed in the 1980s in other advanced
capitalist countries, as indicated by data from a few
relevant surveys [[link removed].].
However, despite these sentiments, state austerity measures have
prevailed, aligning with the preferences of the small minority holding
hegemonic capitalist views and their influence
[[link removed]] over elected politicians.

 

The recent class consciousness pattern on the pressing issue of global
warming in Canada mirror this trend. In 2016, a strong majority of
Canadians agreed that global warming poses a threat to human life,
with virtually unanimous support among those with pro-labor
consciousness. Conversely, those with hegemonic capitalist class
consciousness tended to deny the relevance of this threat — a
vintage elite class mentality.

In summary, the limited direct survey evidence on relations between
higher forms of class consciousness and widely debated political
issues indicates that those with pro-labor consciousness express the
strongest support for progressive political agendas. Those with
pro-capital consciousness exhibit the strongest opposition, while
those with more pragmatic consciousness hold mixed views on political
issues generally. While not a simple tautology, these findings are not
entirely surprising. What stands out is the significant disparity
between hegemonic capitalist views and popular opinion.

But what about association between class consciousness and support for
actually existing political parties, which are the current elected
organizations for shaping policies that respond to the entire
electorate? Direct evidence on this matter is scarce. Some data comes
from Erik Olin Wright’s 1980 survey
[[link removed]] conducted during
the presidential election in which Republican Ronald Reagan beat
Democrat Jimmy Carter. Those with pro-capital consciousness were four
times as likely to vote Republican as those with pro-labor
consciousness, whereas nearly half of the latter group opted for an
independent or other party affiliation.

The 1982 Canadian survey was conducted in the wake of the 1980 federal
election that brought Pierre Trudeau’s Liberal Party back to
majority party rule. Those with pro-capital consciousness were twice
as likely to opt for the Conservative Party as those with pro-labor
consciousness. Those with pro-labor views were four times as likely to
favor the social democratic New Democratic Party, which received about
20 percent of the vote.

A more recent analysis from the 2004 Canadian survey around the time
of the federal election of Paul Martin’s Liberal minority government
shows significant findings. Those with pro-labor consciousness were
only half as likely to vote for the mainstream Liberal or Conservative
parties as those with pro-capital consciousness. Instead, nearly
two-thirds opted for either supported social democratic parties or
others, or refused to align with any party. The limited evidence shows
substantial differences in party preferences based on forms of class
consciousness. It suggests that the increasing numbers of individuals
with pro-labor consciousness, along with others, are becoming less
inclined to support mainstream capitalist parties.

Going Forward

We are now facing an unprecedented combination of threats, including
systemic ecological degradation, economic inequities, potential
nuclear winter, and a widespread lack of confidence in established
political institutions. The main political consequence so far has been
an unprecedented level of social and environmental protest. Voting for
mainstream capitalist parties is now commonly understood as a limited
political gesture, often approached cynically or avoided altogether,
with little expectation that parties will address these pressing
issues.

In this election cycle, Joe Biden’s Democrats are obviously offering
more progressive policies than Donald Trump’s Republicans. People
absolutely should go ahead and vote for their preferred progressive
candidate — but they shouldn’t get their hopes up. The likelihood
of either party implementing policies that challenge the established
agendas of corporate elites, who fund most elected candidates, remains
slim. There is a need for many political parties to be constituted or
reconstituted on more democratic social bases, with more democratic
policy and resource programs.

The prominence of MAGA reactionaries in Trump’s version of the GOP
highlights how far established parties have become from inclusive
democratic organizations.

The rise of extreme right-wing movements making political hay of
xenophobic anxieties reflects the failure of established mainstream
parties in power to address the democratic concerns driving these
widespread social and environmental protests. The prominence of MAGA
reactionaries in Trump’s version of the GOP highlights how far
established parties have become from inclusive democratic
organizations — and how vulnerable they are to narrow, populist
authoritarian appeals.

 

Progressive political activists should now be engaged more than ever,
both within relatively democratic parties and growing social
movements. The potential for sustainable alliances between labor
unions, race and gender equity collectives, environmental action
groups, and other concerned citizens’ groups has never been greater.
Whatever the immediate results of the numerous 2024 national
elections, progressive class consciousness is likely to persist and
increase. Progressive researchers should be making unprecedented
efforts to document hidden class consciousness levels and reveal their
links with narrower voting patterns. The recent experimental
US surveys
[[link removed]] by _Jacobin_ are
a promising start. Widely sharing this political intelligence could be
invaluable aid for democratic actions within and beyond established
political party organizations.

_D. W. LIVINGSTONE is author of Tipping Point for Advanced
Capitalism: Class, Class Consciousness and Activism in the
“Knowledge Economy” and Professional Power and Skill Use in the
“Knowledge Economy”: A Class Analysis._

_If you like this article, please subscribe
[[link removed]] or donate
[[link removed]] to JACOBIN._

* Politics
[[link removed]]
* Inequality
[[link removed]]
* class
[[link removed]]
* Karl Marx
[[link removed]]
* social democracy
[[link removed]]
* class conflict
[[link removed]]
* ideology
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]