Whenever an allegedly pro-worker Republican starts talking about the perils of immigration, I'd also like to hear about his plan to crack down on businesses that hire undocumented workers.
Hell, ask them about CHILD labor. Like, how do you like it when Sarah Sanders is letting teenagers take jobs you could have, just so companies can pay them less?
Stupid JD Vance was talking about "illegals" stealing jobs and my immediate thought was "sounds like corporations are bad, eh, JD? What're you gonna do about it?" And I really wish pundits would think the same way because it's the obvious next question
At the risk of being called a liar or making heads spin, I offer you this bubble buster. When Democrats controlled all branches of government in Missouri, Phil Smith, esq. Democrat from Louisiana, MO passed an amendment by voice vote, onto the annual economic development bill. I was caught flat footed and missed the chance to fight it. It literally said that no business could receive any of the benefits in the bill if they employed “immigrants.” The Democrat lawyer made no distinction between illegal and legal status.
I took two actions:
1. I called Anna Crosslin of the International Institute (a St. Louis relocation NGO) to tell her what’s up and ask for her help.
2. I prepared to battle the amendment if It came up when the senate bill came to the House.
When the senate bill came up, I rose to oppose the amendment. I asked if he intended to make no distinction and he dodged the question. My grilling him caused fair minded democrats to pay attention. Mr. Smith withdrew his amendment, slammed down his microphone and stormed off the Floor.
So I hate to break it to you, but Republicans (at least at the state level) are far more committed to keeping businesses from hiring illegals than Democrats, the new Party of Big Business. See for yourself, the Republican states adopted it and Democrat states, not so much.
I really like your writing. Building worker power is crucial. I agree with everything you lay out. That being said, I feel that the elephant in the room that is not being discussed in your essay is WHITE SUPREMACY and its appeal to many white working class people. Numbers show time and time again that its white working class people who vote MAGA in clear majorities. There is ample scholarship that shows that time and time again throughout history many white working class people have put their racial identity over their class interests. Tim Wise, Steve Phillips, Ian Haney Lopez, Ira Katznelson, David Rodiger, and George Lipsitz all write ample scholarship on this topic. Union members and working class people overall who still want to vote for Trump in 2024 after witnessing his attacks on working people during his term from 2017-2020 are not prioritizing class consciousness. If the immigrants at the border that Trump likes to bash where white and spoke English, the response from both the GOP and its supporters would be very different.
Everything you say can be also said about the Democrats. But you don't. That says a lot. And that makes your argument amount to a nothing burger. Both of them are corporate parties and both "Working Class Democrat" and "Working Class Republican" are scams. If you are pro-working people, you would say that.
So if I wrote an article about "How AIPAC Funds and Supports the Democratic Party" and say nothing about about how AIPAC funds and supports the Republican Party would you say I am not being dishonest and misleading?
Okay, I'll bite. Have you written at all prior to your article about how AIPAC supports both parties? Have you written about AIPAC at all prior to this article? Do you have a consistent and traceable record of reporting on, and editorializing about, AIPAC prior to this piece?
Not everything has to be everything to everyone all at once.
A completely absurd argument to make! There are very real, very clear, and extremely obvious differences between the two parties. If you cannot see this, then get your eyes checked, because the problem is you. Unions are a major and welcome part of the Democrat party, which is a classic big tent. Yes, there is a conservative, corporate wing of the Democrats, and this group should be minimized, but it does not change the fact that this is the party that advances worker's rights. Whereas the Republicans are, and have always been, singlemindedly focused on the absolute destruction of workers and white supremacy. You just don't have much of a case, sorry.
I think the term "Working Class" has been co-opted to mean something different than the actual words in the expression. There's a salt-of-the-earth connotation that's both a class definition and patronizing limit on the people in said class. Like, anyone could look around and see what you're saying, HamNo, but there's this focus on the mythical plumber and factory worker who theoretically can't comprehend corporate taxes and union negotiations and economics more complex than a paycheck (because they're dumb and uneducated, you see) but can look at vaguely Hispanic people who seem to have all the plumbing and factory jobs and start grumbling.
And they play along! Republicans have cornered the market on people who are very happy to have their intelligence insulted! And desperate publications like the New York Times play along too, because they can't appear TOO intelligent lest Princeton- and Harvard-educated Ted Cruz call them elitist! I feel like "low-information voter" should be more of a pejorative than it is.
I'm glad you added this part in there: "Corporations, which employ many lobbyists who are attuned to these things, will perceive that the Republican anti-corporate push is rooted not in a genuine distaste for corporate economic power but rather in a distaste for the trappings of progressivism that major corporations don for PR purposes. So what will corporations do? They will change their outward appearances."
I was worried at first that you weren't going to mention that Republicans are only against power that does something they don't want.
When Reagan was president I made $90k a year, when Clinton was president I made $60k a year, when Bush was president I made $90k a year ,when Obama became president I made $35k a year, and then when Trump became president I made $120 a year, since Biden became president I've only made $35k a year, so there's no way anyone could convince me that democrats are pro worker
You can’t be pro-WEF, pro green new deal, and pro-worker. WEF and green new deal are both about weakening the US and green new deal is specifically about killing are most dense energy sectors which kills specific job (pipelines, refineries, mines, etc) while laying higher energy costs on all manufacturers and all shipped goods. So the core values choke the US economy and therefore, choke our blue collar workers. This is basic math.
This essay perfectly articulated all of my frustrations about the stunning grift that is "clearly the candidates that most naturally represent my interests as a working class person are the billionaire nepo baby and Yale law grad venture capitalist"
As a "worker" which is what I believe is communist term, I think the leftist are mystified why such a person labeled as such would vote for a republican.So I will let you in on some inside perspective .When I received my social security reports of my wages earned they have always showed a dramatic increase in in ytd wages every time we had a republican president ,contrary to that every time we had a democrat president I have a out of work or barely making enough to scrape by. In fact when Obama became president he personally went to my union hall and made sure that they laid off all the older white people, they then went a created a new class of electrician so they could put less skilled and minority people to do the same work for less money .I don't care if you belive me or not, but you can go to the local union office of local 26 Washington DC find out for yourse
You say immigration is "mostly a humanitarian crisis in which working people of the world are artificially divided and oppressed by arbitrary borders in order to benefit capitalists". But if that is true, where's the evidence that workers have ever been able to come together internationally to transcend those borders? Isn't the historical reality that a better deal for workers means a well defined nation state?
I feel like you do miss a point about immigration - it may not be a zero sum game, but it can be a negative sum game. An excess of workers does drive the price of labour down.
Neoliberals often find ways to 'ease' the labour market when a tight labour market threatens to raise the wages. Democrats are not innocent in this. I have no idea how democrats and republications compare on this issue.
In my own country the political right imports hundreds of thousands of poorly regulated workers, and then (successfully) blames the left for the resulting wage stagnation by pointing to a few thousand asylum seekers.
Whenever an allegedly pro-worker Republican starts talking about the perils of immigration, I'd also like to hear about his plan to crack down on businesses that hire undocumented workers.
Hell, ask them about CHILD labor. Like, how do you like it when Sarah Sanders is letting teenagers take jobs you could have, just so companies can pay them less?
All. Of. This.
Stupid JD Vance was talking about "illegals" stealing jobs and my immediate thought was "sounds like corporations are bad, eh, JD? What're you gonna do about it?" And I really wish pundits would think the same way because it's the obvious next question
At the risk of being called a liar or making heads spin, I offer you this bubble buster. When Democrats controlled all branches of government in Missouri, Phil Smith, esq. Democrat from Louisiana, MO passed an amendment by voice vote, onto the annual economic development bill. I was caught flat footed and missed the chance to fight it. It literally said that no business could receive any of the benefits in the bill if they employed “immigrants.” The Democrat lawyer made no distinction between illegal and legal status.
I took two actions:
1. I called Anna Crosslin of the International Institute (a St. Louis relocation NGO) to tell her what’s up and ask for her help.
2. I prepared to battle the amendment if It came up when the senate bill came to the House.
When the senate bill came up, I rose to oppose the amendment. I asked if he intended to make no distinction and he dodged the question. My grilling him caused fair minded democrats to pay attention. Mr. Smith withdrew his amendment, slammed down his microphone and stormed off the Floor.
So I hate to break it to you, but Republicans (at least at the state level) are far more committed to keeping businesses from hiring illegals than Democrats, the new Party of Big Business. See for yourself, the Republican states adopted it and Democrat states, not so much.
https://www.numbersusa.org/resource-article/everify-state-map
You're all immigrants, if you don't live on a reservation.
I really like your writing. Building worker power is crucial. I agree with everything you lay out. That being said, I feel that the elephant in the room that is not being discussed in your essay is WHITE SUPREMACY and its appeal to many white working class people. Numbers show time and time again that its white working class people who vote MAGA in clear majorities. There is ample scholarship that shows that time and time again throughout history many white working class people have put their racial identity over their class interests. Tim Wise, Steve Phillips, Ian Haney Lopez, Ira Katznelson, David Rodiger, and George Lipsitz all write ample scholarship on this topic. Union members and working class people overall who still want to vote for Trump in 2024 after witnessing his attacks on working people during his term from 2017-2020 are not prioritizing class consciousness. If the immigrants at the border that Trump likes to bash where white and spoke English, the response from both the GOP and its supporters would be very different.
I highly reccommend this lecture by Tim Wise on this topic - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6myUwP3wPfs
you’re right, they need at least something to feel superior and connected in
Everything you say can be also said about the Democrats. But you don't. That says a lot. And that makes your argument amount to a nothing burger. Both of them are corporate parties and both "Working Class Democrat" and "Working Class Republican" are scams. If you are pro-working people, you would say that.
1. Please read the archives. HamNo has raked the Dems over the coals plenty of times.
2. The title of the post is "How the 'Working Class Republican' Scam Works." The boundaries of the post's contents are pretty well defined.
3. If HamNo's been consistent about anything (and he's been pretty consistent about everything so far), it's that he's pro-worker.
So if I wrote an article about "How AIPAC Funds and Supports the Democratic Party" and say nothing about about how AIPAC funds and supports the Republican Party would you say I am not being dishonest and misleading?
Okay, I'll bite. Have you written at all prior to your article about how AIPAC supports both parties? Have you written about AIPAC at all prior to this article? Do you have a consistent and traceable record of reporting on, and editorializing about, AIPAC prior to this piece?
Not everything has to be everything to everyone all at once.
Your whataboutism is showing.
A completely absurd argument to make! There are very real, very clear, and extremely obvious differences between the two parties. If you cannot see this, then get your eyes checked, because the problem is you. Unions are a major and welcome part of the Democrat party, which is a classic big tent. Yes, there is a conservative, corporate wing of the Democrats, and this group should be minimized, but it does not change the fact that this is the party that advances worker's rights. Whereas the Republicans are, and have always been, singlemindedly focused on the absolute destruction of workers and white supremacy. You just don't have much of a case, sorry.
i think it’s supposed to be specifically not exclusively
I think the term "Working Class" has been co-opted to mean something different than the actual words in the expression. There's a salt-of-the-earth connotation that's both a class definition and patronizing limit on the people in said class. Like, anyone could look around and see what you're saying, HamNo, but there's this focus on the mythical plumber and factory worker who theoretically can't comprehend corporate taxes and union negotiations and economics more complex than a paycheck (because they're dumb and uneducated, you see) but can look at vaguely Hispanic people who seem to have all the plumbing and factory jobs and start grumbling.
And they play along! Republicans have cornered the market on people who are very happy to have their intelligence insulted! And desperate publications like the New York Times play along too, because they can't appear TOO intelligent lest Princeton- and Harvard-educated Ted Cruz call them elitist! I feel like "low-information voter" should be more of a pejorative than it is.
I'm glad you added this part in there: "Corporations, which employ many lobbyists who are attuned to these things, will perceive that the Republican anti-corporate push is rooted not in a genuine distaste for corporate economic power but rather in a distaste for the trappings of progressivism that major corporations don for PR purposes. So what will corporations do? They will change their outward appearances."
I was worried at first that you weren't going to mention that Republicans are only against power that does something they don't want.
When Reagan was president I made $90k a year, when Clinton was president I made $60k a year, when Bush was president I made $90k a year ,when Obama became president I made $35k a year, and then when Trump became president I made $120 a year, since Biden became president I've only made $35k a year, so there's no way anyone could convince me that democrats are pro worker
Dave have you ever considered that your personal experiences might not be true for the other 330 million people in the country?
That's weird Dave, my anecdotal example is completely the opposite.
Those are huge numbers. What exactly is it that you do?
Based on your anecdotes,I hope you are not planning on voting for Trump! $120 is hard to live on.
What business are you in tho? It seems like your earnings are polar opposite to the economy in general.
Perhaps you are linked to Republican politics or lobbying or beneficence in some way and only have work when your party is in office?
You can’t be pro-WEF, pro green new deal, and pro-worker. WEF and green new deal are both about weakening the US and green new deal is specifically about killing are most dense energy sectors which kills specific job (pipelines, refineries, mines, etc) while laying higher energy costs on all manufacturers and all shipped goods. So the core values choke the US economy and therefore, choke our blue collar workers. This is basic math.
well they all follow the same/similar economic philosophies, neoliberalism
This essay perfectly articulated all of my frustrations about the stunning grift that is "clearly the candidates that most naturally represent my interests as a working class person are the billionaire nepo baby and Yale law grad venture capitalist"
I see alot of people saying that Republicans are against unions I was in ibew for 20 years, and you know what I always made more when I wasn't,
As a "worker" which is what I believe is communist term, I think the leftist are mystified why such a person labeled as such would vote for a republican.So I will let you in on some inside perspective .When I received my social security reports of my wages earned they have always showed a dramatic increase in in ytd wages every time we had a republican president ,contrary to that every time we had a democrat president I have a out of work or barely making enough to scrape by. In fact when Obama became president he personally went to my union hall and made sure that they laid off all the older white people, they then went a created a new class of electrician so they could put less skilled and minority people to do the same work for less money .I don't care if you belive me or not, but you can go to the local union office of local 26 Washington DC find out for yourse
You say immigration is "mostly a humanitarian crisis in which working people of the world are artificially divided and oppressed by arbitrary borders in order to benefit capitalists". But if that is true, where's the evidence that workers have ever been able to come together internationally to transcend those borders? Isn't the historical reality that a better deal for workers means a well defined nation state?
Great post! Excellent insights.
There's a Pew Research study that shows Republicans are more likely than Democrats to identify as "working class," regardless of how much money they actually have: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/08/29/from-traditional-to-open-minded-how-americans-describe-themselves/
Your lack of a paywall is greatly appreciated, Hamilton. Strange to read this today, because this is what I wrote yesterday: "Fight the rentier economy with a rentier economy?" (https://endlesschain.substack.com/p/fight-the-rentier-economy-with-a)
I feel like you do miss a point about immigration - it may not be a zero sum game, but it can be a negative sum game. An excess of workers does drive the price of labour down.
Neoliberals often find ways to 'ease' the labour market when a tight labour market threatens to raise the wages. Democrats are not innocent in this. I have no idea how democrats and republications compare on this issue.
In my own country the political right imports hundreds of thousands of poorly regulated workers, and then (successfully) blames the left for the resulting wage stagnation by pointing to a few thousand asylum seekers.
Immigration isn't neutral.
if republicans were really beneficial to the working class and workers rights/freedom, why would elon musk monetarily support their campaign
Just shared a link to this website at Ian Welsh's site.
https://www.ianwelsh.net/