History 471

The making of the Postwar Order

 

I. BACKGROUND: NEW DEAL 1930S & WWII

·         After the collapse of the capitalist economy in 1929, the Roosevelt administration intervened to try to restore the system to health

o        Though he was often accused of being a socialist, FDR tried to save capitalism, and was actually a fiscal conservative who continually sought to have a balanced budget and pay-as-you-go programs. Whenever it seemed that the private economy was pulling out of the doldrums, he attempted to scale back government spending on public programs that reduced unemployment.

o         In addition, FDR financed many of his programs with regressive taxation. For example, social security funds, based on taxes on wages rather than income, initially paid for work relief. There was a lot of rhetoric about the redistribution of wealth, but New Deal social policy was based on attempts to restore business confidence. In deference to this and fiscal concerns, FDR scaled back many successful public works programs.

·         It was only with WWII that the Great Depression ended.

o        Massive amounts of government spending (deficit-spending) on war production brought full-employment.

·         But what would happen after the war?

o        Labor Movement supported deficit spending on behalf of human and social needs, much like European labor movements (which succeeded to a greater degree)

Compare Europe: In Europe the idea of a "welfare" state that undertook planning in order to guarantee certain economic and social rights as a “right of citizenship”  won wide acceptance after WWII.

·         In Europe during the postwar reconstruction, the idea that capitalism couldn't survive without government intervention led to a specific kind of government intervention. If democratic governments had to intervene to save capitalism, government should at least ensure that the system provided for everyone, not just for a select number or percentage of people.  This notion is what is referred to as the “social wage”—the idea that government should guarantee jobs if capitalism didn’t provide them, that government should reduce the surplus labor supply rather than driving down the social wage by ignoring or increasing the surplus labor supply (the policy of governments in the era before the New Deal), that a citizen couldn’t participate in the polity unless they had economic security

There was some reason to believe that U.S. politics could have gone in a similar direction:

o        Labor during the New Deal had been the major organizational base for a politics directed toward the original vision of  economist John Maynard Keynes: government spending that was directed toward the needs of citizens and toward full employment.  Keynesianism is a term that is associated with deficit spending. It is often forgotten that deficit spending came from the realization that capitalism could not survive without government support.

o        On the surface, this realization threatened to open up politics to class considerations (see Fones-Wolf Reading)

·         FDR issued the Economic Bill of Rights in 1944 because of workers’ activism and demands.

·         Most people never expected continued expansion of military, so how would system be sustained?

·         Many people thought through government spending on social needs, and through controls that would limit private control of the economy

 

Economic Bill of Rights: The right of a useful job, right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation, right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living; right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad; right of  adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health; right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident and unemployment, right to a good education.

o        --Popular legislation, Murray-Kilgore bill, promised to fulfill some of these newly-declared rights, and the labor movement seemed powerful enough to mobilize people on behalf of them, if they could succeed in organizing the south and breaking the power of conservative Democrats that controlled politics in the south

 

·         But U.S. business planned worldwide expansion of markets in the postwar era, and the end to domestic-based economy only, and sought to contain labor-based drive for full-employment and expansion of universal entitlements like health care.   (Note: The newly revived “American Century”  term, behind the current war in Iraq, originated in 1944.  Time Magazine’s far-right minion, Henry Luce, declared that the rest of the world would be developed on America’s terms, and thus the rest of the century would be the “American century. (In 1997, the Project for the New American Century revived the term in their planning for the Iraqi invasion and projection of U.S. world power)

o        In contrast to industrialized Europe, over the course of 1940s and 50s, U.S. witnessed opposition to universal social programs;  campaigns by business blocked some; in other cases, Southern Democrats joined Republicans in blocking any program that might weaken white supremacy—thus Reconstruction era politics still affecting social policy.

 

II. COLD WAR AND “MILITARY KEYNESIANISM”: What replaced the postwar labor agenda

·         The Cold War, which began in 1946, helped to resolve the “problem” of the threat of class politics– through military spending, government could spend to sustain the economy without having to deal with issues of redistribution of wealth that is the heart of notions of social wage.

·         Dreams of an economy organized to provide security was replaced by an economy organized to sustain U.S. global power

·         A significant portion of the economy is directed toward military spending rather than social spending with the dawn of the Cold War. The Cold War bridged the interests of conservatives (who for example, refused to spend for full-employment bill, but would spend on military preparedness) with liberals who committed themselves to a worldwide fight against communism. The combination was powerful.

·         Whereas in 1940 less than 16% of the federal budget was for defense, by 1950 military spending takes up 50% of the budget, and by 1969, it had grown to 56%. 

·         U.S. News and World Report acknowledged the role of government military spending in shoring up the economy when in 1950 they wrote: “Government planners figure that they have found the magic formula for almost endless good times…the Cold War is an automatic pump primer” (Pump priming refers to government spending when the economy seems to be in doldrums)

 

A.Cold War National Security State--probably the most significant piece of 20th century history

·         Cold War supposedly over, but affects us today in ways that go unnoticed but are profound

·         has aided the militarization of U.S. and other  economies across the globe; national security assumed permanent and paramount importance in American life, so that much of the nation’s treasury was devoted to it.

·         U.S. armed forces spread over much of the globe, and U.S. science and industry were profoundly reoriented. War and national security became consuming anxieties and provided the memories, models and metaphors that shaped broad areas of national life.

·         Traditional view: U.S. thrust into contention with Soviet Union, to counter Soviet aggression--Soviets determined to conquer the world, bring Soviet-style socialism by force to the entire planet

·         most historians understand that it was much more complicated than this, and many have concluded that the U.S. bears much of the responsibility for escalating the arms race and the “hot wars” in the third world that took place during the cold war

 

B. George Kennan and the “secrets” of the National Security State:

·         Containment of Soviet Union first announced as policy by George Kennan  in 1947; Kennan argued that the policy would force the Soviet Union to collapse.

·         Kennan famous for this, but in 1948 he also articulated, privately, another aspect of U.S. foreign policy as a member of the State Department: (from “top secret” Policy Planning Study 23):  (document declassified and revealed in 1984)

“We have about 50% of the world’s wealth, but only 6.3% of its population...In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity...To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives...We should cease to talk about vague and ...unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.”

 

·         need to  recognize that agenda of U.S. was bound up with an ideological commitment to expanding  capitalism as well as democracy across the globe, but also a continuation of U.S. involvement in imperialist policies begun earlier in the century. In the case of the third world, very little commitment to democracy is recognizable, as the U.S. helped to overthrow democratic regimes and replace them with dictatorships that served U.S. interests

 

III. New Global Order in the Making

 

 Need to acknowledge that the U.S.  had expansionist goals in postwar, agenda regarding trade favorable to U.S. and to capitalism.

·         During war, these leading businessmen came to accept government role in sustaining capitalist system, saw the benefits of government. Feared collapse of capitalism if government was not used to support it.

·         These businessmen dominated foreign policy after the war. Felt that economic growth couldn’t take place without US government role dominant at home and abroad.

·          Needed to expand trade to sell surplus products abroad and get raw materials for great industrial capacity of US built during war. By end of W.W.II US dependent on imports for all important minerals except coal and oil.

·          These businessmen feared the collapse of colonial empires built in the previous century by European powers.

·         Urged an active government abroad with the aim of bolstering trade and warding off the socialist and communist threat to the former colonial empires as well as in Europe.

 

Bretton Woods meeting—International Monetary Fund, World Bank

·         This was the context for the establishment of 1944 Bretton Woods meeting, where business and government put together the workings of the postwar economy.

·         BW established the dollar as the basis of international currency, established what would become the World Bank and International Monetary Fund

·         --all structured on the basis of one dollar, one vote--since US economy not devastated, had control of money, Assumed US business would dominate in postwar.

·         WB and IMF would offer money on terms that would necessitate development on US terms--not self-sufficient economies, but economies based on trading with US.

·          Raw materials to fuel US industries, and later establishment of industry on US terms too.

·         The unwritten goal of the WB and IMF--one that has been enforced with a vengeance--has been to integrate countries into the capitalist world economy

·         --Policies of WB and IMF are designed to facilitate the repayment of debt: in the end this has resulted in the steady transfer of wealth out of the Third World countries to the bankers and wealthy of industrial countries--continuation of imperialist policies.

·         Role of U.S. government is to facilitate world trade with US financial and corporate dominance secure.

·          It was not the “invisible hand of the marketplace” that produced U.S. global dominance, but government activities on behalf of business. 

 

·         In the postwar, a new global order came into being. U.S. was the dominant world power in the capitalist world, and acted as a kind of “global policeman” for capitalism:

·         Bretton Woods agreement US controlled the value of money across the globe. The dollar was pegged to gold.  The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank began to develop the third world on capitalist terms. Economic and military commitments protected US business interest abroad. The US was able to dictate terms to other countries that ensured it has access to raw materials and markets.

·         US corporate and bankers and government officials envisioned its role as director of rebuilding Europe, in ways that helped expand and sustain capitalist markets.

·         Postwar economic growth was built on low-cost energy, from a steady supply of cheap oil from the third world, where US oil companies interests were protected by US government foreign policy and even CIA secret overthrow of governments.

·         U.S. corporations were able to pass along higher wage costs to consumers because in many cases they were able to set their prices without concern about competition.

·         US businesses did not vigorously contest government intervention in the economy, and recognized some degree of social responsibility that went with that intervention.

·         Major US corporations accepted an unprecedented degree of unionization as long as unions didn’t interfere with management’s right to direct their operations and make all production and investment decisions such as plant location decisions, automation of operations, etc.

·         Overall workers benefited from increased productivity, though corporations profits rose more than workers’ wages

·         The period 1945-1970 in world history had been notable for  corporations’ acceptance of social responsibility and benefits, at least for a significant percentage of people. However, when coupled with the non-universal nature of distribution of fruits of the system, a significant portion of the American population did not share in these benefits 

 

 

IV. FROM CLASS POLITICS TO "GROWTH" POLITICS--1940s-1950s: How this  postwar order was achieved and justified

 

·         In immediate postwar, cold war politics and politics of anti-communism means growing conformity at home; US policy of spreading capitalism abroad and at shoring up capitalist system at home has bi-partisan support--helps to create "permanent war economy". This and other government subsidization of growth through inequitable social programs ensures that social inequality persists even in the midst of new "affluence"

·         In the immediate postwar era, labor was poised to push the U.S. in the direction of universal social programs; Major “agent” of “class” politics had been unions which originated in 1930s; class politics means struggle over the distribution of wealth and power in society, the agenda to re-make a society that was oriented toward ensuring equality of opportunity and access to the resources of society

·         The Cold War helped to contain the labor movement because of the domestic anticommunism that split the labor movement and caused it to be a junior partner in the Democratic Party.

·          Anticommunism is also a factor in the collapse of the attempt to organize the south, which retains a political stronghold for the entire nation. Southern politicians control a one-party system that results in a great degree of power in both Democratic and Republican administrations, and the power of deal-making shapes all of the possibilities of welfare state legislation.

·         Liberals reduced their ambitions for an expanded welfare state that would guarantee the Economic Bill of Rights, and instead became committed to the concept of “growth with equity”—growing the economy by expanding capitalist markets domestically and abroad. Government would help the capitalist economy grow and through that growth more social programs could be added.

o        Liberals were committed to global capitalist expansion and to gradual expansion of  benefits that both aided people in need and helped to stabilize the American economic and social system.

o        By 1950 liberals didn’t object to the military spending and indeed, many openly embraced it. Those who did question it were easily labeled as “soft on communism.” Liberals identified with the goal of stopping communism abroad. While they were dismayed by the ways that domestic anticommunism undermined their commitment to the expansion of the welfare state, they continued to agree to a large military budget which diminished the possibilities for that expansion. As more and more of the GNP and the budget was committed to military, this eroded the possibility of domestic spending that might address capitalist inequities.

·         Taming Labor and political consensus over military policies allow economy to grow in a direction that does not address inequality of wealth

 

A. Taming Labor ----mass movement of labor that had been ignited during 30s was a potential gigantic social movement for the postwar, and some unions had visionary ideas about the postwar.

·         Most of the unions with visionary plans for the postwar contain communists or homegrown radicals, and these are purged in the great postwar "red scare"; radical possibilities of the labor movement, that it might lead a movement for a new agenda, or even a new political party, stopped by postwar anti-communism

·         Labor leaders eliminate 11 unions after these unions refuse to endorse Democrat Harry Truman and after HUAC hearings (House Unamerican Activities Committee)

·         Instead of social upheaval, unions organize and gain benefits mostly for their own members as result of postwar contracts: negotiate for higher wages/benefits for its members, but not to challenge business decision making ("management rights") such as plant locations, automation, etc);

·         Taft-Hartley contributed to this taming-see readings

 

B. US policymakers find “growth politics” makes for political consensus

·         Class politics of Depression era had still been apparent in immediate postwar

·         But US policymakers of both parties avoided class politics like redistribution of wealth for politics of growth--growing the economy to make the pie bigger so that they would not have to target wealthy class; government would use spending policy to infuse the economy with spending, as it had during WWII, but mostly for military and "unassailable" expenditures for the middle class

 

 

C. MILITARY AGENDA PROVIDES "SOLUTION" to bi-partisan (agreement by both Democrats and Republicans) spending and growth politics

·         THE PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTOR TO THE UNPRECEDENTED ECONOMIC GROWTH IN GOVERNMENT SPENDING IN 1950S WAS MILITARY EXPENDITURES.

·         Whereas in 1940 only 15% of the fed budget had been devoted to military, in 1959 military claimed more than 50%, by 1969, had grown to 56%.==more if you include veterans benefits in this category.

·         Military spending was a "solution" because it was government subsidization of business that could be masked; here was a "jobs program" that could be agreed upon by conservative southern Democrats and western and Northern Congressmen, those political dealers who opposed other types of social spending (such as housing and other jobs programs); military installations and contractors located in the southern and western states, and since in the south, the states could decide who got the jobs, it was a way to have spending without redistributing income to the poor blacks and poor whites.

--politically acceptable, indeed unopposable, because it was military, not social spending. . not thought of as welfare

·         Cold War spending gradually became geared to addressing downturns of U.S. economy. Government expenditures for housing, health, education and income maintenance were thought to cause class and group conflict. But few dared to question the cost of defense.

·         channeling money into national security limited the resources available for domestic social needs, all toward non-socially useful products like nuclear weapons and bombers,etc.  The bulk of direct government expenditures went to the creation of weapons of destruction

·         high levels of "defense spending" spurred sales and employment but altered the nature of the economy

 

·         U.S. News and World Report suggested (May 1950) that "government planners figure that they have found the magic formula for almost endless good times...the Cold War is an automatic pump primer"

§         Pump priming was term associated with John Maynard Keynes, (economist) who had suggested that government should “prime the pump” of capitalist economies by social spending, in order to save capitalism. The pump would need priming whenever the economy went into a tailspin. When that happened, he said, the government needed to spend, even go into deficit spending, in order to keep the economy working.  He recognized that capitalism couldn’t be sustained without government spending. Keynes had thought that government should spend for social needs. Now US News and World Report were suggesting that military spending had taken the place of domestic spending as the “pump primer”

 

D. MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX – war as the “health of the state”

·         American corporations tied their fortunes to the ascending military star--lobbied furiously for bigger Pentagon contracts--staffed their hierarchies w/ unprecedented #s of military officers

·         The Defense Dept became practically a state within the state.

·     In 1968, the Pentagon alone contracted for more than $44 billion of goods and services.

            Gen. Dynamics--leading defense contractor 1957-1960--186 retired officers in Pentagon

·         reinforces economic dominance by large corporations in the entire economy

·         largest companies get 2/3 of post-1951 military spending--Defense-related industries and the scientists and engineers they employed entered into a long term relationship with he federal government.;

·         70 of  91 defense secys and undersecys, secys of 3 military services, directors of CIA from 1940-1960 from ranks of big business and finance

·         1958-military purchased 100% of nation's ordnance production,94% of aircraft, 61% of ships and boats,  21% electronic equipment, 13% of primary metals; 1954  profits as % of net worth: 139% for General Dynamics 93% Boeing ; 81% Douglas, etc.

Example of system: Boeing-

·         After the war, Fortune magazine explained "the aircraft industry today cannot satisfactorily exist in a pure, uncompetitive, unsubsidized "free enterprise" economy" and that the "government is its only possible savior". The Pentagon system sustained and expanded the industry along with steel and metals, etc. that went into building the aircraft;

·         First Secretary of the Air Force, Stuart Symington, was the industry's representative in Washington. He regularly demanded enough procurement funds in the military budget to, as he put it, "meet the requirements of the aircraft industry."; Symington, January 1948: "the word to talk was not 'subsidy'; the word to talk was 'security.". 

·         these developments called the Military Industrial Complex--phrase coined by Eisenhower--January 1961, before leaving office—warned of the dangers to democracy of these relationships. U.S. had always reduced military capacities after war, now a permanent military capacity and structure might lead U.S. into future wars

·         Military spending and a disproportionate share of domestic spending is directed toward the south and the west. The south and the west in turn become a point of relocation for unionized northern and Midwestern corporations, who begin to migrate to the non-union south and west starting in the 1940s. This further erodes the power of unions in the Democratic Party.

 

 

 

V. POSTWAR ORDER WAS GOVERNMENT-SUBSIDIZED PRIVATE PROFIT SYSTEM-

·         business-govt partnership--federal money underwrites costs of much research

·         System Demands Consumers and Spending-- American economy produces unprecedented amount of things-, and postwar dynamics provide them;

·         1st, significant degree of unionization means most workers are better off than ever before, with degree of security and benefits unknown before

·          advertising assists in trying to bring mass consumption to more than ever before--advertising rises 300% from 1946-1957

·         Postwar economic growth was built on low-cost energy, with growing supply of cheap oil from the third world, where US oil companies interests were protected by US government foreign policy and even CIA secret overthrow of governments. Thus costs of this system hidden, in unassailable military spending vs. gas pump prices (I would argue this continues to the present time)

·         U.S. corporations were able to pass along higher wage costs to consumers because in many cases they were able to set their prices without concern about competition.

·         US businesses did not contest government intervention in the economy, and recognized some degree of social responsibility that went with that intervention.

·         Major US corporations accepted an unprecedented degree of unionization as long as unions didn’t interfere with management’s right to direct their operations and make all production and investment decisions such as plant location decisions, automation of operations, etc.

·         US corporations granted workers a share of the growing economic pie.

·         Workers benefited from increased productivity, though corporations profits rose more than workers’ wages

·         The period 1945-1970 in world history had been notable for the idea that the growth of government spending meant corporations’ acceptance of social responsibility and benefits, at least for a significant percentage of people. In Europe, there was a growth of universal benefits; in the U.S. much of the welfare benefits were achieved by attachment to particular core corporations; those workers received good welfare and security, through pensions, medical and life insurance, vacations; as they achieved these benefits through private benefits, and higher wages, they continually scorned the public programs

 

VI. GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIZED MOBILITY AND SUBURBANIZATION FOR THE WHITE MIDDLE CLASS  

·         New affluence, new ideals; 1947-1966 were years when "real" wages grow 2.5-3 % a year ; manufacturers could pass along higher wages in increased prices to consumers because of dominance of world markets;

·         most of the upward mobility during the 1950s was subsidized one form or another by government spending; these programs skewed to benefit white middle class, as will be discussed below

·         Public spending on domestic programs continues to create a two and three tier system of benefits instead of universal entitlements.

 

VII. TIERED SYSTEM OF WELFARE

Tiered system of welfare provide the basis for the next 50 years of contentiousness over “welfare”. Welfare for white middle class always seems natural and unassailable. But if one looks at the history of the creation of this tiered system, the racial and ethnic biases inherent in its creation are stark.

o        Divisions between upper and middle-class men and their families, and those who received 2nd tier  “welfare” climbed as taxes increased. Recipients of the second tier programs became scapegoats.

o        The rise of private health insurance and pensions after WWII further lessened middle-class support for a shared social citizenship.

o        For most Americans in 1950s, welfare state seemed remote, even as the expenditures for 1st tier programs climbed.

n       Middle class programs were popular and incrementally expanded.

n       Social security, veterans programs, mortgage deductions, farmers subsidies were not perceived as welfare, but in fact each program was a transfer of money to identifiable groups.

n       This continues under Republican administration of Eisenhower, which passes such bills as disability insurance in 1956, more unemployment insurance in 1958.

 

Background: 1930s: establishment of benefits by race and gender

While social security provides a safety net and security unknown previously in the U.S. previous to the New Deal era, there was a racial and gender bias to the benefits established during the New Deal.

 

 Social Security Act of 1935

While we associate social security with only the retirement benefit program, the Act of 1935 actually set up several programs, some that were perceived as a right and others began to be defined negatively as undeserved

 

--Set up a 2-tier system—some benefits were seen as an earned right, while others were seen as unearned—which reinforced rather than challenged the inequities of the capitalist labor market.

Capitalist labor market depended on a surplus labor supply (unemployment) to keep labor supply high and thus wages low, a condition that affected a significant part of the population during the Great Depression.  Almost all blacks and most women were part of a “surplus labor supply” and racial and gender biases resulted in placement in low-paid, lower-rung jobs or domestic and agricultural labor, jobs that didn’t provide for sustenance. Private employers discriminated as a standard practice of business.

 

1)      old age retirement, which people paid into through payroll deductions, was seen as a right.

o        However, 3/5s of blacks (and many Latinos) were automatically written out of these benefits because of Southern Congressmen who sought to keep the surplus labor supply. Agricultural and Domestic laborers not covered. S. Congressmen connived to ensure that blacks wouldn’t be provided for in old age or unemployment, using the mantle of “state’s rights.” Succeeded in removing 2 clauses from old-age assistance, one that said states were required to provide “a reasonable subsistence compatible with decency and health,” and another requiring states to designate a single state authority to administer the plan. Southerners would not allow the federal government to dictate standards or set benefit levels.

“The going rate for day laborers was two dollars per one hundred pounds of cotton, a day's labor for a strong worker. Outside the cotton fields black women worked as maids, earning perhaps $2.50 a week.  Federal old-age insurance paid directly to retired black men and women, even at the meager sum of $15 a month, would provide more cash than a cropper family might see in a year.”

 

o        50% of women were intentionally written out as well, because it was believed that they should get their entitlements through marriage. Excluded job categories dominated by women, including nurses, teachers, domestic servants, retail.

 

2)      Unemployment benefits were also established under the SSA, but under states’ control, and resulted in mostly biased dispensing. If one had a good job and high wages, and kept it for a significant amount of time, access to unemployment benefits helped sustain survival during economic downturns, but this wasn’t available to all. Certainly women and blacks who were excluded from old age retirement program were also excluded from this.

 

3)      United States Employment Service was established under SSA, but under states control, and the evidence confirms that this agency funneled workers to employers through racial and gender biases.

o        The employment offices set up by the program were notorious for enforcing a racial code, even in the north. One study of Illinois showed that the unemployment offices channeled black workers to lower paying jobs and accepted employer discrimination as a basis of their operation.  A black woman in Illinois applying for jobs would be sent to domestic service primarily, for example. In 1948 75% of unskilled jobs at employment agencies & in Michigan newspapers specifically excluded blacks. Almost all skilled jobs did, and skilled trades unions also excluded them from apprenticeship programs

 

4)       Most blacks and women from 1930-1950 didn’t have access to top tier benefits and the only other option for them were Old Age Assistance and Aid to Dependent Children benefits.

 

·         Thus the Social Security Act was shaped by racial and gender exclusions already in operation that kept many blacks, Latinos and women from first-tier programs, while second tier programs were made inferior with blacks in mind—as a result we got lower provision for all poor, both white and minority

o        southern Democrats opposed to any program that would grant benefits to blacks and undermine their economy, which was based on cheap labor  and available supplies of sharecroppers and domestic servants

o        southern congressmen also insisted on state control of the other SS provisions—unemployment, ADC..

o        gender biases reflected assumptions that white women were not considered regular workers or employees;

 

o        As participants in a paid labor force whose conditions increasing got better through unionization, corporate dominance and monopolies, white men could be seen as making a public contribution that sustained their entitlement to benefits of the system

o        During the postwar, unions and corporations extended private benefits instead of extending welfare state or universal benefits.

o        Core corporations, many of which benefited from the military Keynesianism of the time, accepted social responsibility (or were forced to by the strength of unions), which resulted in more private benefits.

 

o        Most women and blacks and Latinos had a different relationship to the paid labor force, however.  Gender norms and racial bias excluded them from jobs that provide significant resources. This encourages their going to means-tested programs and  that stigmatizes the programs themselves.

§         Blacks were at the bottom of the labor market and didn’t get access to the jobs with benefits and security provisions.

·         Women’s jobs were lower paying, with fewer or no benefits.

·         Womens’ fortunes often required attachment to men for their benefits, or else they were forced into the means-tested programs of ADC.

·         Thus the welfare state reinforced women’s identity as men’s dependents both directly and indirectly.

·         The fact that women take off from the labor force to have children creates an automatic bias. And what of women’s contributions to the economy by taking care of children? Giving welfare to women in the 1930s was seen as a way to provide for children, but when black women begin to take advantage of ADC in the 1950s, they are seen as lazy and shiftless rather than providing care for children.

 

·        Thus the welfare state reproduced and reinforced social inequities between groups rather than challenged them.

 

The factors that made the welfare law so excluding and so inequitable also contributed to creating the need for welfare because it shored up a system of race and gender discrimination and class exploitation that created poverty in the first place. The welfare system created under the New Deal didn’t create inequality in social citizenship, but reinforced inequality, with consequences to the present

 

·         Eligibility for social insurance from the best programs rested on regular, sustained employment in covered occupations; those who didn’t have that were thrown into public assistance programs that were means-tested—you had to prove that you were worthy, and you were subject to constant checks regarding your worthy-ness. This was not a right of citizenship, and the benefits were not enough to sustain health. In addition, because they were eventually defined as “welfare” while

 

·         While in the 1930s, all programs financed by government intervention, from social security retirement to AFDC were thought of as “welfare”, by the 1950s, only the lower-tier programs are defined as welfare, and they are the ones subject to cut-backs when blacks, Latinos and other groups began to gain access to them.

 

·         White women were always been the leading recipients numerically of AFDC and food stamps, and these programs historically have taken a negligible amount of the federal budget, even as they became the source of great political debate. (Even in 1996, when the welfare reform bill that ended “welfare as we know it”-- both AFDC and food stamps together took only 3% of the federal budget outlays).

 

·          But in the 1950s as more whites get access to well-paying jobs, the means-tested programs get labeled as welfare, while programs like unemployment and social security retain the idea that they are legitimate, and not “welfare”. 

 

o        Divisions between upper and middle-class men and their families, and those who received 2nd tier  “welfare” climbed as taxes increased. Recipients of the second tier programs became scapegoats.

o        The rise of private health insurance and pensions after WWII further lesse