Skip to content

Bi-Weekly Discussion - Is the Managerial Class Hurting America?

Photo of Brian B.
Hosted By
Brian B.
Bi-Weekly Discussion - Is the Managerial Class Hurting America?

Details

This is going to be an online meetup using Zoom. If you've never used Zoom before, don't worry — it's easy to use and free to join.

Here's the link to the event: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81742721019?pwd=NTE0U1Uzc04vYlRHeVhwRWVTazJHZz09

Meeting ID: 817 4272 1019
Passcode: 709529

----------------------------------------------
IS THE "PROFESSIONAL MANAGERIAL CLASS" HURTING AMERICA?

INTRODUCTION - HISTORY OF THE "PMC" CONCEPT:

In this meetup, we'll look at a variety of recent criticisms of America's upper middle class, variously defined as people who fall into either the top 10% (over $200K in 2019) or top 20% (over $140K in 2019) in annual household income. Much of the upper middle class overlaps with what is known by sociologists as the "professional managerial class" (abbreviated as PMC) - i.e. a group of middle to upper-middle class professionals is distinguished from other social classes by their training & education, with occupations including academics, civil servants, engineers, managers, doctors, lawyers, and middle-level business executives & government administrators. Defined broadly, the PMC accounts for about a third of the American workforce, but we'll be focused on those with higher income and more political & cultural influence.

The history of the PMC concept dates back to James Burnham's 1941 book The Managerial Revolution which theorized about the future of world capitalism based upon its development in the interwar period. Analyzing the emerging forms of society around the world, Burnham saw certain commonalities between the economic formations of Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, and America under FDR's New Deal. He argued that a new society was emerging in which a class of "managers" had waged a drive for "the position of ruling class." He argued that whether ownership was corporate/private or statist/governmental, the essential spit between the ruling elite (executives and managers backed by bureaucrats and functionaries) and the mass of society was not ownership so much as control of the means of production.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Burnham#The_Managerial_Revolution

In his 1944 essay in "Second Thoughts on James Burnham", George Orwell's criticized some of the near-term predictions Burnham made about the course of WWII (e.g. German victory) and what he saw as Burnham's "power worship", but he accepted that Burnham might be right in identifying a general drift towards oligarchy with the concentration of industrial and financial power, and the development of the managerial/technical class. However, Orwell thought there was no way this managerial revolution could enable fascism or Soviet-style communism to last for long, arguing: "The huge, invincible, everlasting slave empire of which Burnham appears to dream will not be established, or if established, will not endure." As we'll see, Orwell's thoughts are typical of the opposition to the managerial class today among the anti-authoritarian left, particularly democratic socialists.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Thoughts_on_James_Burnham

Orwell noted that the theme of a new technocratic type of society – neither capitalist nor socialist – was predicted in several works such as Hillaire Belloc's 1912 book The Servile State. Belloc was a Catholic conservative and felt that neither capitalism nor socialism was stable or just, but feared the third possibility of a highly unequal technocratic "Servile State" as well. Belloc advocated for "distributism" - i.e. distribution of the means of production to create a society marked by widespread property ownership. Later Catholic conservative thinkers, although less enthusiastic about distributism, have shared some of Belloc's concerns.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Servile_State

Belloc's book was in turn an influence on Friedrich Hayek's 1944 Road to Serfdom, which led later generations of libertarians to fear the erosion of individual freedom entailed by creeping government control of economic decision-making.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_to_Serfdom

Although Burnham was initially a Trotskyite, his political views shifted to the right after WWII and his 1964 book Suicide of the West became a classic text for the post-war conservative movement in American politics. Burnham defined liberalism as a "syndrome" afflicting liberals with guilt & hypocrisy. His works greatly influenced paleoconservative author Samuel T. Francis, who used Burnham's ideas to develop theories about the "managerial state", which he equated with the "welfare-warfare state" and "polite totalitarianism". Many of today's paleocon borrow from Francis's ideas when they rail against "globalism". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Managerial_state

Taken together, we can get a sense of the various political factions that were aligning against the "managerial state" in the early-to-mid 20th century, and in this discussion we'll see how this is still going on today in terms of how many different groups on both sides of the political spectrum we see complaining about the "professional-managerial class".

RELEVANT MATERIAL FROM PAST MEETUPS:

Back in June of 2019, we had a meetup entitled "Are Coastal Elites Living in a 'Bubble'?" We talked about the residential segregation we'll discuss in Part 1 of this meetup, but we also talked about the economist Tyler Cowen & the sociologist Charles Murray's theories about how the cultural segregation of urban elites has negative social effects. We also looked at arguments related to an alleged ideological bubble around the coastal elites' narrower class of pundits, journalists & academics that creates blind spots in their political views. Specifically we analyzed Paul Krugman's critique of "Very Serious People" and Nicholas Nassim Taleb's critique of "Intellectuals Yet Idiots", as well as Daniel Drezner's critique of "thought leaders".
https://www.meetup.com/Philadelphia-Political-Agnostics/events/chrnnqyzhbjc/

In August of 2019, we had a meetup where we discussed the social & economic forces that drive up the cost of housing in many cities, leading to residential segregation - https://www.meetup.com/Philadelphia-Political-Agnostics/events/txqhxqyzlbpb/

In May of 2020, Profs & Pints hosted philosophy professor Olufemi Táíwò for a talk entitled "How the Elite Captured Identity Politics" where he explained how the phenomenon of "elite capture" works.
https://www.meetup.com/Philadelphia-Political-Agnostics/events/270765142/

-----------------------------------------------

DIRECTIONS ON HOW TO PREPARE FOR OUR DISCUSSION:

The videos & articles you see linked below are intended to give you a basic overview of some of the major debates over allegations that the upper middle class are causing a variety of social problems. As usual, I certainly don't expect you to read all the articles & watch all the videos prior to attending our discussion. The easiest way to prepare for our discussion is to just watch the numbered videos linked under each section - the videos come to about about 44 minutes total. The articles marked with asterisks are just there to supply additional details. You can browse and look at whichever ones you want, but don't worry - we'll cover the stuff you missed in our discussion.

In terms of the discussion format, my general idea is that we'll address the topics in the order presented here. I figure we'll spend about 30 minutes on each section.

----------------------------------------------
I. BILL BISHOP'S "BIG SORT" THEORY & RICHARD FLORIDA'S "NEW URBAN CRISIS" - GEOGRAPHIC SELF-SORTING & URBAN CLASS SEGREGATION:

  • IS GEOGRAPHIC SELF-SORTING BY POLITICAL VIEWS THE MAJOR FORCE BEHIND THE INCREASE IN LANDSLIDE COUNTIES OVER THE LAST 40 YEARS? OR DID THE PARTY IDEOLOGIES REALIGN IN A WAY THAT SEPARATED RURAL & URBAN VOTERS WITHOUT MUCH MOVING REQUIRED?

  • DO MOST AMERICANS NOW LIVE IN NEIGHBORHOODS OF POLITICALLY LIKE-MINDED PEOPLE? IF SO, DOES THAT MEAN THEIR VIEWS ARE REINFORCED BY DAILY INTERACTIONS, OR ARE WE TOO DISCONNECTED FOR PEER PRESSURE TO MATTER MUCH?

  • COULD POLITICAL POLARIZATION BE REDUCED BY GETTING MORE TECH COMPANIES & UNIVERSITIES IN RED STATE CITIES, WHICH WOULD ATTRACT LIBERALS TO MOVE THERE? OR COULD THIS SORT OF "CARPET-BAGGING" BACKFIRE?

  • IS THE INCREASING RACIAL & CLASS SEGREGATION IN CITIES THE INEVITABLE OUTCOME OF ATTRACTING THE HIGH-INCOME "CREATIVE CLASS", OR CAN INNOVATION BE UNCOUPLED FROM GENTRIFICATION?

  • WAS THE SUBURBAN POPULISM THAT ELECTED ROB FORD MAYOR OF TORONTO A BACKLASH AGAINST GENTRIFICATION, AS RICHARD FLORIDA CONTENDS? IF SO, IS IT BECOMING A POLITICAL FORCE IN THE U.S.?

1a) The Village Square, "The Big Sort" (video - 8:49 min.)
https://youtu.be/OvzAUSVnIbo

1b) Richard Florida, "The New Urban Crisis" (video - 2:52 min.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Khe0_6W00vk

.
II. DECLINING SOCIAL MOBILITY, RICHARD REEVES' "DREAM HOARDERS" & MATTHEW STEWART'S "NEW ARISTOCRACY"

  • HOW HAVE INCOMES IN THE TOP 10% & TOP 20% FARED OVER THE LAST SEVERAL DECADES? EVEN IF MOST HAVEN'T SEEN A BIG RISE IN INCOME SIMILAR TO THE TOP 1%, HAS THE UPPER-MIDDLE CLASS BEEN IMMUNE TO THE WAGE STAGNATION THAT HAS PLAGUED MUCH OF THE LOWER-MIDDLE & WORKING CLASSES?

  • ARE THE INCREASING ACADEMIC CREDENTIALS REQUIRED FOR MANY PROFESSIONS A FORM OF "DREAM HOARDING" - I.E. AN ENTRY BARRIER THAT KEEPS OUT A LOT OF THE COMPETITION FOR HIGHER-PAYING JOBS?

  • HAS INCOME MOBILITY DECLINE IN RECENT DECADES, OR IS IT THE "SPACES BETWEEN THE RUNGS" THAT HAS INCREASED (PER RAJ CHETTY)?

  • DOES THE FACT THAT THE 9.9% (I.E. TOP 10% MINUS THE TOP 0.1% OF INCOME EARNERS) HOLD MOST OF THE WEALTH IN AMERICA MAKE THEM A "NEW ARISTOCRACY" OR ARE THESE MOSTLY JUST MIDDLE-CLASS PEOPLE WHO HAVE A 401K & OWN HOMES?

  • SHOULD WE FOCUS MORE ON SHIFTS IN THE POLITICAL IDEOLOGY OF THE TOP 10-20%, AS ROBERT MERRY DOES? IS THE DISDAIN FOR MIDDLE AMERICA & "ROOTLESS COSMOPOLITANISM" THAT CHRISTOPHER LASCH SPOKE OF IN HIS BOOK REVOLT OF THE ELITES (1994) NOW A PART OF UPPER-MIDDLE CLASS IDEOLOGY?

2a) The Atlantic w/ Matthew Stewart, "The 99% Is a Myth—Here's How It Really Breaks Down" (video - 3:04 min.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hb28kAavh0M

2b) PBS w/ Richard Reeves, "How the upper middle class keeps everyone else out" (video - 7:09 min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPnxOOeY1Kg

.
III. WOKE CAPITALISM & CORPORATE "DIVERSITY & INCLUSION" AS A DEFLECTION, A WEDGE ISSUE & VIRTUE SIGNALING:

  • ARE CORPORATIONS PUTTING MESSAGES ABOUT SEXISM & RACISM IN THEIR ADS BECAUSE THEIR RESEARCH INDICATES MOST OF THEIR CUSTOMERS LIKE IT, TO "BUY OFF" ACTIVISTS, OR SOME OTHER REASON?

  • CAN THE SITUATIONIST THEORY OF "RECUPERATION" EXPLAIN WOKE CAPITALISM (I.E. CAPITALISM INEVITABLY COOPTS RADICAL MESSAGES), OR IS IT A DUBIOUS CONSPIRACY THEORY?

  • DOES THE "GO WOKE, GO BROKE" MANTRA ACTUALLY HOLD UP - I.E. HAS WOKE ADVERTISING BACKFIRED & LET TO A DROP IN SALES? IS IT TRUE THAT GILLETTE LOST $8 BILLION DUE TO ITS "THE BEST MEN CAN BE" AD?

  • ARE CORPORATIONS MAKING A RATIONAL COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS WHEN THEY FIRE EMPLOYEES FOR OFFENSIVE SPEECH, OR DO ONLINE "CANCEL CULTURE" CAMPAIGNS TRICK THEM INTO OVERESTIMATING THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE OFFENDED VIA THE "SPIRAL OF SILENCE"?

  • DOES CORPORATE DIVERSITY ACTUALLY WORK TO REDUCE BIAS, OR IS IT MOSTLY TO PROTECT THEM FROM EMPLOYEE LAWSUITS?

  • COULD DIVERSITY TRAINING BACKFIRE & CREATE MORE CONFLICTS AMONG EMPLOYEES, LEADING TO FIRINGS & LAWSUITS WHICH WILL HURT COMPANIES?

3a) Democracy Now w/ Anand Giridharadas, "'Woke capitalism' is about deflecting criticism, not benefiting communities" (video - 1:56 min.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0eq1OD5ctI

3b) Science Insider, "What Everyone Gets Wrong About Implicit Bias Trainings" (video - 5:22 min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Li656r-AI0&t=20s

.
IV. YASCHA MOUNK'S "UNDEMOCRATIC LIBERALISM" & MICHAEL LIND'S "NEW CLASS WAR"

  • HOW ACCURATE ARE THE POLLS THAT CLAIM TO SHOW MANY YOUNG PEOPLE HAVE BECOME DISILLUSIONED WITH DEMOCRACY OVER THE LAST DECADE? IS THIS STRONGER AMONG UPPER-MIDDLE CLASS PEOPLE?

  • COULD ELITE EFFORTS TO STIMY POPULISM & PROMOTE LIBERALISM LEAD TO AN OVERCORRECTION THAT FAVORS MORE TECHNOCRACY IN LIEU OF DEMOCRACY?

  • COULD YASCHA MOUNK'S PROPOSED REFORMS (I.E. CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM, ECONOMIC REDISTRIBUTION, CIVIC NATIONALISM) HELP AVOID THE POPULIST BACKLASH?

  • DOES THE PMC BENEFIT FROM LOW-WAGE IMMIGRATION & DEFEND IT BY ACCUSING CRITICS OF "RACISM"?

4a) Yascha Mounk, "The Crisis of Liberal Democracy" (video - 5:22 min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8H-2xciXfY

4b) The Hill w/ Michael Lind, "The New Class War author: How the PMC ruined everything" (video - 9:05 min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpakMRm6mmo

Events in
Photo of Philadelphia Political Agnostics group
Philadelphia Political Agnostics
See more events
Philadelphia Political Agnostics
Photo of Philadelphia Political Agnostics group
Online event
This event has passed
Photo of Philadelphia Political Agnostics group
Philadelphia Political Agnostics
public group