Tuesday, June 21, 2005
Why I love Wal-Mart
OK, I'm being needlessly provocative. I don't love Wal-mart. But I think a lot of people hate it for the wrong reasons.
Here are some good reasons to hate Wal-Mart:
They pay workers sub-poverty line wages in poor countries.
They shut down outlets that try to unionize.
They contribute to urban sprawl.
Wasteful. Ugly. Bad for the environment. But sooo profitable
And here's a bad reason:
#1: Capitalism by any other name
Communities didn't spring forth from a town planner's imagination. They emerged as industry emerged. Factories need large concentrations of workers close by. Goods can be distributed more easily.
American industry still exists. But it's changed. To compete more effectively, companies must streamline production, creating large networks of linked factories that aren't always close geographically - hence the movement of industries to the 3rd world (which has been overstated, by the way). They also have to streamline distribution. Small stores are not efficient: it's much cheaper to distribute goods in a single location.
Don't call me inefficient or I'll whup you
This is capitalism's fault. Ironically, conservative commentators get this a lot better than liberals do:
Conservatives think this is natural and inevitable. It's not: this process is part of capitalists' incessant desire to raise profits and cut costs. It's immoral and unnecessary. If you question how Wal-Mart does it, you really do have to "criticize just about every industry." Which is why I'm a Marxist.
I won't be happy until I get to make your shoes
#2: Petty. And bourgeois.
This unceasing creation & destruction creates a new class: the shopkeeper, or petty bourgeois. I suspect the original translation is petit (small) bourgeois, but I prefer petty.
These people are squeezed between big industry, who they compete with, and workers, who they need as customers. They only survive if they find a niche or get bigger. More often they don't and get "devastated". The conservatives would be surprised to find they're paraphrasing Karl Marx:
Cockroach capitalists
Politically, the petty bourgeois are contradictory. They're rapacious free-marketers, who vigorously oppose unions through their 'independent business' associations, because higher wages cut into profits. They also oppose government subsidies for big business (and, presumably, want subsidies themselves.) They're stuck between labour and capital. Unsurprisingly, they provide the basis of support for fascism, when labour and capital have fought to a standstill and capital needs an ally to smash the workers' movement.
"More, cleaner, better local shops. And no Jews!"
Psychologically, the petty bourgeois don't have a large organization to shield them. They exist in a hostile marketplace. So they internalize the needs of their businesses. They become wary, suspicious, always ready to cut corners to survive. The 'happy shopkeeper' is a myth, as anyone who's worked for a small business will know. They are happy because their customers require them to look happy. But next time you go in a small shop, see the way the proprietor fixes her gaze on you. In her eyes you'll find desperate need and hatred rolled together. She wants you to buy something, or she'll go under. But you might steal something... and she'll go under. The 'pillars of the community' are nothing more than wretched scrooges, despising the customers they desire.
Don't touch the precious things of the shop!
And they treat their workers like shit. For example, I worked in a small sports equipment factory. The manager ignored safety regulations, screamed at the workers and drove a Mercedes while his foreman got $14 an hour. I've had so many friends whose small-business bosses cheat them of paycheques, verbally abuse or sexually harass them.
I love my job. I love my job. I love my job...
I've had much better experiences in large workplaces. Managers aren't as personally invested in their work, so they don't freak out as much. Large workplaces are easier to unionize and regulate. Which is why, given the choice, I'd rather work at Wal-Mart than Mom 'n Pop.
Thank god we're fired. Now we can finally open that novelty sex shop! - Jonquier workers learn Wal-Mart is closing their unionized workplace
This anti-workerism is the dirty secret behind reactionary petty bourgeois utopias. I challenge liberals to answer the following: if Wal-Mart is so evil, how do you feel about an outlet closing down to avoid unionization? Do you celebrate those workers being out of a job? Is the best future you can imagine where they open up small shops of their own - shops which cut corners with safety, are anti-union, abuse their male employees and sexually harass their female workers?
Faced with a concrete reality - an open, unionized Wal-Mart vs. 200 people unemployed, I'll take the former. Those unionized Wal-Mart workers are better placed than anyone to call attention to Wal-Mart abuses, and build solidarity with their sisters & brothers overseas. Which is something the petty & big bourgeoisie both have to fear, for good reason.
Here are some good reasons to hate Wal-Mart:
They pay workers sub-poverty line wages in poor countries.
They shut down outlets that try to unionize.
They contribute to urban sprawl.
Wasteful. Ugly. Bad for the environment. But sooo profitable
And here's a bad reason:
SMALL BUSINESS PEOPLE...This critique has two serious problems.
...end up working in a department of Wal-Mart, nostalgic for their homey store and friendly neighborhood shopping experience. And lots of these jobs are part-time and without benefits. Who are the pillars of your community? The merchant, the banker, the principal, the poet, the police chief, the alderman.....None of these people can decide what sort of town you'll have. ONLY Wal-Mart CAN. Megastores tear the social fabric.
#1: Capitalism by any other name
Communities didn't spring forth from a town planner's imagination. They emerged as industry emerged. Factories need large concentrations of workers close by. Goods can be distributed more easily.
American industry still exists. But it's changed. To compete more effectively, companies must streamline production, creating large networks of linked factories that aren't always close geographically - hence the movement of industries to the 3rd world (which has been overstated, by the way). They also have to streamline distribution. Small stores are not efficient: it's much cheaper to distribute goods in a single location.
Don't call me inefficient or I'll whup you
This is capitalism's fault. Ironically, conservative commentators get this a lot better than liberals do:
The luddites claim that Walmart is destroying the mom and pop proprietors but in order to criticize Walmart, the luddites would have to criticize just about every industry. Supermarkets devastated mom and pop grocery stores... The big retail chains have already created the upheavals that dramatically changed the cultural fabric of society decades agoWal-Mart is one industry of many - all of which destroy existing social forms. They have for 100s of years, since the first feudal lord closed off his land to graze sheep, expelling his peasants. Capitalism constantly revolutionizes existing social forms, destroying older, inefficient ones, such as small shops.
Conservatives think this is natural and inevitable. It's not: this process is part of capitalists' incessant desire to raise profits and cut costs. It's immoral and unnecessary. If you question how Wal-Mart does it, you really do have to "criticize just about every industry." Which is why I'm a Marxist.
I won't be happy until I get to make your shoes
#2: Petty. And bourgeois.
This unceasing creation & destruction creates a new class: the shopkeeper, or petty bourgeois. I suspect the original translation is petit (small) bourgeois, but I prefer petty.
These people are squeezed between big industry, who they compete with, and workers, who they need as customers. They only survive if they find a niche or get bigger. More often they don't and get "devastated". The conservatives would be surprised to find they're paraphrasing Karl Marx:
In countries where modern civilisation has become fully developed, a new class of petty bourgeois has been formed... The individual members of this class, however, are being constantly hurled down into the proletariat by the action of competition, and, as modern industry develops, they even see the moment approaching when they will completely disappear as an independent section of modern society, to be replaced in manufactures, agriculture and commerceShopkeepers exist where it's not cost-effective to build bigger. And where there are willing dupes who think they're building the American dream by opening a shop, when they're just taking on risks - long hours, low pay, and the constant threat of bankruptcy - larger capitalists are smart enough to avoid.
Cockroach capitalists
Politically, the petty bourgeois are contradictory. They're rapacious free-marketers, who vigorously oppose unions through their 'independent business' associations, because higher wages cut into profits. They also oppose government subsidies for big business (and, presumably, want subsidies themselves.) They're stuck between labour and capital. Unsurprisingly, they provide the basis of support for fascism, when labour and capital have fought to a standstill and capital needs an ally to smash the workers' movement.
"More, cleaner, better local shops. And no Jews!"
Psychologically, the petty bourgeois don't have a large organization to shield them. They exist in a hostile marketplace. So they internalize the needs of their businesses. They become wary, suspicious, always ready to cut corners to survive. The 'happy shopkeeper' is a myth, as anyone who's worked for a small business will know. They are happy because their customers require them to look happy. But next time you go in a small shop, see the way the proprietor fixes her gaze on you. In her eyes you'll find desperate need and hatred rolled together. She wants you to buy something, or she'll go under. But you might steal something... and she'll go under. The 'pillars of the community' are nothing more than wretched scrooges, despising the customers they desire.
Don't touch the precious things of the shop!
And they treat their workers like shit. For example, I worked in a small sports equipment factory. The manager ignored safety regulations, screamed at the workers and drove a Mercedes while his foreman got $14 an hour. I've had so many friends whose small-business bosses cheat them of paycheques, verbally abuse or sexually harass them.
I love my job. I love my job. I love my job...
I've had much better experiences in large workplaces. Managers aren't as personally invested in their work, so they don't freak out as much. Large workplaces are easier to unionize and regulate. Which is why, given the choice, I'd rather work at Wal-Mart than Mom 'n Pop.
Thank god we're fired. Now we can finally open that novelty sex shop! - Jonquier workers learn Wal-Mart is closing their unionized workplace
This anti-workerism is the dirty secret behind reactionary petty bourgeois utopias. I challenge liberals to answer the following: if Wal-Mart is so evil, how do you feel about an outlet closing down to avoid unionization? Do you celebrate those workers being out of a job? Is the best future you can imagine where they open up small shops of their own - shops which cut corners with safety, are anti-union, abuse their male employees and sexually harass their female workers?
Faced with a concrete reality - an open, unionized Wal-Mart vs. 200 people unemployed, I'll take the former. Those unionized Wal-Mart workers are better placed than anyone to call attention to Wal-Mart abuses, and build solidarity with their sisters & brothers overseas. Which is something the petty & big bourgeoisie both have to fear, for good reason.
