The Precariat - Who are they and why do they pose a threat to our current political system?

JACK SHUTE

Having watched a TED talk by Guy Standing, co-founder of the Basic Income Earth Network, I reflected on the emerging social class called the ‘Precariat’ and how they could, and to a certain extent have already, drastically altered the political landscape.

Standing describes how we are in the painful construction of a globalised market economy and states that currently it is a delicate moment, with growing inequalities and insecurities starting to threaten long-nurtured enlightenment values. The supply side economic policies pursued since the Thatcher-Reagan days has resulted in a system of “rentier capitalism,” in which a rising share of income is going to those who own physical, financial and intellectual property. This effectively means that the income distribution system of the 20th century has broken down, and will not come back. As a result, one could certainly argue that it has generated a new global class structure. At the top you have a plutocracy of multi-billionaires with absurd power, whose wealth will keep on expanding, especially with the inevitable implementation of AI and how firm will be able to save millions on costs by replacing workers with robots. Below them is a shrinking “salariat” with employment security, however with the changing economic conditions, more and more of these will be moving to the precariat. Another shrinking social class is the traditional industrial “proletariat”, followed by a rapidly growing “precariat”.

The outcome of globalisation, a technological revolution and reforms promoting labour flexibility, resulted in the precariat suffering from pervasive insecurity, which makes it a dangerous class. The precariat has three main dimensions;  firstly, they have a distinctive work pattern, and are being forced to a life of unstable, insecure labour. Arguably more importantly, they are without an occupational identity or narrative to give to their lives, which can especially be a problem having grown up in a town renowned for a particular occupation (dockers, steel-miners etc.) Furthermore, they must do much work-for-labour, such as refining résumés, filling forms and waiting around for jobs - all of which aren’t paid, but without it they would be missing out on potential work. The precariat also often end up with jobs below their education or qualifications, and have low mobility upwards. All this creates frustration, insecurity and stress.

The second defining feature of the precariat is that they have a distinctive social income. They must rely almost entirely on money wages or earnings, and are without any non-wage benefits that even the proletariat obtained, such as paid holidays, medical leave and the prospect of a meaningful pension. While the salariat gain more benefits, the precariat lose even those they had, which ultimately results in the growth of inequality vastly exceeding what income statistics suggests, and in reality, their real wages have often stagnated or fallen, and have almost certainly become more volatile, leading to more uncertainty. An unfortunate byproduct of this is that politicians are mislead as to how bad the situation is and therefore don’t pass sufficient legislation to affect the situation. Lastly, due to volatile nature of the precariat’s pay, the majority are living on the edge of unsustainable debt, with the knowledge that one illness, accident or mistake could tip them into a financial abyss.

The third and final dimension is their distinctive relation to the state, and how in many circumstances the precariat is losing citizenship rights. This is happening most cruelly to the growing number of migrants, but is not limited to migrants, with many native born also losing cultural, civil, social, economic and political rights. As a result many are left feeling excluded from communities that would give identity and solidarity. The majority of the precariat can’t practice what they are qualified to do, and do not see political leaders who represent their interests and needs. This leads to what is the worst feature, being a supplicant, having to ask bureaucrats, employers, relatives, friends or neighbours for help and a loss of self-sufficient which can lead to feeling inadequate and in more severe case depression. One could certainly put forward the case that the rise of precariat and the recent mental health crisis is no coincidence, especially with the male suicide rate skyrocketing, with many male members of the precariat struggling to support their family.

Within the precariat there are also internal divisions, with three main categories emerging. The first are referred to Atavists, and are perhaps the most well known group. Often they will having been raised in working-class communities, and be relatively uneducated, resulting in them being more prone to engage with neo-fascist populists and vote for Trump, Marine Le Pen and Brexit. Next are the Nostalgics, consisting of immigrants and minorities who feel deprived of a home. Additionally, the nostalgics feel that they are losing rights and are often unfairly demonised as well as being alienated and detached from society. Finally, there are the progressives. Categorising as mostly young and at some point ambitious, the majority of progressives went to universities and were promised a “career,” only to emerge feeling deprived of a future. Economists see their danger to society in a more positive light, as they do not want to return to a drab past, and want to join a more positive movement. Nevertheless, currently they don’t feel satisfied with the current political landscape, and can often feel underrepresented in parliament.

To conclude, the emerging precariat class brings an array of both good and bad news. The bad is that many Nostalgics and Progressives are politically disengaged, due to a mixture of disillusion, despair and lack of credible options. This has left a vacuum for neo-fascist populists to be stronger than they should be, and can produce the surprise results such as Brexit, especially as polls are inaccurate with many people expressing the more common opinion but not bothering to vote. The good news is the size of the Atavist group has peaked, due to the fact that they are ageing, as is the legacy of de-industrialisation. Meanwhile, the Nostalgics are starting to find their voice, and the Progressives are mobilising in new movements, with an obvious example being the climate emergency. What is certain is a reconfiguration of society is coming, and having evaluated the precariat class, for me the obvious solution is universal basic income.