Full employment would let workers challenge capitalism itself, not just wages.

Evidence

Hypothetically, with full employment, workers could gain enough political freedom to challenge the very foundation of capitalism—the relationship of exploitation. Imagine Walmart workers saying to their managers, “If you don’t pay us better, we’re going to stop working.” If no unemployed person were available to take that job, Walmart would have to raise wages. At that point, the workers might push further, questioning the very idea of wage labor and demanding a share in the company’s profits and decision-making. This has happened before, after all. The demands of Walmart workers could extend to other sectors, putting the very stability of our economic system at risk. By contrast, a certain level of unemployment ensures our passive resignation to the system while maintaining the “right” balance of power between capital and labor. The reserve army is the pivot on which the law of supply and demand for labor rests: it confines the scope of this law within the unbreachable and highly convenient limits of capital exploitation and dominance. — Clara E. Mattei, Escape from Capitalism, 256

Categorization

• XREF: The Walmart thought experiment directly dramatizes the invisibility of the reserve army as a political choice — links to Mattei’s core ‘invisible order’ theme. — connects to: Full employment is politically impossible under capitalism because firing would lose its disciplinary power — Clara E. Mattei, Escape from Capitalism, 255; Postwar labor unrest aimed at revolution, not just wages. — Clara E. Mattei, The Capital Order: How Economists…, 375; Welfare concessions designed to appease workers instead inflamed demands to abolish capitalism. — Clara E. Mattei, The Capital Order: How Economists…, 111 (+1 more)