States sometimes act against direct capitalist class interests

Evidence

There are times when states have insisted on representing or mobilizing interests antithetical to those of capital. Particular states, for instance, have insisted upon working protections and improved living conditions for the working classes over bourgeois objections. Many states regulate im/migration even in the face of labor shortages that would drive wage rates and so labor costs up. And many support greater leisure as a mode of social control in the face of pressures to extend the working day, while recently some economically developed states have moved at least nominally to equalize wage rates across race and gender. — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 1667 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Weimar-era cartelization forced the state to pick between crushing or strengthening monopolies — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 509; State-capitalism theory downgrades the economic base in favor of direct political domination — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 600; Fascist state intervention in the private sector served capitalist interests, not state power — Clara E. Mattei, The Capital Order: How Economists…, 1713 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• States sometimes defend interests opposed to capital’s immediate wishes #corroborates (0.95) — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 1667