Class warfare is one thing, politics is something else. They are only peripherally related.
Poor people and middle class people do not run for political office, as they have to work for a living. It costs money to run, plus one needs to have many contacts with bucks or perhaps a few with big bucks.
When someone says "we need to increase our productivity" that actually means, "you need to produce more for the same money, or produce the same amount for less money," or perhaps "you need to produce three times more for twice the money". That does not sound like class warfare, but that is what it is. The end result is that those who manage get more, and those who produce get a reduced share. This is the direction our economy has been heading in for a rather long time.
"We need to be more competitive, we must grow our business" these are generally what one hears when one is the target of class warfare.
Perhaps you, as a government employee, do not hear this so often.
The beginning of every faculty meeting always began with the usual "you did a GREAT JOB last year, but we will need to to an EVEN BETTER JOB this coming year." This was always the introductory topic, and was entirely unrelated to salary increases or all the times when we got a great new health insurance plan that always cost more and delivered less than the old one. They could complete a new building and move most of the faculty into new offices, provide new computers, all of which made a huge difference, but they would mention this AFTER the EVEN BETTER JOB speech.
It seemed to me that this speech was always given because the administration thought that they should be businesslike, and that this is what businesses did when they were being businesslike. I don't think that performance would have varied one whit had they never given the speech. I did the best I could every year anyway. But not because of the dumb speech.
