tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5461044.post7519254994218531036..comments2023-10-24T11:03:41.388-05:00Comments on ladypoverty: A Marxist review of the Obama administrationJ.R. Boydhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09076895859826581960noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5461044.post-34658136892820902192010-07-12T22:12:40.654-05:002010-07-12T22:12:40.654-05:00Thanks for your thoughts on this (both of you). I ...Thanks for your thoughts on this (both of you). I would comment further but I'm zooming through the internets at a frantic pace this evening.Ben Therehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09552547709669462400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5461044.post-79820187208375602752010-07-11T17:29:02.289-05:002010-07-11T17:29:02.289-05:00Well, unions also reflect the balance of power in ...Well, unions also reflect the balance of power in society, which in the US case has just always been heavily titled toward business. So the unions we have developed out of those circumstances, which were really difficult -- basically you had to be a committed communist if you wanted to advance any kind of class-based unionism, because that's what you were going to be charged with, and jailed for, regardless. I think the government sort of made its point with the Palmer raids, which wrecked what was most promising about the American labor movement by force.<br /><br />State repression was followed up by the legalization of unions, which of course meant that unions would have to meet certain requirements if they want to remain "law abiding" -- which meant losing most of the tactics that make unions effective in the first place, like secondary boycotts and general strikes. Throw in professionalization and the "business union" model of dues-for-representation in your workplace, and you see how the problems evolve. <br /><br />So it's not surprising that we've ended up with political action committees lobbying Congress on workplace concerns, as opposed to self-directed worker's organizations. And, as DPirate notes, that's a recipe for failure. <br /><br />In many ways, however, I'm also sympathetic to the fact that most US unions operate without any viable alternative for now. Consumerism seems to induce apathy amongst people at work, probably because they're used to playing king in the market: Buying stuff preoccupies their attention even if it doesn't meet their needs. On the other hand, getting people interested in non-market concerns, and getting them to do something other than complain, can seem like an intractable problem. That's why I think these issues have to be thought through in relation to consumerism overall.JRBhttp://ladypoverty.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5461044.post-22537355451665722642010-07-11T15:48:45.492-05:002010-07-11T15:48:45.492-05:00I know you are not speaking to me, but I want to r...I know you are not speaking to me, but I want to respond by saying, no, they do not, and yes, they do.<br /><br />What purpose they were designed for will vary somewhat, but inasfar as they are designed to protect their members interests, they do a good job in the immediate and near-future. Longterm they fail rather miserably, in my opinion, and this has as much to do with your first question.<br /><br />As you say, they wield political power, yet they exercise it upon a party which cannot support the common working man. Not that they see no results, but if they were to be in the least idealistic, they might support candidates of their own on the national level. I would venture to say that the larger unions have both the manpower and the money to get congressmen and senators elected from outside the two-party system.DPiratenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5461044.post-89314134758811402182010-07-10T14:39:20.995-05:002010-07-10T14:39:20.995-05:00Very well said. I'd be interested in your tho...Very well said. I'd be interested in your thoughts on "Big Labor" sometime. I'm pro-labor, of course - well I'm pro-human beings so by nature of that I'm pro-labor - but supposedly the unions do wield some sizeable power politically speaking. They top the charts along with many of the multinational corporations in terms of political contributions. Regardless, I'd trust "Big Labor" over "Big Oil" (or finance, pharma, whatever) anyday. As another large powerful institution, a union has it's hazards but we've been conditioned since Ronald Reagan to fear/hate unions almost as much as we are supposed to fear/hate communists or terrorists. It's obvious why this conditioning is so important, but Im curious, do you think unions live up to their ideal? Do they serve the purpose they are designed to serve?Ben Therehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09552547709669462400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5461044.post-41663889399631654722010-07-10T12:25:26.823-05:002010-07-10T12:25:26.823-05:00+ ∞+ ∞DPiratenoreply@blogger.com