Libertarians and Labor Unions

[RGacky3]

Heres something maybe we can agree on, forget the state, unions, without them you essencially have a Capitalism that will almost neccessarily self implode (variable costs continously drop due to competition and the profit motive, which ends up destroying demand, which ends up requiring more cuts to to facilitate profits, thus destroying demand even more), with unions you force the money down, you force the hours down, meaning more people can work, and work less hours for more money, meaning you don't have the demand drop off.

So why don't you guys support Unions? NON-governmental, voluntary and democratic entities that workers use to gain power over the employer. Infact this should be something that libertarians ACTIVELY support, considering its a way workers can represent themselves outside of trying to pressure the government.

Infact RIGHT NOW, labor unions help strip away the corporate control of the state (something libertarians claim to not like), so why not back them?

Could it be that libertarian ideology is not about liberty at all, but infact about class domination? I don't know.

But anyway, lets here it libertarians, whats your view of unions?

[RichardAWilson]

I believe it’s a class based position. The Libertarians claim to dislike the labor unions for compelling businesses to pay higher wages. According to them, business and worker relations don’t need to be improved because they’re voluntary exchanges.

Libertarianism is to the bourgeoisie what socialism is to the proletariat.

Freedom and rights for the Ruling Classes!

[Revolution starts with U]

Libertarians tend to view strikes as an affront to the owner's property. They will say the worker's are coercing the "scabs" from entering the workplace. And then they will resort to rewriting history, saying Unions are inherently violent, and not mentioning that 9/10 the owner's goons struck first.

[Napoleon Winston]

Personally, I think unions are a great idea, its a peaceful way for the working class to organize and demand better wages.
Its when the government gets involved either way that I object.

[Napoleon Winston]

I believe it’s a class based position. The Libertarians claim to dislike the labor unions for compelling businesses to pay higher wages. According to them, business and worker relations don’t need to be improved because they’re voluntary exchanges.

Libertarianism is to the bourgeoisie what socialism is to the proletariat.

Freedom and rights for the Ruling Classes!

They are voluntary exchanges.
Unions are just a working classes way of gaining power in bartering work for wage, its a fundamentally good thing for workers, and a bad thing for employers.

[Skooma Addict]

I am pretty sure most libertarians support "voluntary unions." But most don't think they would be common at all.

[Revolution starts with U]

skooma, that blue is far too opaque to read effectively

[RGacky3]

So why do I never see a Libertarian on the picket line?


Personally, I think unions are a great idea, its a peaceful way for the working class to organize and demand better wages.


What if it goes beyond that, what if they manage to effectively take over hte industry?

[DinodudeEpic]

The problem is that people don't know what an union is. They are NOT a government organization. They are formed by the workers to gain representation.

When you limit unions, you have to then use government power to enforce it.

Same goes for striking, you can't ban striking without government.

Note that using corporations to do this would turn them into governments themselves.

So, anarcho-capitalism must either let the workers take over the means of production or have the corporations turn into government.

Note: States are voluntary in the same way as a corporation, since you can just run away to Antarctica/other uninhabited place and live in anarchy. But, that would be virtually suicide(Unless you're a survivalist/pioneer). Like how not working in a corporation makes you unable to afford anything. (Unless you win the lottery all the time, or you self-sustain yourself. Or, you decide to self-employ yourself, but the corporations would just buy your business.)

As for other types of 'right' libertarianism, this would just have the problem that restricting unions and strikes would limit the liberties the workers have from corporate coercion.

[Jazzratt]

So why do I never see a Libertarian on the picket line? Because no matter what the tedious ballaches tell you they have no interest in supporting the aims of striking workers. Even those in the same position have bought into the fantasy economics of the right which makes them believe that if they take pay cuts, pension reductions and so on they actually earn more because the invisible dick of the market will piss golden trickles down onto them or something.

[RGacky3]

Sure, but why are not Unions part of that invisible dick? What I'm trying to point out is that libertarians, as we all know, are NOT interested in actual liberty, if they were you'd see them on the picket lines.

I have yet to see libertarians ever fight for real workable liberty for actual working class people, nor have they defended not doing so.

[DinodudeEpic]

Classical liberals actually are more against state control of the economy. They simply just don't know of actual Socialism, and worker's self-management. If they knew of that, they would all become laissez-faire mutualists or free-market syndicalists who want a economy where the markets are regulated by non-government labor unions that democratically owned by the workers. Another problem is they don't see that corporations also use force to put the working class down.

Note that various doche-bags take up the word 'libertarian' and act like the only way to freedom is laissez-faire capitalism. And, that freedom is right and oppression is left.

And, people keep associating 'left' with state-owned economies and 'right' with laissez-faire economies. The sheer stupidity and widespread use of it astounds me.

Then again, 'pseudo-libertarians' are not really classical liberals, but paleoconservatives (Sometimes even reactionaries who call themselves 'Libertarian') who want to dress themselves in sheep's clothing.

In total, Classical Liberalism is NOT a right-wing ideology, it's merely a dead breed of leftism. Pseudo-libertarianism is simply populist rhetoric used to con people like how the Soviet Union calls itself communist to make people think the workers actually own the means of production.

[Napoleon Winston]

So why do I never see a Libertarian on the picket line?

I've never had any reason to involve myself in disagreements between an employer and employee, and, with the exception a new IWW movement, I likely wont.



What if it goes beyond that, what if they manage to effectively take over hte industry?

What do you mean "take over industry"?
If they buy the company from the owner and for a co-op, I have no problem with it.

[Klaatu]

Libertarians view unions as an affront to a private business' "private-property rights."

Well the union's collective bargaining right is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution's 1st and
14th Amendments. That is, the right to make legal contracts with other parties, whether
collectively or singularly, and have these contracts be protected by law.

For example, I as an individual have a freedom of speech right to ask my employer
for a pay raise, improved working conditions, etc. Of course, if one or two of my
co-workers went into the boss' office at the same time, that would be considered
as a collective, and we would enjoy exactly the same bargaining rights that I as an
individual would have. Same goes for a larger group of say, one hundred. Or one
thousand. All enjoy all of the same rights that an individual does. This is also a
right under the First Amendment, the right to assemble peaceably.

So unions need to see a business' so-called "property rights" as an affront to unions'
constitutionally-protected collective bargaining rights, not the other way around.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause

[Judicator]

I don't know if they would be against the idea of a union in theory, but unions generally tend to push for government protection and so forth. This would lead libertarians to oppose particular unions.

[Libertador]

To make some extra cash I used to do three or four hours of work on the shop floor where my parents work (though they're in management).

I have nothing but contempt for people who abuse the influence of their union. There was a guy who was operating forklifts while on some heavy heavy painkillers because of a leg-related accident at work. The company was willing to give him absolutely full pay but he refused. When they tried to force him into taking a vacation the union went on strike for three weeks.

These morons honestly were so close to shutting the whole plant down and making everyone lose their jobs.

[Skooma Addict]

Because no matter what the tedious ballaches tell you they have no interest in supporting the aims of striking workers. Even those in the same position have bought into the fantasy economics of the right which makes them believe that if they take pay cuts, pension reductions and so on they actually earn more because the invisible dick of the market will piss golden trickles down onto them or something.

Most of them are not very interested in workers struggle. They aren't really interested in any particular struggle of any social class. They have different priorities, which is basically just promoting their message.

[Zav]

Could it be that libertarian ideology is not about liberty at all, but infact about class domination? I don't know.

But anyway, lets here it libertarians, whats your view of unions?
To the Libertarian Party, Liberty is only the freedom to exploit others to get ahead.

[Napoleon Winston]

To the Libertarian Party, Liberty is only the freedom to exploit others to get ahead.

I disagree, although Im not sure of the exact views of the Libertarian Party, most libertarians don't want government intervention on trade, any laws restricting what people can and cant do with their capital (in this case, the physical labor offered by the workers), are, on principle, anti-libertarian.

Although you need to remember, many of the justifications (not reasons, laws are generally in place for a much different reason than the presented justification) against labor unions, are the same as those restricting large companies from forming monopolies, e.g. its unfair for multiple entities to work together to artificially drive up the price of their capital.

[RGacky3]

I've never had any reason to involve myself in disagreements between an employer and employee, and, with the exception a new IWW movement, I likely wont.


To support workers gaining fair wages and conditions, and gaining more freedom, which you claim to support.

You'd support a new IWW movement?


What do you mean "take over industry"?
If they buy the company from the owner and for a co-op, I have no problem with it.

I mean, for example what they did in argentina, or shut it down to the point where the boss has to give up control.


I don't know if they would be against the idea of a union in theory, but unions generally tend to push for government protection and so forth. This would lead libertarians to oppose particular unions.

So do corporations, yet libertarians are always quick to defend corporations. Unions are, juts like corporations, except non-profit, democratic and for workers.


I have nothing but contempt for people who abuse the influence of their union. There was a guy who was operating forklifts while on some heavy heavy painkillers because of a leg-related accident at work. The company was willing to give him absolutely full pay but he refused. When they tried to force him into taking a vacation the union went on strike for three weeks.

These morons honestly were so close to shutting the whole plant down and making everyone lose their jobs.

There are always tidbits and stories like that, but they are few and far between, before unions that guy would have been simply fired, and no safty measures taken.


Most of them are not very interested in workers struggle. They aren't really interested in any particular struggle of any social class. They have different priorities, which is basically just promoting their message.

Their message is one thing, the policie they actually push for are always pro-buisiness, anti-worker.

[Skooma Addict]

Their message is one thing, the policie they actually push for are always pro-buisiness, anti-worker.They don't see things from the capitalist v worker paradigm socialists use. For them there is no class called "workers." There are wage earners, but they are only ever grouped together when discussing economics. They do not believe workers have as many common interests as socialists do. The same goes with business.

[Red_Struggle]

http://teapartyworker.com/

This makes no sense.

[Jazzratt]

Most of them are not very interested in workers struggle. They aren't really interested in any particular struggle of any social class. They have different priorities, which is basically just promoting their message. There's quite a difference between having "no interest" in worker struggles and actively trying to make things worse for workers because your delusional fantasy economics tell you to, though.