Results 21 to 40 of 41
Very familiar with them. I was referencing your bizarre claim that this somehow makes socialist revolution more likely though.
They sure are, but that doesn't mean that socialist organizing automatically follows. The Democrats will put themselves front and center as the "opposition" to this move by the GOP and people will see that as the way forward (as happened in Wisconsin). This is not inevitable of course, but the chances of a socialist revolution coming from this are slim to none. What major socialist organizations are playing a relevant role in this battle right now? Are those organizations able to actually achieve hegemony over the opposition thus taking it from the Democrats? These are important questions that folks who say "yay things are bad so now socialist revolution will happen!" often fail to even address.
It's difficult even if socialist groups were present to be taken seriously. The complete control of the media by business interests over what is considered to be the norm and acceptable makes it an uphill battle. I mean if there were socialist groups really active in the protests, I don't think it would be unreasonable to say a lot of the unions would have probably tried their best to distance themselves from those groups, worried about how the media would react to them working with socialists. They don't have a strong backbone and are weakened as it is, they would fear the inevitable right-wing backlash over it.
I just wonder how long will self-styled progressives keep putting so much hope in the Democrats only to be let down by them so much? So far this strategy has not really paid off dividends for union members seeing how much they've fallen apart in the past 40 years or so.
Well according to the local news Snyder signed it about 45 minutes ago, it's official folks.
Comrade Samuel: The defender of truth, justice and the un-American way.
So, the proletariat will spontaneously revolt and form a worker's government? Preposterous. Socialist class consciousness cannot and does not necessarily develop in correlation with capitalism's sharpening contradictions.
Just as there's no royal road to science, the same goes for a class-conscious worker's party, and the revolution itself. If you sincerely think that this piece of legislation aids our cause, where does it end? Would you end up saying that further pay cuts are necessary to bring the workers "closer" to revolution? You're just pragmatically adapting to bourgeoisie's playbook instead of advocating reaching out to the workers and aiding their struggles. To me, your attitude reeks of opportunism.
I might argue the contrary view: Will a Socialist Revolution happen if people are satisfied and pacified with strong, untouchable unions? If that were true, it would have happened already when unions were strong, back in the 1960s. You are all forgetting human nature: happy and content people do not revolt. And just simply educating people about Socialist causes will not accomplish enough for us.
I acknowledge that this malfeasant legislation is a setback. Of course we have to fight to get back to where we were before. But that is the whole point: people get screwed, therefore they fight back.
And yes, I agree that the present Democratic Party are basically a bunch of wimps who are beholden to Capitalist Gangsterhood Overlords. Perhaps getting money out of politics might help remedy this somewhat? No one should have to be rich to be in political office.
money is to politics as fertilizer is to garden weeds.
>Midwest unions are notoriously corrupt and in bed with the capitalist Democratic party.
>Unions want to force all workers to be a part of them and to pay dues.
>Unions forcing themselves on workers is not any different from any other form of tyranny.
That "tyranny" is at present the only organized thing that exists to defend workers wages, pensions, healthcare, and employment in an age of austerity. That's the sad part of the situation but no socialist organization can bring out 12,000 workers in one place, no socialist organization can seriously call for a strike without first getting some nods from the unions. Have they become beholden to the Democratic Party. It would seem that way. But destroying unions is just going to make it that much harder for workers to struggle against the coming battles that will be fought in the near future.>Midwest unions are notoriously corrupt and in bed with the capitalist Democratic party.
>Unions want to force all workers to be a part of them and to pay dues.
>Unions forcing themselves on workers is not any different from any other form of tyranny.
We claim to live and die equal, the way we were born: we want this real equality or death; that’s what we need.
And we’ll have this real equality, at whatever price. Unhappy will be those who stand between it and us! Unhappy will be those who resist a wish so firmly expressed.
The French Revolution was nothing but a precursor of another revolution, one that will be bigger, more solemn, and which will be the last.
-Gracchus Babeuf
No one is "forcing" you to join. Go get a job at WalMart if you dislike unions.>Midwest unions are notoriously corrupt and in bed with the capitalist Democratic party.
>Unions want to force all workers to be a part of them and to pay dues.
>Unions forcing themselves on workers is not any different from any other form of tyranny.
How are you enjoying your new-found poverty from lowered wages in RTW State of Indiana ?
John Stewart (The Daily Show) calls your state "India, N. A." (India, North America)
money is to politics as fertilizer is to garden weeds.
I am in absolutely no way an apologist for the eradication of labor rights. I am however completely against any move that forces workers to pay into a corrupt labor bureaucracy that accomplishes little except cosmetic improvements to the worker's situation and filling the pockets of labor lobbyists and the bureaucracy. I work part-time as a forklift operator and the union I am [forced to be] a part of keeps on demanding for the most inane of things like a $25 union fee increase for new workers (it's already $75) and I haven't seem the union leaders do jack shit except go out to dinners at restaurants I could never afford after every weekly meeting.
I was forced to join because I needed a job and my only labor-related marketable skill is that I have a license to operate heavy machinery and I can drive a bus. Walmart pays pennies compared to what I make at my current gig and I can promise you it's not because of the union.
That's the kind of vanguard mentality that absolutely disgusts me and belittles the average worker. Workers, hell- nobody, should be forced into something that they don't want to participate in- period. The actual situation is that unions are corrupt and they accomplish little- I've witnessed it first hand in my job and I have working class friends with the same attitudes.
All this bill does is give people the choice to join a union or not and I can't say I disagree with that.
Vanguard mentality? No that's just looking at the current situation and understanding that right-to-work laws are designed to further destroy what power unions may have which directly effect the lives of workers. It's not a coincidence that on average workers lose wages, pensions, and healthcare benefits in right-to-work states. So you may say you know the union isn't benefiting you in any way but the facts tell us differently. And what you're telling Klaatu is just a boldfaced LIE. It is illegal for you to be forced to join a union to work somewhere(Thank Taft-Harley, you support that anti-worker legislation too?) and if you live in Indiana, as your profile suggests, you already live in a right-to-work state. Which means that's another boldfaced lie about how you're forced to join a union and pay dues at your workplace.
We claim to live and die equal, the way we were born: we want this real equality or death; that’s what we need.
And we’ll have this real equality, at whatever price. Unhappy will be those who stand between it and us! Unhappy will be those who resist a wish so firmly expressed.
The French Revolution was nothing but a precursor of another revolution, one that will be bigger, more solemn, and which will be the last.
Right-to-Work-for-Peanuts legislation will have a negative impact on the working class. I don't deny that Unapologetic may have a legit beef with his union, but support Right-to-Work legislation would be a serious error for any leftist.
Not a lie- right at employment the human resources department said they couldn't hire me without joining the union (union is half-on the board of directors and apparently that's a loop hole).
Maybe that's illegal but that's what it says in my employment contract.
Unapologetic
Union dues pay (mostly) for your strike fund (did you know this?)
you and others should bring up your dissatisfactions with your labor local's leaders. If you feel as though
they are not doing their jobs, take a vote to cast out that local and install a new one that is more honest.
But for godsakes, do NOT advocate that The State pass LAWS which weaken union rights for EVERYONE
WalMart has truck drivers too, you know (really!)
So you think you deserve high pay for your extraordinary skills. Or do they pay you well because of your good looks?
Or maybe the company owner is your rich uncle?
THEN GET A JOB AT WALMART (they will not FORCE you to join a union - guaranteed!)
You and your friends really need to study the HISTORY of unions, and find out how working conditions were in the
19th century, before unions had protections. Learn about how Henry Ford hired thugs to beat up union organizers.
Ford would put big husky workaholic guys at the front of the assembly line to set the pace of everyone on the line
and if you could not keep up, you were fired. Men came home from work exhausted after their twelve-hour shifts.
Children as young as eight labored in dangerous jobs for 14hour days. Workers exposed to white phosphorus in
matchmaking, or mercury in felt making or carcinogens in coking ovens, heavy metals vapors (linked to prostate cancer)
in ironworks foundries... the list goes on. Need a vacation? HAH! Quit the job and look for a new one the following week.
Forget potty breaks.
In the 1930s, my grandfather's thumb was accidentally ripped off in a machine. Since there was no union to make sure
the company was held responsible (they were) he was fired. And since there was no workman's comp, nor
unemployment pay then, he had to rely on welfare... which was, in those days, administered only by his local church.
(There were no government programs then.) He had to sue in court just to get a meager settlement.
Unhappy with unions? You have no idea, grasshopper.
There are about five to ten times as many non union jobs available as there are union jobs. You DO have a choice.
Get a Non-Union job, because no one is FORCING you to apply for the union job (don't you get it?)
I have worked in a shit-hole shop for over twenty years. Believe me, I have had some serious disagreements with the union
over seniority rights, overtime rights, etc. I felt like strangling some of my coworker diehard by-the-book, self righteous
"you can't do that" union brothers and sisters... because of their unfair and insensible opinions... believe me I have had
my problems over this or that.
But AT NO TIME did I ever advocate (or even think about) the idea of throwing my union under the bus, because I am
smart enough to know what the alternatives were. That is, a bend-over-for-me mentality of pretty much what you are
advocating: a complete divorce and destruction of our only means of representation in this era of increasing big-brotherism
from the increasingly-powerful plutocratic empire.
Now go learn some things and come back when you have your degree in labor history.
Last edited by Klaatu; 13th December 2012 at 23:18.
money is to politics as fertilizer is to garden weeds.
Looking more at the way this law was jammed through, even if you're an apologist for the liberal democratic system this was wrought with crap.
Firstly, these laws were passed in a lame-duck session of the Michigan legislature. While the Republicans are still going to control the House when the new session starts next year, they lost some legislators and from what I'm told they were mostly hardline Republicans. There's a handful of Republicans who've been known to vote common with Democrats on some issues, so they've been pushing some shit legislation through before they lose their more dependable legislators.
-The laws were abruptly announced and then introduced in a short span of days so as to take the opponents of the measure by surprise. More "shocking" since the Governor had promised he wouldn't let the party consider such legislation when he was voted in.
-The bills were split up into different components so as to bypass some requirement in Michigan state legislature about debating similar bills in different houses in a short span of time. There were two bills considered by the senate affecting private and public sector employees, while the House ended up attaching their bill on to a yearly spending bill. The latter is particularly bad because this means that particular law can't be overturned by referendum, as anything in a spending bill is immune from referendum. Even if the normal RTW bills are taken to referendum, the one in the spending bill can't be touched.
This also put pressure on the governor, basically "we're doing this with or without you" from the party.
-In order to achieve quorum in the Senate, the chamber was locked down to prevent legislators opposed to the bill from walking out. The State Supreme Court ruled this was an illegal action, but the bill was already passed by this point.
-The State Capitol was closed down to the public, using the pretext of some protestors who tried to storm the senate floor. The state capitol is technically supposed to be open in some form in order to allow for the public to scrutinize the action of their representatives.
-The RTW legislation was passed under some special form, which allows for it to be implemented immediately rather than the usual one year + implementation. This requires a 2/3rds majority, though by some way the Republicans have been passing these laws without following that, including this one. There's apparently some other stuff they're trying to jam in before they lose their current clout, including some abortion-related measures that they were unable to do so earlier in the session.
So yeah, really underhanded way they went about it, even by the standards we've come to expect from them. All the more reason to show the bankrupt nature of bourgeois "democracy", serving the economic interests of the ruling class above all.
Exactly, Red Commissar. That is how dictatorships work.
The Proposal 2 referendum in Michigan would have prevented this (because it would have put union rights in the state constitution) But the vote failed because too many people were fooled into believing that prop2 would be "bad for Michigan." Prop2 enjoyed majority support as late as August, when polling put it as passing by a wide margin. But once the right wing spin-machine got going, with such political ads such as "teachers will be allowed to be drunk in the classroom" (I am not making this up) the referendum then failed, as support dropped off (I guess there are a lot of stupid people out there that believe the drivel)
Another thing, Gov Snyder has stated since his election two years ago that a RTW bill would be "too divisive." Well last week he was claiming that "this bill will bring workers together." (huh?)
The law exempts police and firefighters, because they "did not want to divide those whose lives depend on their fellow workers' support"
(but it's OK to start animosity between assembly-line workers?)
And some say "We did not see this coming" Well I saw this coming!
money is to politics as fertilizer is to garden weeds.
Unions are imperfect organizations.
The current attacks on unions in Michigan is crazy. Michigan was the heartland of the US labor movement, and it is hard not to see this as primarily ideological.
Unions in Canada are currently under attack from both the hard Right federal government and the centrist Ontario government.
One thing I am sure of: this anti-union aggression will not stand.
Most people here are surprised and in disbelief that this happened,
especially since the governor said he would not sign RTW legislation.
(Same thing happened in Indiana earlier this year)
Thus the Mich. governor (as well as the Indiana governor) turns out to
be a two-faced liar. Recent polls indicate that support for him has dropped
off precipitously. At this time, it looks like he is out on his keister in 2014.
Furthermore, I predict that this new law will be struck down in court, and/or
be repealed by voters (as happened in Ohio earlier this year)
money is to politics as fertilizer is to garden weeds.
Do you think it will be struck in court because of illegal procedures of how it was passed?
Kurt, here is an article from The Detroit News (my own opinion on this later)
money is to politics as fertilizer is to garden weeds.
The current anti-teacher union legislation in Ontario is probably uncoonstitutional. That's part has what has kept either side (in the legal sense) to going in more aggressive directions.
Even with the lousy economy, Michigan must have a relatively high union density a pro union sentiment. If the state needs to start having hearings on every single contract with each individual.
There are many reasons employers respect unions, the biggest is that they make life simpler.
