GM strike

[Michael Eisenscher]

If that's what Dougie is saying, I have no quarrel with it.  But that said,
real workers face real threats to their economic welfare and security that
require immediate strategies.  Promising them solutions under socialism is
little different than telling them they'll get their reward in heaven.
Neither is a very satisfactory response to what they confront in the moment.
Academics can debate and dissect the "logic of capitalism."  Workers still
struggle within the framework of that logic to avoid being ground to the
lowest common denominator, whether they accept that logic or not.

M.E.

At 09:11 PM 6/29/98 -0500, Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
>Michael E wrote:
>>"When won't they be able to find another worker somewhere in the world they
>>can hire to work for less?  Once you accept their logic, you buy into the
>>never-ending cycle of playing worker and worker, whether across borders,
>>union v. non-union, right-to-work states v. non-RTW (for less) states,
>>native-born v. immigrants, men v. women, old v. young, even one UAW local
>>against another within the same company.  The only significant difference is
>>at what pace you will run the 'race to the bottom.'"
>
>Isn't Doug's point that once you accept the continuing existence +
>legitimacy of capitalism, you get forced to accept the logic of capital and
>the 'never-ending cycle of playing worker against worker...'? Isn't he
>basically saying that the labor movement that can't imagine any socialist
>alternative to capitalism can only tinker with the pace at which 'you will
>run the "race to the bottom"'?
>
>Yoshie
>
>