> The successs of a _union_ leads to bourgeoisification, because
> the values, understandings and relations with which a union
> is organized are liberal -- as I said, they're groups of
> persons who are combining to advance their collective and
> private interests, very much like people forming a corporation,
> partnership, or cooperative. When and if they succeed, there
> will be a difference between them and the people who haven't
> succeeded, and they will be motivated to attempt to conserve
> their advantages, that is, enter into a class relation with
> the rest of the community. Isn't this what we generally
> observe in history? But liberalism is not the only possible
> route of political development and activity.
This is a pretty cynical and ahistorical understanding of the labor movement. Surely you are aware that unions have not always acted like liberal interest groups. An injury to one is an injury to all, after all.
mark