>An article by Kim Fellner ("The Labor Movement: It's More than We
>Bargain for" at
><http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/fellner240705.html>), one of our MR
>contributors, is already getting _a lot_ of readers (though it's
>only early morning on Sunday now) -- it's featured on the homepage
>of Google News (at <http://news.google.com/>) today. Cool!
Cool indeed! And it's still there, a remarkable tenacity in the cyberworld.
To counter your self-promotion with mine, Kim Fellner writes:
>Given the general ho-hum about all things labor, one might say that
>any news is good news, and most of us progressive labor folks think
>a shake-up is long overdue. But there's a nagging unease on all
>sides about the terms and tenor of the debate. The sound bites never
>get much beyond "blah, blah, blah, blah, organize, blah blah blah,
>blah change." And the skirmishing is all about mathematics: How much
>money for organizing? How many international unions should there be?
>What percentage of dues should go to the Federation?
Over the past month or so, I've done interviews with Jonathan Tasini, Bill Fletcher, and Barbara Ehrenreich that all go well beyond the "blah blah blah" level: <http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Radio.html>.
Doug