Yes, what you say is true. But you needn't say it. The larger issue is: why are folks being so thick about a book that is well worth struggling with. L'il Kim wrote a self-serving review, faulting Fitch for "oddly" ignoring "the power of business in America," when, conveniently, the power of business is the topic of her next book (and I hope she doesn't drop the ball.) More to the point, business power is hardly absent in Fitch's book. Neither is class struggle. He demonstrates how business wages a class war in Europe, too, but unions overseas have at least been able to advance a social democratic agenda, so that more than a shadow of welfare legislation and working class protections remain in those nations. It's his take on corruption and clientalism, which have fragmented solidarity here, that is new. If Philips-Fein can't see that class struggle is at the heart of Bob's analysis, it's because she's not looking. Matt Witt, an ex Teamster insurgent who should know better and is now ensconced at the Labor Center in VA ,also swipes at Bob, and for writing a brief he thinks that Karl Rove could subscribe to. Saying that is either scurrilous or dumb, and you decide. It is surely sad that that is how the left argues.
You know, I work for a union, too, and defending Bob's book is no day at the beach. But I'm damned if I'll say anything as preposterous as that he is doing the man's work. He's doing OUR work, or at least starting the effort. ( And that's the last I'll say about it until my own review is finished.)
Mike Hirsch
On 3/11/06, Yoshie Furuhashi <furuhashi.1 at osu.edu> wrote:
>
> Jim posted:
>
> > review | posted February 16, 2006 (March 6, 2006 issue)
> >
> > Labor Pains
> >
> > Kim Phillips-Fein
> <snip>
> > Oddly absent in Fitch's bleak account is the power of business in
> > America. After all, employer violence, legal obstacles to
> > organizing and the constant fear of reprisal from the boss have
> > deterred untold numbers from union activism. And this, in turn, has
> > helped create a climate in which corruption could flourish.
>
>
> All trade unions in all countries confronted such violence, legal
> obstacles, and fear of reprisal from the boss. Arguably, American
> unions had it easier than European unions. After all, the US ruling
> class, unlike the European ruling class, did not impose fascism on
> the populace here. And yet, American unions are fatter and more
> corrupt than European unions. It's time to look at unions themselves
> to understand why.
>
>
> Yoshie Furuhashi
> <http://montages.blogspot.com>
> <http://monthlyreview.org>
> <http://mrzine.org>
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
-- ________________________________________ `And these words shall then become Like oppression's thundered doom Ringing through each heart and brain, Heard again -- again -- again-- `Rise like Lions after slumber In unvanquishable number-- Shake your chains to earth like dew Which in sleep had fallen on you-- Ye are many -- they are few.' --------Shelley, "The Mask of Anarchy: Written on the Occasion of the Massacre at Manchester" [1819] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20060311/c75051b0/attachment.htm>