Doug Henwood wrote:
>
>
> Why not bureaucratic inertia and comfortable fatness? Organizing is
> expensive and troublesome. For a lot of labor leaders, why not just
> collect a six-figure salary and hope the dues keep coming in until
> it's time to retire?
After sending my response to this I remembered the Mother Goose rhyme which applies beautifully to almost all criticisms of "the left" or "the working class" which ignore the conditions Marvin has summarized:
f wishes were horses, beggars would ride. If turnips were watches, I would wear one by my side. And if "ifs" and "ands" Were pots and pans, There'd be no work for tinkers!
There always exist the likes of Andy Stern, as there always exist the likes of ________ (fill in with your favorite revolutionary or labor organizer). Which flourishes depend on the conditions passed on by the immediate past.
This is not pessimism. Lenin thought in 1916 that there would be no revolution in his lifetime. He continued to act to build resistance to WW 1 though he knew (correctly) that it would be hopeless. Conditions did change, and his hopeless work was a necessary precondition of response to those new (and unpredictable) conditions.
Carrol