On "hearing" anti-union sentiment. That is related to a point I have often argued on this list but have, I think, failed to convince many on. It is NEGATIVES that move people. Almost no one goes around spontaneously blurting out what she is _for_. But the "aginners" are always talking. And intellectuals who spontaneously equate the world of words with the world of reality then fail to see the great favor in which unions are held and believe that everyone is against them.
Some 30+ years ago the Bloomington teachers union was on the verge of showing a little courage. A special School Board meeting was held at which the public could offer comment. Two women from our little nest of Reds spent an evening circulating a statement of solidarity with the teachers that went FAR beyond what the teachers were asking for, and in fact criticized the teachers for not demanding enough. A large number of people signed that statement. Then Jan and the other woman took that statement to the School Board meeting. The teachers were amazed. But the amazement didn't stop them from giving in. They, like the posters on this list, believed the buzz generated by "what people [i.e. reporters & a scattering of loudmouth rightists) are saying and couldn't believe that people out there were actually on their side.
Carrol
-----Original Message----- From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org] On Behalf Of Carrol Cox Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 7:54 AM To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Surowecki on unions
This discussion is trapped in a realm of pure thought from which it is impossible to escape to the actual world, in which ideology arising from daily practice, NOT propaganda or conscious belies is central. Propaganda NEVER has any effect of its own but is important ONLY in so far as it can appeal to people who already agree with it. That agreement has to come from the ideology of everyday life.
And unions are _favored_ by most workers at that level of ideology. But the power of capital (as expressed in legislation since Taft-Hartley, in various right-to-work laws, in an NLRB which even at its best makes no real effort to protect labor rights -- all this makes it almost impossible to _reach_ particular work forces with union propaganda. When that can be done, unions usually win.
This may be the central defect of lbo-talk conversation: an obsession with propaganda which blocks analysis of the conditions and practices which generate the ideology to which propaganda can appeal. And this concern with propaganda also obscures the condtions of actual organizing, the sheer _PHYSICAL_ difficulties of getting a message _to_ a person _in_ a context in which he/she will recognize that it is directed to him/her, and subsequently pay attention to it.
Propaganda NEVER _causes_ anything; it reinforces and deepens what is being generated by other factors.
Carrol
-----Original Message----- From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org] On Behalf Of sandia Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 11:16 PM To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Surowecki on unions
It's also important to recognize how much of the anti-union sentiment is stoked by conservative/business elites and activists. Since the 1950s, and especially since the 1970s, they've propgated the anti-union line and sought to proliferate it down from rightwing think tanks, lobbyists and business groups. See Kim Phillips-Fein's book, "Invisible Hands," as well as Joseph McCartin's work on the attacks on public sector unionism in the 1970s.
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:55 PM, <123hop at comcast.net> wrote:
> I hear a lot of anti-union sentiment, but it's hard to say what it means
because the last generation has seen a near universal condemnation of
organized labor and expressed complete contempt for labor in general. To be
a worker in this country is synonymous with being a loser. The only thing
worse than being a worker is being in jail.
>
> The reality shows, which focus entirely on the ritual humiliation of the
working class and on showing that the poor are capable of anything in order
to get ahead, have only added fuel to the fire.
>
> Joanna
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Julio Huato" <juliohuato at gmail.com>
> To: "Marxist Debate" <marxist-debate at googlegroups.com>,
pen-l at lists.csuchico.edu, "Lbo Talk Lbo Talk" <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 6:52:59 PM
> Subject: [lbo-talk] Surowecki on unions
>
> Opinions on this piece?
>
>
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2011/01/17/110117ta_talk_surowiecki
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk