[lbo-talk] Labor Imperialism

Wojtek S wsoko52 at gmail.com
Mon Jan 30 12:27:31 PST 2012


[WS:] I wonder to what degree this reflects the views of the rank and file?

More generally, it appears to me that "the system" enjoys a majority support. People may be objecting to the cards they have been dealt, or to a few "rotten apples" in the corporate echelons, but they accept the general parameters of the system and they do not believe there is an alternative to it. That is, they accept the existing division of labor between the public and the private sectors, private ownership of the means of production, the need for fiscal austerity to control "irresponsible" spending, the need to fight "terrorism" "communism" and kindred "threats" to the American way of life, etc. They may do it for different reasons, to get invited to the halls of power as you suggest, to maintain their standing in the community, because of their religious faith, or for many other reasons

Even in Greece, after the country has been ravaged by neoliberalism, the communists and the radical left combined are supported by only 12 percent of the voters. I think here this support would be no more than 2-3 percent. These are not numbers that make capitalists and politicians tremble in their boots. So why is it surprising that government or organized labor pursue right wing policies? If the left of the center views appealed to the majority of the voters, we would see leaders singing to a very different tune, no?

Wojtek

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 30, 2012, at 1:21 PM, Billy O'Connor wrote:
>
>> Wojtek S <wsoko52 at gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Why would AFL-CIO engage in all that on
>>> behalf of the USG?  What is their payback?
>>
>> Cashy money.
>
> Not just that. It's what's expected of junior partners. It assures that invitations to the White House will be forthcoming. And there's ideological affinity too. I recall a WSJ article from the late 1980s or early 1990s, during some serious labor unrest in S Korea, that quoted an AFL-CIO advisor on the scene as saying, "The problem with Korean unions is that they don't know how to control their rank and file." The AFL-CIO (remember when George H.W. slipped and said AFL-CIA?) has always been anti-communist, and you don't need to have communists around to be anti-communist.
>
> Doug
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

-- Wojtek http://wsokol.blogspot.com/



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list