Thursday, September 8, 2011

Unions have "Stockholm Syndrome:" Where else does Organized Labor have to go? [VIDEO]


[FRSFreeStates brings another post to PfP.  Please check them out daily over at www.frsfreestates.blogspot.com!  If you would like to write a post, please email peopleforpolity.blogspot.com.]

Link:

It’s pretty obvious that, ideologically, Organized Labor doesn't fit in very well with the Democratic Party; at least it doesn’t anymore.  Organized Labor fits in better with the Democratic Socialist Party or the Green Party; both parties are minor democratically socialist third parties in America.

They fit better because they are socialist themselves and tend to be anti-business, anti-free enterprise, anti-profit, pro-welfare  state, and if anything, would like to see America spend more on its welfare state and expand it like these socialist third parties.
But my question is, “Where does Organized Labor have to go?”
They are already a lot smaller than they used to be and without the same clout as they used to have. Just look at the Democratic Party leadership today and the last few years.  

When it’s time for them to govern, angering Organized Labor is not the thing they worry about most. Just look at the debt deal and other compromises that the White House and the Democratic leadership in congress have had to make in order to govern the last couple of years.  
Which, again, brings me to this question:  
Where does Organized Labor have to go?
 I mean this as a rhetorical question, but if you believe you have the answer, feel free to send it to me.  
Does Organized Labor really want to back these socialist third parties that may have 20,000 members between them in 2012?  
 Another rhetorical question:  
Do they really want to see a Republican White House and Congress in 2013 and make worker’s rights weaker than they are today and make big business more powerful?  
Because these are the things that will happen if Barack Obama is not reelected President in 2012, and they know that Richard Trumpka, the Leader of AFL-CIO, understands these things very well and is very smart politically.  They also understand that if his movement doesn't do what they've traditionally done for the Democratic Party and do it in 2012, his movement will get hit even harder and made smaller in 2013.  
If Organized Labor doesn't like the Democratic leadership but wants to continue to be Democrats, Socialist Democrats that is, then they have a couple of options: 
Shut up and go with the program?  Not likely.   
Perhaps they should work to elect more Democratic Socialists in the Democratic Party to Congress, Governorships, state legislatures, local government, or even run their own Presidential Candidate.  However, if they do that in 2012, they'll pay a heavy price for this strategy and be hated by Democrats for it.  
But that would be a great option for them in 2016.  Dennis Kucinich, or some younger Democratic Socialist, could be their candidate.  Or they can just leave the Democratic Party, though I just laid out the problems with that option.  Perhaps they could unite the Greens with the Socialists into one united Democratic Socialist Party and work to make them big enough to represent their values, but that would be a long road to accomplish. 
The fact is, as much as Organized Labor complains, to put it lightly, about the Democratic Leadership, they don't have any better options right now other than to stay in the Democratic Party and to elect more Democratic Socialists who think like them and who will do what they want.

9 comments:

  1. That is the problem. Where does organized labor go? The dems keep selling them out and Trumpka is left with little to no option. I like your ideas.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for the post! However, I don't necessarily agree that all Socialists and Labor belive in an "anti-business, anti-free enterprise, anti-profit" state. Most believe in some sort of compromise for the common benefit of The People and the state itself.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Damn PFP I wish I saw that comment on my blog and it would've been emailed to me. But thanks for posting my blog anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Great post, PfP. FRS brings a refreshing pov.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Great question frs. Unfortunately I don't have an answer to your rhetoric. blah.

    ReplyDelete
  6. LOL great comment for someone who's Anonymous

    ReplyDelete
  7. it wasnt meant as an insult btw why does it matter if im anon not like you know anyone on here anway

    ReplyDelete
  8. My answer (and what I think they are going to do) would be for Labor to only back individual candidates rather than the Democratic Party as a whole. This would involve backing some Democrats, but also opposing centrist Democrats when they stand against the interests of Labor. It would also involve backing third party candidates (especially at the local and state levels) when a viable Democrat doesn't exist. It means holding a hard line and not compromising until the Labor movement is rebuilt. Basically, Labor has to actively turn the focus of the Democratic Party back to them. That doesn't happen passively, and it doesn't happen without challenging them.

    SWR

    ReplyDelete
  9. Link exchange is nothing else however it is just placing the other person's
    webpawge link on your page at appropriate place and other person will also do similar in support of you.


    Here is my web blog: www.sbo365th.com

    ReplyDelete