Fighting Amongst Ourselves

Trey Smith

Evidence that things are far, far worse than we ever dreamed can be seen in John Q. Public’s resentment of labor unions. Twenty-five years ago people who argued with me (and I had these arguments every day) about the contributions of organized labor used to maintain that unions were “bad” because they were either (1) too anti-democratic and dictatorial, or (2) too “corrupt” (i.e., mobbed up or otherwise “crooked”)

But that was the extent of it. No one suggested that unions weren’t beneficial, or that they weren’t devoted to the interests of working people or, considering the stark alternatives, that they weren’t, in fact, “necessary.” Rather, their gripes were confined to the procedural, to the way unions were governed. Or to be more accurate, to the way they perceived unions to be governed (because, in truth, people often confused “corruption” with simple laziness and inefficiency).

But that’s all changed. While you still hear the occasional grumbling directed toward “corrupt union bosses,” what people complain about today it that labor unions are “elitist.” It’s true. Shocking as that may seem, America’s working people actually use the E-word when referring to other working people — to people who, by virtue of a union contract, have managed to stay above water, who’ve managed to retain decent wages and benefits, and haven’t fallen victim to the biggest money grab since the Gilded Age.
~ from Why Do the Poor Cheer for the Rich? by David Macaray ~

The anti-union sentiment that is sweeping the country is maddening. Unions offer working people one of the best mechanisms to insure decent wages and benefits. It is a way of mitigating some of the often ruthless power held by corporations. And yet, despite the obvious benefits of unions, more and more people are demonizing them for all the ills brought down on us by the financial elites!

Unions didn't cause the recent financial meltdown. Unions weren't responsible for Foreclosuregate. It's not the unions who are hoarding wealth and refusing to invest it in America. Unions didn't receive any of the massive bailouts; in fact, many of them made tremendous concessions to keep business open. So, why, oh why, are unions shouldering much of the blame?

Macaray offers the reason, one that isn't the least bit palatable.

Not to sound defeatist, but maybe the one-percent has already won this thing. With the poor now cheering for the rich, the plutocrats’ wildest and most ambitious fantasies have been realized. Not only have the rich succeeded in convincing workers to root against labor unions — the one and only institution dedicated to their welfare — they’ve convinced them to fight for the interests of the wealthy rather than the interests of their own tribe.

Holy Mother of Jesus, this makes no sense. And it’s not simply politics. It transcends political ideology and voter booth privacy. Rooting for the rich is crazy. It’s not only illogical and impractical, it’s unnatural. Indeed, it’s tantamount to the chicken population of the United States naming Colonel Sanders its “Man of the Year.”

Cluck, cluck, cluck, bawk, bawk!