Posted by dereklane
on October 31, 2009, 12:48 pm, in reply to "Re: I'm All Right Jack!"
I think I said earlier, I'm not in any unions. Neither, in case you're wondering, am I an employer.
So, no, I've not been to a union meeting lately. Are you telling me they *are* doing stuff to improve the lot of the unemployed, and make sure they're comfortable enough not to take work when it conflicts with union interests? If so, that's interesting. I would like to hear more, if you're able to offer it.
You say:'Is that any wonder?'
Well, no it doesn't surprise me, if that's what you mean. When terminology such as scab (and other derogatory terms designed to be spat)exist and are encouraged, the threat of violence is never all that far off. Despite Stevo's assertions that all that stuff was left back in the eighties, you can tell just by imploring people to spare a thought of compassion for the circumstances behind the strike-breaker's decision to work, that this attitude is not all that far in the past. I'd argue that its unlikely to be in the past at all, at least in sentiment.
That is scary stuff. It makes me wonder how, on the one hand, we can be here concerned for the well being of people oppressed by our governments, and concerned about people suffering (and you know, all that buddhist compassion stuff) and on the other hand, act very aggressive to people who don't exercise solidarity with unions, but, are nevertheless still oppressed.
It seems a fairly narrow set of protocols for compassion, really.
'If you don't annoy me, or disagree with me, or get in my way, I'll care about your well-being'.
No doubt, this is *exactly* how our elite think. It doesn't make for happy thoughts about the state of the left, when you consider how similiar, with little pushes, both sides appear to be.
cheers,
Derek
Responses: