Labour divided

by Henry Farrell on October 19, 2005

Confused by the internecine warfare in the US labour movement? Jim McNeill’s “new article”: for _Dissent_ is the best account that I’ve seen, giving a fair shake to both sides of the dispute.



Richard 10.19.05 at 2:12 pm

Say it loud and say it proud: McNeill rocks!!!


lemuel pitkin 10.19.05 at 4:36 pm

He does indeed. Excellent article — thanks for pointing it out.


anno-nymous 10.19.05 at 7:02 pm

In the US, I believe, we call it the “Labor” movement.


harry b 10.19.05 at 7:05 pm

Nothing like a bit of cultural imperialism.


Susan 10.19.05 at 10:52 pm

perhaps the problem with the US labor movement, is the lack of “u”


RedWolf 10.20.05 at 5:01 am

The meager comments to this post demonstrate the problem of the labor unions and, therefore, the drawbacks of the article linked to it.

Labor has been marginalized by lowered membership. As a result, Democrats move away from bread and butter issues towards the center becoming more supportive of the employers (whose money they take). Kerry run as a centrist and you couldn’t see daylight between him and the talk about “compassionate conservatives” that are now killing the labor people (i.e. foot soldiers, very few officers die in Iraq) that serve in the military.

Showing the claims of each side fails to emphasize the tilting of a sinking ship that is labor or Democrats or the US.


Slocum 10.20.05 at 7:47 am

Labor has been marginalized by lowered membership.

Private sector unions may have been marginalized, but public sector unions (teacher’s unions in particular) have not declined and are an important core constituency of the Democratic Party. It’s notable that public and private sector unions care about different things. For example teacher’s unions don’t care about globalization nor is there any danger their employers will go into chapter 11 and dump their pension obligations.


David 10.20.05 at 11:26 pm

Slocum: no danger, eh? You apparently feel more confident about the future status of the government’s “pension obligations” than some of us.

Comments on this entry are closed.