Friday, February 6, 2009

Because no one has accused the labor movement of being communist in the last week, we'll do this

Lex asks some important questions that no one responded to, so I will take a shot at getting some laboring questions answered.

First, let me say that a labor merger under the terms being discussed horrifies me. Let me grab a coupla quotes from that article:
There was general agreement that any future federation should focus on political and legislative matters, while also serving to encourage individual unions to do more to organize workers.

But many officials oppose a rotating presidency, saying the parent federation needs a strong, visible president who, by dint of serving for several years, is recognized by Congress and the news media as the undisputed voice for labor.

Several presidents have also called for creating a strong executive director’s position, partly in the hope that the parent federation would have two strong voices rather than one.

In other words, the AFL-CIO would become strictly a lobbying organization. Yay! I've always wanted to belong to a lobbying organization! Let the motherfucking revolution begin.

I do think we need a strong, strong president. Someone who can speak for "labor." Someone who is independent, answerable to no one. Someone who can demand unwavering support from everyone around him. Someone who can act decisively. Someone who has a lifetime position. Preferably someone willing to eliminate all enemies to labor, even those within the movement. I cannot see any problem with this at all.

But for fuck's sake, lets make sure this powerful man has a woman/minority assistant so that the workers can have someone to adore. Someone who looks like them. Some one who cares. Bam! Look out 21st century, here we come.

"The Leopards" is the most brilliant thing to come 0ut of Lex's mouth in some time.


No comments: