Union bashing - this time by citing Trotsky who missrepresented Marx'
basics ("Marx 101") - is only another form of the situation the NYT
reported on.
At 16:23 14.07.2011, Louis Proyect wrote:
>On 7/14/2011 10:11 AM, Hinrich Kuhls wrote:
> > The real political problem as reported by the NYT
> > in its article on the new GM plant
> >
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/13/business/with-chevrolet-sonic-gm-and-uaw-reinvent-automaking.html
> > in a nutshell:
> >
> > "The radically revamped factory here operates
> > with fewer and cheaper workers, many of whom are
> > paid $14 an hour rather than the full U.A.W. wage of $28 an hour. [...]
> > The U.A.W.'s president, Bob King, said the union
> > considered the significance of a competitive
> > subcompact to G.M.'s overall product lineup. [...]
> > "We are committed to the success of the company,"
> > Mr. King said recently. "We had to talk about a
> > business model that makes sense."
> >
> > Any thoughts on this constellation?
> >
> >
>
>Leon Trotsky, "Trade Unions in the Epoch of Imperialist Decay"
>
>There is one common feature in the development, or more correctly
>the degeneration, of modern trade union organizations in the
>entire world: it is their drawing closely to and growing together
>with the state power. This process is equally characteristic of
>the neutral, the Social-Democratic, the Communist and "anarchist"
>trade unions. This fact alone shows that the tendency towards
>"growing together" is intrinsic not in this or that doctrine as
>such but derives from social conditions common for all unions.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
