roachboy

what really killed off the old-school unions, particularly in the states (for particular reasons, starting with sector monopoly) was the change in the politics of firm location, and of the type of relation between capital and nation-states implied by it.

this happened across the early 1970s, at about the same time as stock ownership internationalized.

american unions, because they operated on a sector-monopoly model, became more a counter-business than any other unions i know of--they were tied to a particular phase of the organization and location of production---and (not surprisingly, if you think about it) found themselves totally unable to respond to the above shift in the politics that had restricted capital to acting within nation-states

[[[you know, writing cliff notes must be fun, in a perverse kinda way, dont you think?]]

either way, what happened to the american trade union system is not generalized, so if you are talking about unions in the way those who posted above are, you are really only referring to the situation in a particular place--with a particular (reactionary) political climate--dominated by folk who detest all forms of organization among people, (unless the right controls them)----and unions worst of all.

the american type of trade union activity was structured from the outset by a fear of politics. the system was designed to reduce the space for the left by eliminating competition amongst trade unions for the same employees within a given workarea....
they were also quite willing to trade away the right to strike.
this was the beginning of the end for them.
the american model was based on a substitution of material benefits for politics. they therefore represented a very particular development of the union model in any event. for myself, i never thought the model a good one.
the organizations that made up this model may well have outlived their functionality--but because of the particular choices they made in how they would interact with capital, not because there is any problem at all with working people organizing to defend themselves and their interests against capital.

i think the distinction is important.
people only have power when they organize themselves, and when these organizations are in a position to shut down areas of activity.
of course people should organize themselves and learn to take and maintain power, whether in local conflicts over service delivery or anything else.
of course working people should form organizations--but they would have to be more adapted to the new situation they face in a new and improved type of capitalist barbarism (witness the american health care system. go from there. its easy.) without organization, individuals who are not holders of capital are powerless.
kinda like now.... hell, even those who do hold some capital are powerless.

one result of powerlessness is that folk actually believe that it makes sense for them, for their own interests, that business can shop internationally in search of the lowest possible wages--that it is possible to see this pattern as natural when in fact it has only existed for about 40 years and required an enormous change in the rules that had shaped the capitalist game for the previous 140 years or so.

this situation is not natural.
you just werent paying attention



as for the econ class view of unions--neoliberals dont like unions. lower level econ classes in particular are little more than distilled presentations of neoliberal ideology with lots of curious little equations that make all seem rational. but if you compare particularly these classes to the world they puport to describe, they are almost always worth even less than the short course was.

at least the short course is retrospectively kinda funny--you get to meet the strange fictional character known as the hitlero-trotskyite wrecker, one of the great feats in the history of literary paranoia. if you put aside that stalin played a big role in writing it and how many people died on account of it, the short course can be quite entertaining. kind of. in a strange sort of way.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite