

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
This article is a joint publication of Foreign Policy In Focus and OtherWords.
This Labor Day, like others before it, finds American workers squeezed on many fronts. Inequality is rising, union membership is dwindling, and wages aren't keeping up with job growth.
Naturally, addressing all those challenges is a huge priority for the labor movement. But this year, I'd like to add another: protecting the nuclear deal with Iran.
It makes sense that unions might be concerned with issues like trade and immigration. But why else should workers worry about how our government operates outside the United States? Does labor need its own foreign policy?
Let me put it this way: When you don't speak up, your default policy is the status quo.
For most of its first 50 years of existence, the country's largest labor federation -- the AFL-CIO -- never once challenged the deployment of U.S. troops into foreign conflicts. But it turns out that workers have as much of a stake in those decisions as anyone.
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan together are projected to cost American taxpayers anywhere from $4 trillion to $6 trillion. And now the war on the Islamic State -- a direct continuation of the last war in Iraq -- has already racked up over $5.8 billion in costs, according to the National Priorities Project. And the tab's running up at a rate of over $600,000 per hour.
That's money that isn't available to put unemployed people back to work, fix our nation's failing infrastructure, provide high quality public education, create a universal Medicare-for-all health care system, build affordable housing, or help transition to a sustainable, de-militarized alternative economy, among many other major social needs identified by the labor movement.
War, in other words, is bad for working people.
That's why my organization, U.S. Labor Against the War, challenged the AFL-CIO back in 2005 to abandon its silence and oppose the George W. Bush administration's illegal war in Iraq.
The unions listened -- and subsequently called for an end to the war in Afghanistan, too. Several years later, in 2011, the AFL-CIO executive council proclaimed its opposition to our nation's "militarized foreign policy."
War, in other words, is bad for working people.With increasing clarity, unions have come to recognize that a country that commits over half its discretionary budget to war spending can't afford to address the increasingly pressing needs of its people.
So that brings us to the Iran deal, which was painstakingly negotiated by the Obama administration and its partners in the United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, and Germany. It's been endorsed by over 100 former diplomats, hundreds of religious leaders, scores of distinguished non-proliferation experts, and numerous members of both the American andIsraeli military and intelligence communities.
But some war hawks in Congress -- along with their wealthy benefactors in the military-industrial complex and international hardliners like Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu -- are intent on sabotaging the agreement. If they succeed, they'll put our country and the world on a fast track to yet another disastrous military conflict, the costs of which are too horrific to contemplate.
A war like this wouldn't just be unaffordable. It would be illegal and immoral, too. That's why the labor movement must see to it that such a conflict never begins.
If you're in a union, contact your rep and urge them to add their voice in support of the Obama administration's negotiated agreement with Iran. They can sign a statement set up by my organization at bit.ly/IranDeal_LaborSignOn.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
This article is a joint publication of Foreign Policy In Focus and OtherWords.
This Labor Day, like others before it, finds American workers squeezed on many fronts. Inequality is rising, union membership is dwindling, and wages aren't keeping up with job growth.
Naturally, addressing all those challenges is a huge priority for the labor movement. But this year, I'd like to add another: protecting the nuclear deal with Iran.
It makes sense that unions might be concerned with issues like trade and immigration. But why else should workers worry about how our government operates outside the United States? Does labor need its own foreign policy?
Let me put it this way: When you don't speak up, your default policy is the status quo.
For most of its first 50 years of existence, the country's largest labor federation -- the AFL-CIO -- never once challenged the deployment of U.S. troops into foreign conflicts. But it turns out that workers have as much of a stake in those decisions as anyone.
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan together are projected to cost American taxpayers anywhere from $4 trillion to $6 trillion. And now the war on the Islamic State -- a direct continuation of the last war in Iraq -- has already racked up over $5.8 billion in costs, according to the National Priorities Project. And the tab's running up at a rate of over $600,000 per hour.
That's money that isn't available to put unemployed people back to work, fix our nation's failing infrastructure, provide high quality public education, create a universal Medicare-for-all health care system, build affordable housing, or help transition to a sustainable, de-militarized alternative economy, among many other major social needs identified by the labor movement.
War, in other words, is bad for working people.
That's why my organization, U.S. Labor Against the War, challenged the AFL-CIO back in 2005 to abandon its silence and oppose the George W. Bush administration's illegal war in Iraq.
The unions listened -- and subsequently called for an end to the war in Afghanistan, too. Several years later, in 2011, the AFL-CIO executive council proclaimed its opposition to our nation's "militarized foreign policy."
War, in other words, is bad for working people.With increasing clarity, unions have come to recognize that a country that commits over half its discretionary budget to war spending can't afford to address the increasingly pressing needs of its people.
So that brings us to the Iran deal, which was painstakingly negotiated by the Obama administration and its partners in the United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, and Germany. It's been endorsed by over 100 former diplomats, hundreds of religious leaders, scores of distinguished non-proliferation experts, and numerous members of both the American andIsraeli military and intelligence communities.
But some war hawks in Congress -- along with their wealthy benefactors in the military-industrial complex and international hardliners like Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu -- are intent on sabotaging the agreement. If they succeed, they'll put our country and the world on a fast track to yet another disastrous military conflict, the costs of which are too horrific to contemplate.
A war like this wouldn't just be unaffordable. It would be illegal and immoral, too. That's why the labor movement must see to it that such a conflict never begins.
If you're in a union, contact your rep and urge them to add their voice in support of the Obama administration's negotiated agreement with Iran. They can sign a statement set up by my organization at bit.ly/IranDeal_LaborSignOn.
This article is a joint publication of Foreign Policy In Focus and OtherWords.
This Labor Day, like others before it, finds American workers squeezed on many fronts. Inequality is rising, union membership is dwindling, and wages aren't keeping up with job growth.
Naturally, addressing all those challenges is a huge priority for the labor movement. But this year, I'd like to add another: protecting the nuclear deal with Iran.
It makes sense that unions might be concerned with issues like trade and immigration. But why else should workers worry about how our government operates outside the United States? Does labor need its own foreign policy?
Let me put it this way: When you don't speak up, your default policy is the status quo.
For most of its first 50 years of existence, the country's largest labor federation -- the AFL-CIO -- never once challenged the deployment of U.S. troops into foreign conflicts. But it turns out that workers have as much of a stake in those decisions as anyone.
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan together are projected to cost American taxpayers anywhere from $4 trillion to $6 trillion. And now the war on the Islamic State -- a direct continuation of the last war in Iraq -- has already racked up over $5.8 billion in costs, according to the National Priorities Project. And the tab's running up at a rate of over $600,000 per hour.
That's money that isn't available to put unemployed people back to work, fix our nation's failing infrastructure, provide high quality public education, create a universal Medicare-for-all health care system, build affordable housing, or help transition to a sustainable, de-militarized alternative economy, among many other major social needs identified by the labor movement.
War, in other words, is bad for working people.
That's why my organization, U.S. Labor Against the War, challenged the AFL-CIO back in 2005 to abandon its silence and oppose the George W. Bush administration's illegal war in Iraq.
The unions listened -- and subsequently called for an end to the war in Afghanistan, too. Several years later, in 2011, the AFL-CIO executive council proclaimed its opposition to our nation's "militarized foreign policy."
War, in other words, is bad for working people.With increasing clarity, unions have come to recognize that a country that commits over half its discretionary budget to war spending can't afford to address the increasingly pressing needs of its people.
So that brings us to the Iran deal, which was painstakingly negotiated by the Obama administration and its partners in the United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, and Germany. It's been endorsed by over 100 former diplomats, hundreds of religious leaders, scores of distinguished non-proliferation experts, and numerous members of both the American andIsraeli military and intelligence communities.
But some war hawks in Congress -- along with their wealthy benefactors in the military-industrial complex and international hardliners like Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu -- are intent on sabotaging the agreement. If they succeed, they'll put our country and the world on a fast track to yet another disastrous military conflict, the costs of which are too horrific to contemplate.
A war like this wouldn't just be unaffordable. It would be illegal and immoral, too. That's why the labor movement must see to it that such a conflict never begins.
If you're in a union, contact your rep and urge them to add their voice in support of the Obama administration's negotiated agreement with Iran. They can sign a statement set up by my organization at bit.ly/IranDeal_LaborSignOn.