"Fortunately, the apparatus for resistance is already in place," Macaray writes (Photo: AFSCME/Twitter)
The Vital Role of Organized Labor
"What is so 'radical' about working people demanding to regain their middle-class status?" Macaray asks
Question: What do the most "successful" countries in the world--i.e., the "happiest," fairest, most enlightened, most optimistic, and most generous--have in common? Answer: The majority of them have quasi-socialist governments/economies, and highly unionized labor forces.
"The only foreseeable way for the vaunted American middle-class to make a comeback is by having the "average American worker" once again earn a livable wage and enjoy decent benefits."
Actually, there's a third commonality as well. Unlike the U.S., they are unburdened by the largest, most bloated and debilitating military budget in the history of mankind--an advantage that permits them to treat medical care as a "right" rather than a "privilege," and to offer free college tuition to those who wish to attend, working off the premise that an educated electorate is an "investment," not a "luxury."
In the 2016 Democratic Primary, when Bernie Sanders advocated free college tuition, politicians not only ridiculed him, they practically laughed him off the podium. They treated the concept of "not punishing" a poor person who wants to continue their education as an exercise in unchecked extravagance.
Yet, we didn't hear so much as a peep from those same people when it came to the F-35 fighter plane. Not only is the F-35 prototype the most expensive weapons system in the history of mankind, which is a mouthful (the fleet's estimated cost is upwards of $379 billion), but the damned thing doesn't work. That's no exaggeration. After a decade of development, the F-35 is still deemed "not acceptable for combat."
Just imagine what this country could have done with an extra $379 billion dollars if we'd decided not to develop this airplane. Because we've become inured to the word, we've forgotten how much a billion dollars is. Consider: If you gave a person a million dollars and told him to spend $1,000 per day, and come back after he spent it all, he'd return in 3 years. If you gave him a billion dollars, and told him to spend $1,000 a day, he'd return in 3,000 years.
Maybe we use that extra $379 billion as a down-payment on single-payer health care? Or for underwriting free college tuition? Or for putting a sizable dent in those much needed repairs of our infrastructure (roads, bridges, dams, aqueducts, canals, ports, power plants, etc.)? In any event, it would have been money well-spent.
Which brings us to labor unions. The only foreseeable way for the vaunted American middle-class to make a comeback is by having the "average American worker" once again earn a livable wage and enjoy decent benefits. And the only way that's ever going to happen is by workers rising up and insisting on it.
I realize that choice of idiom has the slightly nutty, early 20th century ring of proletarian idealism to it, but it also happens to be true. Resistance is the only solution. Resistance is the only way that working people are going to improve their circumstances. It's obvious that the "free market" won't do it, the U.S. Congress won't do it, and the Church and philanthropic organizations won't do it. It's the workers themselves who must once again coalesce and assert themselves. What is so "radical" about working people demanding to regain their middle-class status?
Fortunately, the apparatus for resistance is already in place. The only thing that workers need to do is stand on their hind legs and utilize that apparatus. Unions are legal. Labor laws are on already the books. The NLRB, wimpy as it is, already exists. Everything is in place.
And if you're looking for proof that Corporate America is scared shitless over the potential rise of organized labor, it is represented by fact that they will do anything in their power to keep unions out. They are terrified of us.
If Wall Street didn't regard worker solidarity and collectivism as dangerous, they wouldn't care. They wouldn't give a hoot about unions. But they do care. Which is why hundreds of millions of dollars were spent on those toxic "right-to-work" campaigns.
Again: The apparatus is already in place.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. 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. The final deadline for our crucial Summer Campaign fundraising drive is just days away, and we’re falling short of our must-hit goal. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Question: What do the most "successful" countries in the world--i.e., the "happiest," fairest, most enlightened, most optimistic, and most generous--have in common? Answer: The majority of them have quasi-socialist governments/economies, and highly unionized labor forces.
"The only foreseeable way for the vaunted American middle-class to make a comeback is by having the "average American worker" once again earn a livable wage and enjoy decent benefits."
Actually, there's a third commonality as well. Unlike the U.S., they are unburdened by the largest, most bloated and debilitating military budget in the history of mankind--an advantage that permits them to treat medical care as a "right" rather than a "privilege," and to offer free college tuition to those who wish to attend, working off the premise that an educated electorate is an "investment," not a "luxury."
In the 2016 Democratic Primary, when Bernie Sanders advocated free college tuition, politicians not only ridiculed him, they practically laughed him off the podium. They treated the concept of "not punishing" a poor person who wants to continue their education as an exercise in unchecked extravagance.
Yet, we didn't hear so much as a peep from those same people when it came to the F-35 fighter plane. Not only is the F-35 prototype the most expensive weapons system in the history of mankind, which is a mouthful (the fleet's estimated cost is upwards of $379 billion), but the damned thing doesn't work. That's no exaggeration. After a decade of development, the F-35 is still deemed "not acceptable for combat."
Just imagine what this country could have done with an extra $379 billion dollars if we'd decided not to develop this airplane. Because we've become inured to the word, we've forgotten how much a billion dollars is. Consider: If you gave a person a million dollars and told him to spend $1,000 per day, and come back after he spent it all, he'd return in 3 years. If you gave him a billion dollars, and told him to spend $1,000 a day, he'd return in 3,000 years.
Maybe we use that extra $379 billion as a down-payment on single-payer health care? Or for underwriting free college tuition? Or for putting a sizable dent in those much needed repairs of our infrastructure (roads, bridges, dams, aqueducts, canals, ports, power plants, etc.)? In any event, it would have been money well-spent.
Which brings us to labor unions. The only foreseeable way for the vaunted American middle-class to make a comeback is by having the "average American worker" once again earn a livable wage and enjoy decent benefits. And the only way that's ever going to happen is by workers rising up and insisting on it.
I realize that choice of idiom has the slightly nutty, early 20th century ring of proletarian idealism to it, but it also happens to be true. Resistance is the only solution. Resistance is the only way that working people are going to improve their circumstances. It's obvious that the "free market" won't do it, the U.S. Congress won't do it, and the Church and philanthropic organizations won't do it. It's the workers themselves who must once again coalesce and assert themselves. What is so "radical" about working people demanding to regain their middle-class status?
Fortunately, the apparatus for resistance is already in place. The only thing that workers need to do is stand on their hind legs and utilize that apparatus. Unions are legal. Labor laws are on already the books. The NLRB, wimpy as it is, already exists. Everything is in place.
And if you're looking for proof that Corporate America is scared shitless over the potential rise of organized labor, it is represented by fact that they will do anything in their power to keep unions out. They are terrified of us.
If Wall Street didn't regard worker solidarity and collectivism as dangerous, they wouldn't care. They wouldn't give a hoot about unions. But they do care. Which is why hundreds of millions of dollars were spent on those toxic "right-to-work" campaigns.
Again: The apparatus is already in place.
Question: What do the most "successful" countries in the world--i.e., the "happiest," fairest, most enlightened, most optimistic, and most generous--have in common? Answer: The majority of them have quasi-socialist governments/economies, and highly unionized labor forces.
"The only foreseeable way for the vaunted American middle-class to make a comeback is by having the "average American worker" once again earn a livable wage and enjoy decent benefits."
Actually, there's a third commonality as well. Unlike the U.S., they are unburdened by the largest, most bloated and debilitating military budget in the history of mankind--an advantage that permits them to treat medical care as a "right" rather than a "privilege," and to offer free college tuition to those who wish to attend, working off the premise that an educated electorate is an "investment," not a "luxury."
In the 2016 Democratic Primary, when Bernie Sanders advocated free college tuition, politicians not only ridiculed him, they practically laughed him off the podium. They treated the concept of "not punishing" a poor person who wants to continue their education as an exercise in unchecked extravagance.
Yet, we didn't hear so much as a peep from those same people when it came to the F-35 fighter plane. Not only is the F-35 prototype the most expensive weapons system in the history of mankind, which is a mouthful (the fleet's estimated cost is upwards of $379 billion), but the damned thing doesn't work. That's no exaggeration. After a decade of development, the F-35 is still deemed "not acceptable for combat."
Just imagine what this country could have done with an extra $379 billion dollars if we'd decided not to develop this airplane. Because we've become inured to the word, we've forgotten how much a billion dollars is. Consider: If you gave a person a million dollars and told him to spend $1,000 per day, and come back after he spent it all, he'd return in 3 years. If you gave him a billion dollars, and told him to spend $1,000 a day, he'd return in 3,000 years.
Maybe we use that extra $379 billion as a down-payment on single-payer health care? Or for underwriting free college tuition? Or for putting a sizable dent in those much needed repairs of our infrastructure (roads, bridges, dams, aqueducts, canals, ports, power plants, etc.)? In any event, it would have been money well-spent.
Which brings us to labor unions. The only foreseeable way for the vaunted American middle-class to make a comeback is by having the "average American worker" once again earn a livable wage and enjoy decent benefits. And the only way that's ever going to happen is by workers rising up and insisting on it.
I realize that choice of idiom has the slightly nutty, early 20th century ring of proletarian idealism to it, but it also happens to be true. Resistance is the only solution. Resistance is the only way that working people are going to improve their circumstances. It's obvious that the "free market" won't do it, the U.S. Congress won't do it, and the Church and philanthropic organizations won't do it. It's the workers themselves who must once again coalesce and assert themselves. What is so "radical" about working people demanding to regain their middle-class status?
Fortunately, the apparatus for resistance is already in place. The only thing that workers need to do is stand on their hind legs and utilize that apparatus. Unions are legal. Labor laws are on already the books. The NLRB, wimpy as it is, already exists. Everything is in place.
And if you're looking for proof that Corporate America is scared shitless over the potential rise of organized labor, it is represented by fact that they will do anything in their power to keep unions out. They are terrified of us.
If Wall Street didn't regard worker solidarity and collectivism as dangerous, they wouldn't care. They wouldn't give a hoot about unions. But they do care. Which is why hundreds of millions of dollars were spent on those toxic "right-to-work" campaigns.
Again: The apparatus is already in place.