[Marxism] Why are American workers so passive?
larrydamms at yahoo.com
Sun Apr 5 09:17:24 MDT 2009
>Michael Kazin, a historian at Georgetown University, said that while
>demonstrations remain a vital outlet for the European left, for
>Americans “the Internet now somehow serves as the main outlet” with
>angry blogs and mass e-mailing.
On the one hand, there's something to this... the society of the privatized spectacle and
all that. On the other hand, is Kazin actually suggesting that tactically and strategically
speaking, posting to a blog is the same thing as withholding labor?
>Leo Gerard, president of the United Steelworkers, said there were
>smarter things to do than demonstrating against layoffs — for instance,
>pushing Congress and the states to make sure the stimulus plan creates
>the maximum number of jobs in the United States.
>“I actually believe that Americans believe in their political system
>more than workers do in other parts of the world,” Mr. Gerard said. He
>said large labor demonstrations are often warranted in Canada and
>European countries to pressure parliamentary leaders. Demonstrations are
>less needed in the United States, he said, because often all that is
>needed is some expert lobbying in Washington to line up the support of a
Wow. The unions are so utterly irrelevant today I've forgotten just what a bunch of
chauvinist blockheads their leaders are. This is beyond parody... this is plain shitbaggery.
>Professor Kennedy saw another reason that today’s young workers and
>young people were protesting less than in decades past. “This
>generation,” he said, has “ found more effective ways to change the
>world. It’s signed up for political campaigns..."
Not a touch of irony in this mortar brain's words.
Why does this asinine article equate symbolic protests with actual strikes? It reflects the
very stupid political culture it purports to call into question...
More information about the Marxism