Uninformed you are, unions are pro socialism/pro communism and that will kill the middle class!
"Ba-a-a-ah, Ba-a-a-ah, Captialism Good, Socialism Ba-a-a-a-a-d..." Right, because the world and life are known for their black-and-white simplicity; but then again, some people are only capable of thinking in only two colors...
It's a plain fact of history that a robust brand of capitalism, more or less accomodated for by the Constitution, is what made the U.S. successful and powered territorial expansion to the West coast and beyond. The inherent problems in the institution came to the fore during the Industrial Revolution, when more capital became more centralized as smaller firms were swallowed up by larger one or forced out of business. The resulting monopolies then came to yield inordinate influence over what were previously the mechanics of fair trade to the point where the economic welfare of the nation was so threatened that the Feds pulled out the trust-busters and the rest is history. Today most serious economists and political scientists consider pure, unregulated capitalism to be unsustainable and untimately self-destructive.
Communism hardly even got off the ground from an idealogical perspective, and even those nations that suppose themselves to be communist obviously are not. China has sold out, North Korea is insane/starving, and Cuba's been watered down to stagnant Socialism. Besides a few crackpots, Soviet reminiscers in Russia and emotionally-insecure college students, there are few serious communists remaining today; the socially and economically competitive nature of capitalism not only fits most closely with the tendencies of human nature but it also the most fertile environment for technological and cultural development (generally speaking).
However history of the late 19th and 20th centuries (see also: Industrial Revolution in the U.S., industrial exploitation of children/women/immigrants, limitations on working hours, workplace mortality, labor movement, trust-busting, stock market collapse, Great Depression...) proved that the capitalist beast is one that must be leashed, caged, or at least yarded, and so came the rise not only of further government regulation of the economy but also the provisions for the organization of the working classes and the education of their children. It was this "liberation" of the working family that allowed the rise of the middle class in the U.S., especially in the industrial North and especially after the Second World War.
Children no longer had to spend 12 hours a day in fields or coal mines working to make a rich man richer, they could go to school. Workers had more time and money for liesure, there became more disposable income, consumer goods and culture came to supply the demand, and capitalistic opportunities shot up seemingly everywhere. My point here being in this little history lesson is thus:
The United States made its most profound advancements as an economic/political power under a hybridized form of capitalism that successfully blended capitalism's inherent potential for prosperity with socialistic protections for the working class and the poor. That is to say, contrary to how folks today see the dichotomy, a dash of "leftism" had the odd effect of supercharging the American economy, and nearly everybody prospered.
We've been operating under a quasi-socialized capitalistic system for decades; the debate isn't whether capitalism or socialism is bad but rather what mixture of features from either is optimal for the U.S. economy.
What I don't understand is the rank and file, which are certianly not radical leftist, so why do they tolerate leadership that is?
I don't know where you're getting your information in this regard, it sounds a bit like something that'd be on Glenn "Now I'm No Expert" Beck's cable show. That is to say, likely misrepresentated and taken out of context. I find it unlikely that ALL labor leaders EVERYWHERE are part of a vast socialist conspiracy but even if they were a bunch of Rabid Pamphlet-Passing Reds most people wouldn't buy it or don't because, IMO, most union members are affiliated with unions first and foremost because of the practical benefits of such and not because they're excited about revolutionary idealogy.
Communism is just a red herring. The union, its members and officers as radical or extreme as FoxNews may paint them to be, are still bound by the reality that their own survival is dependent on the overall survival of the firm and industries in which they take part, strikes and pickets notwithstanding. Whether one sees the company-union relationship as parasitic or symbiotic the fact remains that any union willing to pursue true ideological collectivism is plotting its own demise.
Using Mr. Beck as an example source of contempory criticisms of labor I think it's important to keep in mind that he's well-compensated for his (rather brilliant) skills as a propagandist and it would be short sighted not to at least suspect that there are well-funded interests keen to capitalize on conservative anger by bringing the Red Scare out of mothball and using it to excite and anger morons into advocating the dismantling of organized labor.
Fighting "Socialism" is a diversion for idiots that want to pretend they're informed and socially active, no doubt as a psychological exercise in empowerment necessitated by economic instability. Because, honestly, when things were going well nobody gave two spits about the looming spectre of Socialism. Socialism doesn't worry me. What worries me are the unlearnt lessons from history, the capacity for greed, the lack of compassion; what scares me more than anything are the News Corp.'s, Enron's, Blackwaters, Halliburton's, Goldman-Sachs, BP's, Phillp-Morris's, Union Carbide's, and Microsofts of this world; these and others that have proven that they will sacrifice anything - integrity, public health, the environment,
their own employees- for the sake of almighty profit.
I live in a state almost already ranked last in education funding per capita, and they're slashing the education budget even more. Parents have to choose between sending their kids to college or saving for their own retirement. Our kids are going to grow up with a worthless education that will leave them vulnerable to corporate and political manipulations. Even now this nation is paying the price for not having taken education seriously. What do we have to lool forward to but generations of unquestioning morons enslaving themselves to the system with personal debt, propping it up with their tax dollars, fighting its wars, making minimum wage at some crap service job (the only ones left), flying the flag and decrying anyone who questions the sanctity of the Capitalist construct as a "Socialist" or "Progressive". The schools crumbling, the prisons overflowing, the vast poor and lower middle classes, the haves, their gold and investments government-backed and safe behind iron gates. That is the future I'm worried about.
BTW people like me are the vast majority of the public.
Great. Roaches outnumber humans, should we make them the masters of the planet? But I must agree with you: the vast majority of the American public is wholly ignorant and uninterested in matters such as these because they either lack the education to really understand them or are taken by more entertaining diversions.
Unions are right there with Congress and Lawyers in public opinion and there is a legit reason why people think like that.
I think there's an overall dissatisfaction with all economic and political institutions right now. Most people largely suspect that they're all out to screw us and the evidence seems to bear this out.
I come form family in Penn and Canada all decimated by the steel unions to protect the few at the top.
Your in a favorable union envrionment here the rest of the country not so much.
What the majority of the country thinks is largely irrelevant; contrary to a lot of the angry insistences going around these days the Founding Fathers designed the American system specifically to thwart popular will from easily becoming legislation. If the popular will had always gotten its way the American experiment would have survived to about...oh, 1790 or so.
Sorry unions ruined your family. Tough break, but if there's got to winners then there's got to be losers. Unions being ran and managed by human beings they are inherently flawed. Some are crooked, incompetent, corrupt, and I don't agree with all of their positions or practices, but I pay my dues and support my union because I trust it to protect my interests better than will management, even if at times only marginally so, so as an informed and intelligent citizen who values his rights, as a consumer, and employee, and dedicated taxpayer, I've placed my lot with organized labor. If in your mind this makes me a Socialist then so be it, but never question my dedication to the American experiment or the freedoms guaranteed to us therein.
But hey, what do I know? I'm just a baggage handler...
