Stop Me Before I Vote Again

"This sort of thing makes me want to hang myself. Sometimes it seems that we really are our own worst enemies"

mjs "we" ???

u call these folks
on this "list"
"lefties"
is this their self description ??

case hardened cadre
is of course mockery
of a fine vintage
but where does the old moor
actually come in here ??

i know of the marx list
of the pliable post trot
el proyecto
and
to be completely fair minded about it
its a wash basin
too infrequently
dumped out
and replenished

but this one
is it henwood's ??
'cause it seems to be
more like
the tuxedo left's plantation punch bowl

i must admit
cruisin' with the kosniki seems like
more fun

was this the list
and were these the sports
that wanted my boy roman P
drawn and quartered ???

would any of em accept party discipline ??

among the lists
former ml fraction
do any of em bother to read marx anymore ???

broad broad broad !!!!
not that reading the man from trier
does much good in some cases
proyection is positively stuffed
with re- warmed lenin
as are most post trot types

can they imagine
following the command
we've voted its settled
now shut up and take orders

Dunno, OP. My guess is they're the usual mixed bag: some idiots, some distinctly non-idiots. Marx has been much read among my comrades there, as far as I can tell, as has Lenin. The human material I think is not sub-par.

The sad thing is that, to the extent there's a conscious left 'round here -- a left that reads and respects Marx and Lenin, whatever they may think about Trotsky -- this is it.

Not a reflection on the list comrades, I think, but a comment on the current state of what I'm reluctant to call the struggle.

Just on the intellectual plane, and even among people who have read the books and thought about the questions, awareness is amazingly stunted. Liberalism seems to be a soul-devouring Bad Mom or Bad Dad whose influence is hard to shed, even if you've read and admired Marx.

I can only assume that you and I escaped, Owen, because we're basically rather louche, delinquent-type people. You more than me, of course. But I'm catching up as best I can.

I'm not a dialectician, MJS - but I've found these folks to be worth the discussion. And the cooperation:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/

Just checked out that link, and it seems the busty young "teacher" is gone. Damn.

But, aaa-aaaaanyway...

I skimmed some of the comments at that site, and there's been a lot said for keeping younger teachers on the basis that they're more enthusiastic, not "burned out", and -- most interestingly -- "connect better" with students. Now, stop me if I'm over-generalizing here, but based on what I've seen in the news, it seems that all the teachers who've been busted propositioning or having sex with students have all been young teachers -- young and cute.

Man, I sure wish to hell some of the younger teachers at my old high school had tried to "connect better" with me -- specifically, a certain social-studies teacher and a certain history teacher come to mind.

" Liberalism seems to be a soul-devouring Bad Mom or Bad Dad whose influence is hard to shed, even if you've read and admired Marx."
i couldn't agree more

we all once thru the socialization tunnel
to become meritoids
become utter depravity constructs
but for the grace of organization and its attempts at collective praxis ...

one good i note

we hardly need to imndulge in righteous once and for all purges

the "social product" seems for now inevitable
pb depravity ie liberal slants radical purisms cone hatting of all sorts
though a "natural" ie spontandseous outcome
of socialization
can be at least modifioed by diligent group action

it takes a party
cells are never enough

to filtch part of Hillary's pet phrase
and of course a party does not exist

we have red anomie here

ripe among other things
for anarcho skepticism
neutered struggle members
and
stocastic acts of idiotic
cubist pre figuration

walter mitty
rebellions
and socialism in one head
abound however

ah the dialectics of it all...
as my home room teacher use to say
in third grade
as we scrambled out the door to recess

i vist jacks link
and stumble on this bit of silly
revolution in a brain pan
isometric
exercising

"Mass Democracy and Decisive Clarification
vs.
the Control-Freak Model of Organization"

http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=957

jack
is this what i'm to expect there ??

"the most important front of the war of ideas:

whether or not a better world is possible "

well at least
a better link might be possible

It's a grab bag, Owen - like anything short of Marx and Bakunin in a fistfight outside of an imaginary bar in Barcelona, with Hemingway officiating and Koestler calling color.

"one of the city’s most successful hedge-fund hotshots offers a different surmise: “The majority of Wall Street thinks, ‘Hey, you lent us money. We did a trade. We paid you back. When you had me down, you could have crushed me, you could have done whatever you wanted. You didn’t do it! So stop your bitching and stop telling me I owe you, because I already paid you everything! The fact that I’m making money now is because I’m smarter than you!’ "

http://nymag.com/news/politics/66188/index4.html

your tableau sez a lot about u jack

"Marx and Bakunin in a fistfight
outside of an imaginary bar in Barcelona,
with Hemingway officiating
and Koestler calling color."

i'm digesting it with difficulty

If the Left is dead, and liberalism is a "bad Mom", then what's left? "anarcho-skepticism" and "cubist pre-figuration"?

To echoe Eddie izzard, we just live in a crap age. Humor and bitterness are our lot.

“If enacted, Brown-Kaufman would have broken up the six biggest banks in America,” says the senior Treasury official. “If we’d been for it, it probably would have happened. But we weren’t, so it didn’t.”

"the announcement of the Volcker Rule wound up providing an added political boost. For the banks and the Republicans, the core of their legislative strategy had been to try to stall out the clock until November. But together with the bank tax, the Volcker Rule had the effect of ringing the industry’s bell, of elevating the issue and making the opposition realize that the White House was picking up momentum."
ya ya ya
but soft..

" More than that, it split the industry between those directly affected by Volcker and those who were not."

the sharks lurking in the shadows waiting to feast on any hacked off limbs
of these quasi socialized**
megasaurs

** all that's really private
about their "operating" surplus extraction
are the inner circle bonuses
big as they are they're hardly signifigant
in the flow of nationaal income

but owen what about the bond holders and stockholders

rentier louts money mediated by
err...the sharks lurking in the shadows
hee hee hee

"the Obamans have now missed two once-a-century opportunities for a root-and-branch reformation of a financial system that remains as dangerously unstable as ever."

Can you tell me, briefly, according what organizational plan you would like to see American society arranged? 'Meritocracy' looks pretty terrible, insofar as it actually exists, but I don’t know what you’d like to replace it with. (Also: I am asking this question in a state of childlike earnestness so profound that I plan to get up from my newsreader and go into a magical forest to play with a talking teddy bear. Please don’t get the wrong idea.)

I had to read Marx to get my sociology minor, but I was not then, nor am I now, clear on what exact relationship his ideas had to any version of reality that I have ever occupied.

Thank you.

"Geithner, Summers, and Obama had little interest in tackling those matters, not because they are indentured servants to Wall Street but because at heart they are all technocrats who believe the system doesn’t need to be rebooted or downsized, merely better supervised."

hmmmm

emma :

having to read marx obviously didn't get you
around the bases and back to home plate

too bad really

he saved me a great deal
of stupid exhibitionistic floundering
and instinctive dada

then again teddy bear picnics
aren't so bad either

The non-grading colleague wasn't doing his weeding job on the students; so he must in turn be weeded.

I am all for living out your creed when its net effect is something other than requiring other poor slobs to fill in the gaps for you. If this prof thinks grades are evil, s/he should get a job in a school where they don't do grades or start one. Instead his little quixotic gesture forces other people to make up the difference. Fuck him.

I am a leftist and an unabashed supporter of weeding and I see no contradiction. I recently left a job where unless i wanted to spend every day of my life making excuses to clients I was required to do the work of my boss and my own. He spent his days sequestered in his office, leaving much evidence that he spent the day day-trading, twittering and looking at porn. Unsurprisingly, he was a member of the upper middle class and after undergrad and grad stints in elite schools, seemingly had never had a job where he ever had to make or do anything. At this particular workplace, it seemed the higher you got up the food chain, the more prevalent was this kind of blatant idleness. I have never seen a person from the working class behave this way, no matter where their careers took them. I can't see that any particular blow is struck for egalitarianism by indulging upper middle class slobs, since invariably folks lower on the food chain pick up the slack.

As a manager, I mostly oppose firing. I am totally fine with the idea of working with varying levels of competence. But complete bums who do so little during the course of the day that their competence can't be known, let alone questioned, foul the working conditions of the people around them and are therefore fair game.

The busty model is gone, alas. In her place, last time I looked, is a slightly quizzical-looking shaven-headed black guy with excellent cheekbones. His expression isn't quite right, though; he seems to be asking himself, What am I doing here?

Once you grant the premise that "achievement" ought to be any kind of criterion for employment

Given that we labor under capitalism, and given that there is going to be a certain percentage of unemployed at all time, and given the porousness of the safety net for jobless people, what should the criteria for employment be?

And does the wide berth we're supposed to give non-achieving teachers (and presumably most sorts of 'duffers') apply to everyone? Would you allow for exceptions in areas where work ethic and competence have a serious impact on health and safety? Shouldn't the folks managing the oil spill right now be ethical, competent and hard-working and, if not, shouldn't they be strongly encouraged to do something else?

Assuming, dreamily, that we had the option of firing Obama and co, and hiring someone genuinely better, wouldn't it be a good idea to do it?

The busty model is gone, alas.

The image randomizes on refresh. There is still a comely woman in the image collection, though she doesn't seem obviously 'busty.'

Is this who you mean?

http://www.keepgreatteachers.org/images/petition2_bg.jpg

slopster
as a declasse haute burger
i couldn't agree less with your wrath or more with your analysis of the diddler
behind the bigger door
as to the working class toiler climber

let me suggest merit climbers rarely
jump off the escalator
hard work in an evil outfit just gets more folks fucked

at first i stayed out of this but it continues

fact
mjs sees ample busts inside shirts of no return
even when they aren't there

in this case
i suspect the inded aren't there

flug deserves a naughty boy note
from one of our he-man
self appointed
tribuines
of the other
err ...the oppressed gender

i strongly second anyone suggesting merit as the soul criteria for teachers
nursery thru say grade 4 or 5

after that
i'd use strictly
the juniority principle
fire the oldest fucks first

after a raw soul has gained its sea legs more or less
in fact probably a bit less

then a realy aweful nasty old teacher is really great
that's just how life is babe type training

anyone after age 14
who can't find a mentor somewhere
isn't looking for anything but an alibi

Given that we labor under capitalism, and given that there is going to be a certain percentage of unemployed at all time, and given the porousness of the safety net for jobless people, what should the criteria for employment be?

But to answer your hypothetical, my response about the "criteria" is that they should be absolutely arbitrary. Drawing straws would be ideal. The same way you'd decide who to kill and eat in a lifeboat.

It seems to me increasingly that any left worthy of the name has to make a real commitment to equality and solidarity. Once you grant any legitimacy to management's ranking and winnowing and weeding -- once you cede them the right to decide who's 'worthy' and who isn't -- you're playing their game.

Slopester's image isn't the girl I remember. But perhaps I dreamed her.

mjs exposes his ignorance of the reality of lifeboat survivalism. Maybe in some ideal lifeboat you'd draw straws. In actual lifeboats the injured get tossed first then as hunger sets in, it is the one likely to put up the least resistance. Hey! It is just like on land, come to think of it.

Boink -- admittedly, I have no direct personal experience of lifeboat cannibalism. I suspect you haven't either.

Drawing lots is what I'd argue for in the lifeboat, and it's what I argue for here.

But to answer your hypothetical, my response about the "criteria" is that they should be absolutely arbitrary. Drawing straws would be ideal.

So this goes for all fields: brain surgery, nursing, oversight of regulatory agencies? Do you draw straws when you need to find someone to tune your bike or a web host for your blog? And if you do, and the guy does a crap job, do you go back? I mean do authentic lefts have to give up on the whole idea that certain folks can do things and other can't? That there is a such thing as competence and in at least certain areas, it's somewhat critical?

It seems to me increasingly that any left worthy of the name has make a real commitment to equality and solidarity.

And this is done by fobbing your work off onto other people instead of withdrawing from the world of work entirely and doing something more intentionally revolutionary? And where does this commitment put me in relation to my boss? Should I have gone idle also, and fobbed my work off onto someone under me? What a pair of revolutionaries we'd have made.

Once you grant any legitimacy to management's ranking and winnowing and weeding -- once you cede them the right to decide who's 'worthy' and who isn't -- you're playing their game.

I am playing regardless so long as I am working for them. If I am a teacher, fucking over my colleagues and my students won't change a thing, apart from making the screwing they're already getting that much worse.

I think it may be the folk in question are academics, or wish they were,--my profs were all Das Kapital-thumpers yet just as concerned about preserving their meager positions of power and privilege as any corporate middle-manger I've come across since. Reading Marx doesn't stop class-snobbery any more than being atheist stops one from being a moron.

Peter -- You're exactly right. Too many "auld dominies", as Boswell's dad called Dr Johnson.

Interesting that this little debate is happening without any mention of the history of seniority rules. I don't actually know that story myself, but suspect it might have once had something to do with keeping the bosses from using layoffs to rid themselves of union leaders, while also reducing their payroll by boosting entry-level payees.

Otherwise, it strikes me as a classic tough issue. Seniority isn't completely arbitrary, is it? If you've put years of yourself into a job, should you not develop some kind of superior claim to keeping it? On the flip side, one could argue that young people need jobs more than codgers. But that's not always true, either.

Seems to me that, where jobs are scarce, it's both smart politics and ethically decent for labor to claim seniority rights. Who would join a union if lotteries determined layoffs?

In a world with guaranteed incomes, medicine, and jobs, lottery is the right way to go. In this world, I have to go with Slope on this one.

Not that it isn't a giant clusterfuck, all this aborted struggle in a world where the Big Capitalists sell 85 percent of the shit but only employ 25 percent and always shrinking of the workforce.

We need access to the macro-choices...

Nothing we say here will change the way our masters behave. The best we can hope to do is clear our minds of cant -- and perhaps help somebody else clear his.

One huge cant piety that we need to demolish is this notion that we have to help optimize the workforce -- or even that it needs optimizing, or can be optimized.

It's all some kind of Taylorist fantasyland, but if we buy into it, we've abandoned the only place where we have any autonomy at all, namely our minds, and turned ourselves into sideline cheerleaders for one of the many forms of demented managerial hubris.

One huge cant piety that we need to demolish is this notion that we have to help optimize the workforce -- or even that it needs optimizing, or can be optimized.

You don't have to sign on to the abstract notion of optimizing the workforce to allow that every job, including teaching, requires at least a certain minimum level of competence and commitment and that folks who don't have that minimum should - for the benefit of all concerned - be encouraged to pursue something else.

I have thought about my education -- public school in a working class neighborhood in Pittsburgh -- and in my view many, possibly even most, of my teachers did not have the minimum level of competence and commitment. Some were crazy and emotionally abusive on top. All of the good teachers I had were new to the field and most of the bad ones were not. Were I a high school principal forced to lay someone off, I would have no problem squaring my left politics with firing one of these vampires and would deeply resent -- from a left perspective -- any mandate that I keep them on and fire someone else.

Protection from arbitrary firing empowers workers and is one of the primary purposes of a union. Under seniority rules, at least some portion of union members can expect to see their jobs protected from layoffs, while allowing a layoff process to proceed in a completely arbitrary fashion robs all union members of their job security and is largely self-defeating. The less secure workers are, the less they can afford to challenge management.

Unions have always stressed the need for competence at work and the ability to get the job done. To do otherwise plays into the hands of management and political forces which seek to portray union workers as lazy, incompetent and a general drag on the economy. I see nothing to be gained from living up to this bogus stereotype. Union workers can get the job done well while protecting themselves from being worked like animals for maximum gain. The two are not inconsistent goals.

A union is only as strong as its members. Not all workers are cut out for union membership, and in the case of layoffs, I would sooner see the boss's pets, stoolies, Stakhanovites and others who don't respect union rules or the way things are done to protect the job getting the axe over solid union members.

Sean -- As I may have mentioned before, I don't object particularly to the seniority principle.

It's a mistake to try to justify it on the grounds of competence, though. That's not persuasive. There are too many counter-examples. If you take that tack, you risk undermining the principle you're trying to defend.

You wrote:

I would sooner see the boss's pets, stoolies, Stakhanovites and others who don't respect union rules or the way things are done to protect the job getting the axe

There's a slight incoherence to this conversation, which I think reveals the presence of a Bourgeois Brain Bug. Nothing personal, Sean -- we've all got 'em -- but its does seem that we're trying to see the thing from two sides at once. That can be a good thing, but not if one of them is the enemy's side.

The list people appear to have jumped right into arguing from an assumption that this:

New York State’s fiscal crisis is forcing painful cuts across the board.

is NOT utterly dishonest. I hardly know where to begin. Fiscal catastrophe is a defining characteristic of capitalism. The "crisis" didn't suddenly appear one day and decide to force ghoulishly savored loss of livelihood. The catastrophe was conceived and executed by people. The same people who are now planning even more immiseration and eying new prospects for looting. It's funny that any left wing list could fail to leap on that right away. And it gives a new meaning to "red meat".

The "crisis" didn't suddenly appear one day and decide to force ghoulishly savored loss of livelihood. The catastrophe was conceived and executed by people.

you mean people like...

Sidney Hawkins Gargiulo - Hawkshaw Capital
John Petry (chair) - Gotham Capital
John Sabat - SAC Capital
Joe Williams - Democrats for Education Reform (DFER)
Brian Zied - Maverick Capital

...?

they're the board of directors of the petitioning organization.

don't blame unions for seniority

and certainly don't consider seniority
the basis for wageling job site power

as often as not seniority "rights" allow
mangement to split the job force in a bargaining unit

more precisely

firing needs to be distinguished from lay offs

the sack for cause

the mock epic duels of
corporate HR-SD flunky
vs union griever
in time outline a veritable 3-sphere
of possum -bilities

let's face it the mass sack of any type
or thru motivation
and by any criterion
is no more socially rationalizable
then summary executions
they are all terrifying if not terrorizing
speaking of terror as tactic
the lock out and mass firing of strikers
is a straight up local terror attack
but even so
to conflate these mass slaughters
with winnowings during famine
or the day in day out
equally un rationalizable
hire /fire process of
"employee optimization"
well that's all too obviously
a category mistake eh ???

i get the impression a few of u folks
might profit by pondering this a bit more

perhaps lots of experience tempers one's grasp

seniority in the right to evaluate
"in context" seniority rules
might make sense or it might simply expose
the de facto non solidarity
the efficient atomization
and orderly serialization of the job force

line up for the gas chambers please
the first shall be last

st Al has the gist here

"It's funny that any left wing list could fail to leap on that right away. And it gives a new meaning to "red meat". "

our slopster being a prime cut
of said red meat

applying one's lace curtain parlor
list of ethical maxims
to a job site
whatever they might be
means ends
golden rules
true merit rewarded whatever

its all ...well
utterly fucking idiotic
counter revolutionary dog fling

hapa thank u for naming names

considering "the source"
if not logically conclusive
or even much more then a forensic lead
none the less
usually proves rhetorically effective

"The less secure workers are, the less they can afford to challenge management."

seniority may insulate seniors from the slaughter of their juniors

often business agents make deals along these lines
precisely because
a they don't want to call the mates out over layoffs
and b
each barg unit member looking to his or her own intrest
might swallow a layoff
if the seniorized majority are left exempt
this happens with pay and bene bargaining to

have any of you "clear " headed righteous union maids
any seniority in this bargaining biz ??

these types of arguments are
like two dimensional barriers in a three doimensional space

btw
we are also talking --some of us though not father S --
as if all hierarchy is absolutely context free
to be judged by the same set of maxims

listen these are profiteers here
trying to reduce the cost per inmate
of school jail time

this isn't about the the three RR's here
its about the social wage cost
of the exploitable class
bare that in mind i know father s does

the pub school mission
is often righteously subverted by good teachers sure
but do u think systems of excellence have anything to do with that ??

but hey that's why
totalitarianism is a paper tiger

now that asia builds hu caps dirt cheap
the MNCs hardly need a local "skilled" work force that's tip top
and as for hardy hands to apply to the galley oars ...

do dah name undoc mean anything to ya

the public school system is a hideous
mirage machine
part of the bread and circus show
to keep white kulacks "potted "
and pre process the lower darker
native orders for the various penitentiary outfits the land of liberty
maintains to preserve our intrinsic freedoms

the father with his habitual
love of all things bentham
calls these outfits panopticons

with this site i guess
as the pan opticon of panopticons

"the moral culpability of Not Doing Your Job"

confusing that chinaski-ite loafery
no matter how nickle platted the context
with the rentier class
we toiling jobsters support
without a murmur
seems to me a misapplication of prissiness
anal sadism and other bad out croppings
of perverse shit can training

sean et al

trouble makers get fired for cause
not laid off

if mangement has a trouble maker it doesn't wait till the next "lay off"
to fire the miscreant bug

besides most job sites aren't organized
so where's the seniority right there
but a weapon of choice for management
to well
keep out true job security thru a union
and it's "possible" agency as
source of active solidarity

god this only gets worse as one proceeds into it

quite a tar baby mjs

that all being said
i think this bit of pink bathos
is far worse

"people aren't weeds"

never found that in marx
as for this:

"Accept the fact that any work force is going to be varied, and rather than this stupid and impossible and divisive obsession with competence give a little bit of thought to performing the best possible with a given work force"
why that's cook shops of the future eden
menu time stuff

look we all know the maxims
i suspect they date back to the days we lived and acted in troops like baboons

between those rough and ready notions of reciprical decency and the modern public class room
stretches a vast interval of human history

(it was left to the reader to learn whether 1/5 political operative & 4/5 'private capital' board was typical for a mom's apple pie education NGO)

The problem with the current system, IMO, is that pay and "merit" get conflated. I'm pretty sure that most people would require only tiny increases in pay to take on more difficult jobs that have more prestige and power. If less demanding jobs paid almost as well there wouldn't be so many miserable, useless turds barricaded into their corner offices for fear of having to find another job, which would mean watching $10,000 to $100,000/year in rents disappear from their income.

I don't think that merit is really a valid basis to distribute income, but as a basis for determining who does what job I'm fine with it. I'm also fine with constant weeding out and firing if there's a good EI scheme, low unemployment and low inequality. The flip side to that is that it would also be much easier to quit. Fuck job security. It's about income security and labor mobility.

fb
you write like we're already under the dictatorship of the job class

aren't we still in corporate free range exploiters happy hunting grounds here ??

displays of solomon like wisdom
are off base save em for your
coming days
as commissar

now lets stur the pot

stir what pot? this just seems like counter-cultural nostalgia to me.. arguing in favour of the two most hated aspects of unionization - seniority and protected incompetence. It's a good way to deter people from joining a union.

"counter-cultural nostalgia to me"

well i'm usually very specific about this
i mean job site organizing
with or without the aid of an established union

anti corporate activity is always fun

wallmart ...BP ..goldman
come to mind

community action takes contrary forms

in certain contexts
block foreclosure and of course in most
do its opposite promote " walk away "

iraqistani actions ???
green actions ??

i'll leave that to others
normal pwogs are more easily led into those box canyons
then job site activity
or often even community activity

reading and writing at this site
is not taking action
for some of us it's enough
simply
to point the finger
or
give the finger

at least the wise guy finger
can direct others
to the sore spots and nerve endings
of the corporate empire

get out and raise hell

stop traffic

symbolic ??
one thinks of the chinese lady
that set fire to herself on the roof
of her about to be demolished house

group ???

the community near beijing trying to save itself from the same bull dozering process as the lady that set herself ablaze

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/27/world/asia/27china.html?th&emc=th

"arguing in favour of the two most hated aspects of unionization - seniority and protected incompetence. It's a good way to deter people from joining a union"

that couldn't be less smug or more libelous

the majority of shitty job holders in america
would love a union
u show no sense of their contextual savvy

parroting squawk radio bull
is surprising out of any regular or semi regular here

we are all as the father s suggests
slanted from the very "matrix of our social being "
by the bourgeois society (BS)
we arose out of

but we hardly need to preen ourselves with some of dumbest and dirtiest BS swill

you may have noticed i have little regard for seniority in union settings
in fact i think it is a very sinister worm
over time
much like no strike clauses
but that's neither here or there

and as to feather beds and such
or dolys and louts sitting in cap bird seats
that needs some fresh paint on it
to cover its rusted hulk

pure ike 50's agit prop
back when the unions appeared to be
reaching a third of all pri sec jobs
and even more
outside the yahoo states

a threat to corporate flexibility
long since demolished by the triple play
of wider deeper global markets
the march of automation and
of course the now much talked about
off shoring and out sourcing

now what 7-8 % of pri sec jobs
are organized
for collective bargaining ??

and outside of rent sumps
swimming in gubmint contracts
what's the residual number
and where is it headed ???

fb if you're up for some union talk
please start off
with something better
then that bozo comment

for three years now i've tried to get my pal
herb n sorrell to post here
but he won't:

" owen
pink fairies like u guys got there
eat goat cheese not ham hocks "

alas
this is one comment thread
where he might profitably add some relish

ps he spells worse then me
but no typos

he's as meticulous as an ant about his typing

@MJS:
You said you supported the concept of seniority on the basis of its supposed arbitrariness, and then proposed a system of layoffs based on drawing straws, which is certainly arbitrary. I don't agree that seniority is arbitrary, there are sound and logical reasons for it, but it is mutually exclusive with a system that involves drawing straws.

It bears repeating that one of the primary purposes of the union is to protect against arbitrary firing. It doesn't get any more arbitrary than drawing straws and doing so defeats the purpose of the union in no uncertain terms. The goal of the merit-based crowd is obvious from the propaganda provided: to eliminate seniority, and to allow management to achieve its objective of firing the most expensive workers and those closest to retirement. It has nothing to do with merit, since the union already allows the firing of grossly incompetent employees for just cause. The lottery system you are proposing serves management's objectives even more than the "merit" system, as drawing lots will likely eliminate even more workers with seniority than would be the case if management had to come up with some sort of reasonable excuse for firing them. It completely defeats seniority as a viable means of shielding workers from arbitrary firing and protecting the investment senior workers have in the job.

There's a slight incoherence to this conversation, which I think reveals the presence of a Bourgeois Brain Bug. Nothing personal, Sean -- we've all got 'em -- but its does seem that we're trying to see the thing from two sides at once. That can be a good thing, but not if one of them is the enemy's side.

No exchange on SMBIVA would be complete without a comment like this. I might equally suggest there is a Bourgeois Bookworm Bolshevik Bug at play here, which, nothing personal, tends to arise in people from a privileged middle class background who spend too much time absorbing the Gospel according to Saint Vladimir and thus imagine themselves uniquely qualified to dictate the nature of reality to a working class whose needs and priorities they are often unable or unwilling to fathom. Highlights of this disorder include an inability to disagree with opponents without accusing them of some moral or intellectual defect that prevents them from seeing the revealed truth you are conveying to them, rather like Saint Vladimir himself. This habitual supercilious condescension, well in evidence on this site, is one of the primary reasons the working class distrusts intellectuals...that, and hard experience.

Sorry, but from where I am standing, it is you that is arguing from the enemy's side, supporting arbitrary firing based on lots that is contrary to the union's very purpose in defense of some vague notion of class solidarity. I see no class interest being served in telling a guy with 6 months left to retirement he should just pick a straw and take his chances against some guy with 6 weeks on the job. Workers just aren't as comfortable seeing their life work pissed away for dubious ideological benefit as their intellectual betters are.

seniority may insulate seniors from the slaughter of their juniors

Those seniors were juniors once themselves and subject to the same rules. It also works in reverse, with seniors being pressured into early retirement to keep jobs open for the juniors.

each barg unit member looking to his or her own intrest
might swallow a layoff
if the seniorized majority are left exempt
this happens with pay and bene bargaining to

That's true enough. No one said it is a perfect system, but it serves its function of protecting the workers with the most time invested in the job, which seems reasonable to me.

have any of you "clear " headed righteous union maids
any seniority in this bargaining biz ??

As always op, I find myself wondering whatever might the purpose of questions like this be. I am sure the response must be some secret window into my soul.

But to answer your question, I am self-employed, but come from a strong union background with my grandfather and father both being organizers and many of my family members currently in unions or likely to be in them in the future, so a mix of seniority and no seniority in this race.

these types of arguments are
like two dimensional barriers in a three doimensional space

Whatever the fuck that means.

The 2d barrier in 3d space is like the side line of a football field. It is no barrier in a physical sense but under a regime of rule enforcement (striped shirts) it attains absolute status. But is this what op intends to suggest?

Good points, Sean.

You said you supported the concept of seniority on the basis of its supposed arbitrariness, and then proposed a system of layoffs based on drawing straws, which is certainly arbitrary. I don't agree that seniority is arbitrary, there are sound and logical reasons for it, but it is mutually exclusive with a system that involves drawing straws.

I'd prefer something that was more explicitly arbitrary. But seniority ain't bad.

Sorry for the apparent ad-hominem. Hunting down and destroying bourgeois brain bugs in our own heads is something we all have to do, and do continually.

I see no class interest being served in telling a guy with 6 months left to retirement he should just pick a straw and take his chances against some guy with 6 weeks on the job.

And anybody who thinks he personally is more deserving than the next guy is a menace. This attitude has led to a number of "I got mine" union contracts where the older guys leave the younger guys to twist in the wind.

Deserving no, rather, invested. Were youth perpetual, seniority would be pointless. But we don't get to start over. The end of the productive years keeps bearing down. We start grasshopper and end up ant.

This is the world we have. I wish it were 75 F and low humidity 16/7 and a little cooler at night. But....

Deserving no, rather, invested.

Anyway, I'd respond to this observation by asking whether "investment" in things as they are is anything to be praised, or encouraged. Isn't it rather a recipe for getting schnookered? A little like getting a mortgage, perhaps.

The other thing is, I been young and I been old, and young is certainly better, but the young guy needs to pay his rent just as much as the older guy, and neither one is going to enjoy living in his car.

"a Bourgeois Bookworm Bolshevik Bug at play here,"

fair enough

" which... tends to arise in people from a privileged middle class background who spend too much time absorbing the Gospel according to Saint Vladimir and thus imagine themselves uniquely qualified to dictate the nature of reality to a working class whose needs and priorities they are often unable or unwilling to fathom."

does that follow mate ??

are we here writing for "the working class"
i submit this is aimed precisely at you
a pwog

working folks have better things to do hopefully

"Highlights of this disorder include an inability to disagree with opponents without accusing them of some moral or intellectual defect that prevents them from seeing the revealed truth you are conveying to them, rather like Saint Vladimir himself. "
u prefer your polemic
fought out in oven mittens
don't be so thin skinned and glass jawed

"This habitual supercilious condescension, well in evidence on this site, is one of the primary reasons the working class distrusts intellectuals...that, and hard experience."

completely irrelevent
mjs has never been supercilious
in his adult life
so far as i have seen these past 43 years
nor prone to condescension

again we are writing for intellectuals
here
not
our class betters the wagelings
the world historical agents of social progress

If you keep demonstrating how incompetent I am you risk losing your blog to me, by your logic.

So the older guy is more deserving? Once a group of people starts thinking about who's more deserving than who, they're ripe for the picking. Nothing more divisive and self-destructive could be imagined.

Not more deserving, just with a helluva lot more to lose than the younger guy, and more time invested in the job. Both have an equal need to pay the rent, maybe more for the older guy with kids. But the older guy has the greater need, at that point in his life, to protect his retirement, as his working days are numbered and that is what his family will have to survive on when he can no longer work. Never said seniority was based on competence. It's not exactly a morale booster for the younger guy to know that he might spend the next 30 years working towards retirement only to be axed at the last minute by drawing straws. Preserving some kind of job stability is what the union was created for, what you propose would completely destroy that.

oops, posted to wrong thread.

are we here writing for "the working class"
i submit this is aimed precisely at you
a pwog

Good to know someone is out there working to save us kulaks, yeomen and pwogs from ourselves. We're unworthy! We're unworthy!

again we are writing for intellectuals
here
not
our class betters the wagelings
the world historical agents of social progress

As opposed to the Egghead Einsatzgruppen, would be tough-love administrators of the national 12-step program to wean us kulaks, yeoman and goo-goos off our fetishes and addictions. Heavy on the tough, light on the love, though, as compassion is but a bourgeois affectation of rage-addicted goo-goos and church ladies. To make an omelet, heads must be cracked. Lots of 'em. There is no room for sentimentality, or real-world concerns, particularly not of the kulak variety. The more these sinners suffer, the faster they can hit bottom and begin the process of recovery.

That's been a real winning formula for social progress, alright.

That's been a real winning formula for social progress, alright.

The received ideas of actually-existing contemporary American labor unions don't seem to be among them. Indeed, one might say with some confidence that if experience means anything, they are prescriptions for certain defeat.

The almost-retiree is a guy one wants to protect, fair enough. But the youngster is the guy one needs to persuade. Throwing the latter under the bus for the sake of the former doesn't seem like the smartest move.

Is there really any "winning" alternative other than to tell people, over and over, that we are all in the same boat -- or lifeboat, as the case may be? And that the same sharks will eat us all if we don't defend each other -- the old and the young, the virtuous and the vicious, the industrious and the lazy?

Persuade the vicious and the lazy to defend each other?
Let's hear it!
Go!
But seriously, isn't this topic rather problematical. Especially given square one. I am reminded of Reagan's sermon on the unity of mankind in the face of extraterrestrial threat. But if the Martians are hiring.... it all falls apart.

that's weird. a search for the word 'pension' on this web page comes up empty. whodathunkit.

Lotta pensions are going to come up empty, too, hapa. Even for the deserving.

kulacks and pwogs are very different beasts
this is not a kulack site
and the site hardly attempts to save anyone

i think m dawson suggests
the site's mission
ought to be simple
broadcast one message
the Dembos are NOT your comrades
mr and ms pwog

the Dembos are in fact
out to suborn u
to lead you into violation of your most cherished ideals

the Dembos are just the better looking
more pwogie compatible head
of our
at present two headed
corporate imperial state leviathan

-------------
it is only from me
folks get any zibe
that's preachy vicious callous
and into sand blasting type mind reform

not the other posters

i'm perfectly happy to play
the pocket minotaur 'round here
every site needs it's nasty guy (or gal) eh ??

its like pro hockey that way

the game is better played with as little of my style of play as possible
but there has to be some of it
by some one with little more to contribute besides sharp elbows and a thick skull
especially on home ice
or the stars get fucked with
by the visiting team

Does 'zibe' have a synonym? If so, please use it.

"real-world concerns"
this is not the first time you've pulled that jack rabbit out of your hat sean

i must say the strength of it escapes me
what is un real world ??

is it suggesting folks walk away from an under water house ??

is it suggesting the Dembots aren't worth your
vote let alone your time or money ??

is it suggesting folks stop traffic ???

is it the occasional display of distain
for pinko montebanks ???

what ???

obviously you feel deeply rooted in
the grit and grime of "amerikan reality"

and what leads you to suspect say ...i'm not ??

boink do you get anything out of my comments

i doubt it
so maybe you oughta just skip em

zibe is a zinging vibe

snide however is a jack ass
of a different color

op,
Your comments are the life and soul of my SMBIVA experience, but ... what can I do when I can't decipher? I do a lot of googling when I read your stuff and I have recourse to my keyboard for proximity searches and neither helped with 'zibe'.... Perhaps you could figure out some redundancy technique for your typing and spelling habits. Something like parity bits at a higher level.

I may not be intellectual enough for SMBIVA. I'd probably have a lot of trouble with the entrance exam if it were based on Marxist literature. Actually I wouldn't do well with any theological subject matter.

Different point:
In this thread it seems that what Sean refers to as real-world concerns are not taken seriously ... even snidely contrasted to unreal-world ones. Real-world concerns are the quotidian. Unreal-world concerns are the dreams of the haute-burger revolutionary intellectual whose daily bread is provided by a generous dead hand or lucky lottery ticket.
Following Christ after having dispossessed oneself of encumbrances is not for the quotidian kulak. However intellectual one is, no social restructuring is worth considering or even possible if the values and instincts of the quotidian kulak are not taken into account. Sean tries to take them into account. You seem to proceed on the basis of vanguardism and party discipline.
If I misunderstood you I apologize.

boink

great comment

seems i at least have taken on a wrong "glow" here over the years
i hope this is taken as sincere

i lack any sense of "confidence" in my personal insights
only a manic delivery system may obscure that

i have very little personal "concern"
about ME being correct on any one point
or other

--a minor virtue in life
but of value in a comment cage --

of this i'm sure
i argue to discover or stoutly defend
not to refute out of glee at the put down involved

none of this seems worth personal acrimony
past the usual flurry of the moment

i do chance an offense
when i think a blow from a chin rest
might be in order
i say kick em in the balls to see what they're made of
if the subject is more importatnt to them then their amour propre that will soon come out in the wash
if not
them who the damn hell cares about em

of coures
as suits us asymetrical nasty types
i myself prolly less then many here
enjoy the awakening of the spirit
born of a good chin rest blow
but the road to a higher truth
is often a pilgamage
full of virtual blows and beatings

discovery very rarely
proves to be a punt ride
down one of those languid
18th century english canals

--now solely maintained
for the useage of hemi-toffs
on keatsian leave
or those suddenly hormone jiggered
normally frigid pointy heads
portrayed in brit-flicks --

the occasional neologism
like zibe
is there to break up the flow
just like the speed dump effect of too much space bar

its a brechtian device so to speak
i prefer if people sub vocalize this shit
and the really irresponsible typos
are a disgrace

the heterography on the other hand
intended or merely the product of dislexia
turned to insoucient affectation

a poor speller is the stutterer
or mumbler
of written communication eh ??
i neither prefer the one or the other
at times the fluency of the pass thru mumble
is exhilerating
over against the porky pig hang ups
that dangle my fingers above the keys
till my word machine can spit out
a spellable paraphrasitic

short version:

just go zibe your self
if you can't take a stroke

op, what in gods name are you on about?

"that couldn't be less smug or more libelous

the majority of shitty job holders in america
would love a union
u show no sense of their contextual savvy"

Sorry for not grasping the nuances of the fantasy working class in your head. I will try harder next time. Out here in the real world that Sean and I inhabit:

"Among non-union workers, 77% said they had no interest in becoming unionized. Among those currently unionized, seven in 10 said they were satisfied with their union while 27% stated that if given the choice, they would prefer not to be unionized. "

and what reasons do they give?

""Employees increasingly see themselves as free agents who decide who they're going to sell their service to," said John Mortimer, president of LabourWatch, an employee-rights organization. He said more workers today also believe in merit over the union principle of seniority."

http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=756585#ixzz0pEJARwrJ

Maybe the numbers are dramatically different in the States, but I doubt that anywhere near a majority are in favour of joining a union, and I'm pretty sure that they would give similar reasons.

"fb if you're up for some union talk
please start off
with something better
then that bozo comment"

Please forward me a guide to your fantasy world so my future posts can be more consistent with the unions that exist within it.

" real-world concerns are not taken seriously "

that might be so if those concerns seem self confining concerns

to suggest a kulack has the latitude of action
of a pwog is far from anything we've written here i think

if one is
gifted by happenstance
to a pwog's life
by some independent means
or more meritoriously
because thru effort and talent and adequate financial sponsorship
one is today nicely resting
one's mind above
some easily ridden manifestation
of marketable human capital
whatever one's ready sources
of easily sponged up
general equivalent
your pwog's life is far from that of a kulack

if you want to build a site that draws in kulacks

i'm game
but to mean that needs to be specific
as in my case old herb sorrel's
now defunct union site for proto organizers
that definitely aimed to scoop up
as many attack kulacks as it could

asttack kulacks are of course not very common but they do exist in union circles
and well they can be a refreshing change
from your pwogie blitherers

btw sean is definitely not an attack kulack

"fantasy working class in your head"

"Maybe the numbers are dramatically different in the States"
where in hell are you canada ??

if so stay there

i guess you aren't familiar
with the various polling surveys
that give quite different results
not just here in the states
but canada as well ??

in fact i suspect that poll
was as carefully worded
to slant against unions
as much as other polling
has a " friendly " tilt

"employee-rights organization"

do u not get the new speak there fb ??

now the polls that show above 50%
of job holders
can see the value of collective bargaining etc
are but the prelim makings of organizable sites
the move from entertaining
a "possible union"
to voting in an actual union
is quite another matter

example i've not seen this question

"would you be prepared to risk job lose building a union at your company"

but fb
if you are anti union as you certainly appear to be
fine but please confirm it
in writing here

then i'll just ignore you from now on
and let you have as much fun here as you can

most anti union folks are vermin
so far as i can see

fb
i went to your link

if you read that bwithout steam emerging from your ears

well

fuck u !!!

I didn't actually read the whole article. I was just searching for some recent poll numbers.

The Financial Post and this labourwatch group are dodgy, no disagreement there, but the CLC guy quoted doesn't dispute poll results, and CUPE uses the same polling company.

fb
if you are trying to claim i'm unplugged from the job class in norte amigo
and in particular from the union movement here
in the northeast of the united states of freedom

you're simply wrong
today my contacts ..for the moment are indirect with the service and commercal unions
but not detacted

if you are trying to let me see the duanting tasks of organizing the norte amigo
service economy you needn't
it is well within my purview ...both sides

i note this sgitprop diguised as datum

"Employees increasingly see themselves as free agents who decide who they're going to sell their service to,"

this fre lance fantasy though clever much like home ownership 65 years ago
is a very rapidly dispersed and dispelled
tooth fairy notion

if life time job "security "
is long gone as a fantasy
--never existed in reality --
and
job force
"identification" with "my company"
at the margin of motion
is disappearing too
then the naked wageling has to pretend to herself she's a professional
a free lance a job site ronin

she isn't she's caught in the flux
of flux security
not to be confused with the social democratic paradisio
of flex security

---

you still haven't told me your view of unions

my " pink amoeba cell" PAC
has been evaluating the contemporary
service union as institution
and as class struggle vehicle
to get clear on its institutional constraints is critical
b4 one tries hopping on board and trying to drive it into
the middlle of the class struggle

alas this is chatter
best targeted to the readership
of a far different blog
-- my PAC has one under construction btw --

one that tries to re introduce pwogs to the present anatomy and physiology of
the labor movement so they might become organizers en masse
something not seen since the terrible 70's

-- my PAC has one under construction btw --

"CUPE uses the same polling company"
same "results"

i suspect not

wording can be everything as u well know
not to mention sampling error because of self selection effects
answers are fragile things
not in the least bit robust to phrasing on question

and sample participation
is equally problematic

it's not the polling whore here
thoug polling outfits state side are usually on one class side or other...mostly
no its the outfit paying for the poll that counts

polling company marketer
"how do we poll
well
where you want me to take it
we go british style
or up the ass"

Well, here's another one by another pollster who is usually commissioned by unions. It's pretty similar

http://ourtimes.ca/Features/article_52.php

Obviously polls don't tell the whole story but they are pretty consistent with what I sense anecdotally.

My take on unions:

Private sector - I support private sector unions. I worked in two factories that were almost exactly the same, right across the road from each other. One was unionized, the other wasn't. Result

Starting wages
$10/hr, 12 hr shift, 1/2 hour unpaid break, no coffee breaks etc
$17/hr, 12 hr shift, 3 hrs of paid break spread throughout the shift

Public sector - I'm not a big fan. What's your take on them?

Overall, I'm a bit skeptical of the unions as a nexus of future political action, or as defensive bulwark against neoliberalism. All of the places in my home town shown here were union, but that didn't stop anything:
http://www.cbc.ca/connect/2010/03/mayor-of-smiths-falls.html

now we can talk fb

"as a nexus of future political action"
unions need to be seen for what they are
institutions that morph till they can survive in corporate bourgeois societies (afl)
or they never sustain themselves (iww)
even so
they are a " defensive bulwark against neoliberalism" only its temporary protection
not perminent
particularly if its an industrial union
and not a comercial or service union
-- of course service/commercial unionism is extremely under developed--

but here's the point

all industrial economic institutions
are caught
in the faustian process of modern capitalism
creative destruction
including corporate institutions themselves

okay so unions are 50 year institutions
not 150 year institutions
and yes corporations are far more agile
at swallowing each other
and of course unions are limited
in their trans national reach
unlike the MNCs they're up against
they can't go where the factories
of their industry go

but the commercial and service sectors
are out there waiting to be organized

"Public sector unions"
sissy unions mostly
able to thrive of a tax base
not a marketplace

then again they are half of all union membership in the states

the ritual stats come out here :

where once nearly a third
of all pri sec jobs were unionized
(high ike 50's)
now its 7 %

pub sec unions on the other hand
had hardly really starting
when the pri sec industrial unions peeked
and are now about at that same
fatal third of the relevent
(pub sec)job force

and if i were to guess the pub sec unionns are headed for a beating too
vide the teachers unions facing
destruction thru the charter school movement

what could rescue them ??
well my guess
only a pri sec union boom

pub sec unions are
probably in the future
only likely to be well supported
by pri sec union members' households

the synergy is obvious
solidarity of unionites

mission:

organize the pri sec
service and commercial workers

Looks to me like the haute burger goof-off who, like his brethern of left and right, likely pulls down a check and credit for work other people do, and who probably expects very much better than goof-off service in areas that matter to him -- hospitals, restaurants, bike shops, web hosting etc -- lost this argument entirely.

A question that has gone unanswered but has been begged by many people's comments:

What is the nature and/or purpose of work?

One theme I get from some of the comments is that seniority, competence, fulfillment of workplace duties, etc. are bad because everyone's entitled to a job.

Well if that's the case why don't we simply do away with work and then give everyone a weekly, biweekly, monthly, quarterly or annual stipend?

Flip side:

We work to produce things of value. Then, question begged: value to whom, value in whose eyes?

Return to manufacture of hard durable goods. I'm working in a factory where bicycles are made. I am a line welder, I join tubes to make the bicycle's core component: its frame. I slack off because of apathy, or because I'm depressed that my wife is having an affair, or because I feel spite toward my employer's failure to give me a living wage. In any case, I slack off. My welds are shoddy, and the resultant frames I make during this period of slacking are defective. They cannot withstand normal cycling use under an average-sized adult. And, incidentally, they are designed for and sold to adults.

Leave aside the question of whether we should have a product liability lawsuit against the manufacturer. Let's just ask whether someone using a defective frame and getting injured by it should be acceptable to anyone.

Go back to the cause of the defect: my apathy and its resultant lousy welding and flawed tube joints.

I should be free to continue in this apathy?

The received ideas of actually-existing contemporary American labor unions don't seem to be among them. Indeed, one might say with some confidence that if experience means anything, they are prescriptions for certain defeat.

Never suggested otherwise. The unions clearly have to reinvent themselves to survive and make a real impact. This is not an argument against seniority.

The almost-retiree is a guy one wants to protect, fair enough. But the youngster is the guy one needs to persuade. Throwing the latter under the bus for the sake of the former doesn't seem like the smartest move.

You can't have it both ways. Either you protect seniority or you don't. If there are going to be layoffs, there is no way to avoid the pain for at least some union members. The best you can hope for is a system based on rules and tranparency, with everyone knowing in advance who is most likely to go in the event of layoffs and why, and agreeing to these terms at the start of their membership. An arbitrary process keeps everyone wondering whether the process was impartial or not, leads to contention and undermines solidarity and the credibility of the union. It also keeps everyone uncertain of their job security and unwilling to rock the boat, either inside or outside the union, right up to the point they retire. It also serves management's objectives of cutting a sizeable chunk of the highest paid workers and those closest to retirement in any layoff. All this very real damage, to preserve some mystical sense of class solidarity that doesn't exist?

Is there really any "winning" alternative other than to tell people, over and over, that we are all in the same boat -- or lifeboat, as the case may be? And that the same sharks will eat us all if we don't defend each other -- the old and the young, the virtuous and the vicious, the industrious and the lazy?

So we need a sense of class solidarity with the soldiers, cops, gulag quards, torturers and agents provocateurs? The elite aren't the only sharks in the water.

what is un real world ??

is it suggesting folks walk away from an under water house ??

No, it's suggesting that anyone who thinks there is a rational basis for an individual to want to own the roof over his family's head free of mortgages and rents by the time he retires must be an idiot.

is it suggesting the Dembots aren't worth your
vote let alone your time or money ??

No, it's for suggesting no one else is, either.

is it suggesting folks stop traffic ???

Which accomplishes what, exactly? Every worker who loses his job that day because he got caught in your traffic jam is going to be your enemy. Aside from maybe making Mr Gotrock's mistress late for her tanning session, I don't see it causing the elite too much concern.

obviously you feel deeply rooted in
the grit and grime of "amerikan reality"

and what leads you to suspect say ...i'm not ??

What do you care what I think? You obviously believe you have all the answers, have nothing to learn from me or anyone else and anyone who disagrees with you is a pwog, kulak, yeoman or whatever other nonsense term you use to categorize all the swine who refuse to see the pearls you cast before them. Forgive me if I fail to find realism in those who can't deal with me or other humans in any terms but caricature.

sean you are really really
tediously thin skinned
and humorless
look at that stalwart fb
i've shame fully mis used his good nature

where's yours ??

i guess i get under your hide
a bit too easily
too bad every once in a great while
i learn something from souls of your ilk

"What do you care what I think"

to a certain extent
i'm trying to find out
where your coming from

the line" unreal"
strikes me as so massively off base
i was interested in why it seemed
so central to your insights

really
a certain petulant bristling
goes poorly
with a 75 mph fast ball
i must confess
i fel i'm dealing with
not very impressive tools of discourse

try being a little less abrasive
and combative
this isn't a contest here
at least not in my mind

if you review the comments i think you'll see
i'm trying to explicate the post
not convince you
maybe get you out of that defensive crouch

hair trigger counterpunching
is thought to be a celtic trait
i'm all to familiar with celts
surrounded by em in fact
are you a celt per chance SEAN ???
a prickle prideful choleric celt ???

i note you always play fair and that i admire above all else
i've never felt you've willfully mischaracterized anything ive written
thus lines of communication can remain open
despite your exasperating combativeness
popeye without his spinach

"Every worker who loses his job that day because he got caught in your traffic jam is going to be your enemy"

got to be the purest squawk radio
demagogue line
of all time

as if the fault in that case dear sean
is in ourselves not our system

fired because of a traffic jam ??
what sort of exploitation machine uses such draconiam measures ??
and the protesters blocking an intersection are to blame ??

it goes a bigger distance of course

assuming the traffic is both literal and during rush hour
not figurative mostly
and stages sensibly

at any rate to think
that it deserves the same notice and evaluation as carpet bombing
how reactionary must one get over the fall out from the class struggle ??

a strike can lead to layoffs in plants up the chain of production
what if transit workers shut down the system
or utility workers shut off the electricity

should they make targeted exceptions ??
how many ??

recall the mail train in the pullmam strike ???

you by that measure reduce all actions to terrorism

brilliant

i expect you were just srambling to
score a few more points against the taunting menace calling itself paine

"Forgive me if I fail to find realism in those who can't deal with me or other humans in any terms but caricature."
then don't act like one
and a particularly dim-dull one at that sometimes

----------

folks recall this is not my blog

father s never treats his guests this badly
i ask no forgiveness
but i do hope sean u consider me in this instance just another ugly mug mouth here

if gang ups occur i back off immediately
fortunately for me you are well regarded and many if not most here may even agree with you

i know i usually do once youve shaken
the idiotic crust off yourself

if i annoy you
why not ignore me here

most folks seem to find that suitable censor

this site has room for anyone
i bet father s would welcome a blog by you
i know i would and i'd be without
public comment on it
if that appealed to you

"it's suggesting that anyone who thinks there is a rational basis for an individual to want to own the roof over his family's head free of mortgages and rents by the time he retires must be an idiot."
first not an idiot
a prisoner of social "handles" attached to them
to advance their
docile exploitability

and even then
walk away
only if they are very likely
in a hopelessly craterd financial position
ie so far under water
resurfacing
let alone clearing off the principal
is highly unlikely
and even if possible ...maybe possible ..
not worth the hideous sacrfice
to self and household

as an act of systemic sabotage ala father smiths organized walk away movement
that of course is a political decision
bringing in other considerations

"No, it's for suggesting no one else is, either"
where dear heart have you seen that advocated here ???

in my case third party building
that is third party's of the electoral kind
is not my recommendation for time investment by an activist
which is quite different from voting for one or even maybe tossing em a few crowns

i prefer the independent challenge
in the general election by a well known figure
particularly one seen as trying to save the "soul" of the democratic party
now in the hands of evil corporate malfeasers
by attacking it's blanche lincolns
and spectre's and lieberman's and nelson's and
baucuses and and and

to try to punish say barney frank ??
a complete rubber tiger
i find that oddly destructive

barney types i think
deserves to be kept in office
but pounded to powder day in and day out

btw

i love the self appointed refs
calling this one "
against the slackers
".. why don't we simply do away with work and then give everyone a weekly, biweekly, monthly, quarterly or annual stipend?"
u mean of course do away with the obligation to have a job that may extract work from a soul or two right ??

work freely provided needs no prohibition eh

even domestic chores require
at most
only an in house stentorian

but more basic stuff unfolds here

we i think are considering todays
for private profit
corporate guided and dominated
social production system
not some redraft of the social production system

under present conditions
how do we jobsters
most effectively
struggle against our exploitation

father s suggests as a prelim
we don't swallow the corporate rule book and the corporate ethos

example
a poorly built car sold to the public

that is a product quality control issue management needs to deal with
not the exploited line workers

now there is the matter of union public relations

but as with official words from "the state "
one doesn't here suggest ferdinand trumka
cry out
"slack off you fuckers"

i just read
about the still missing
600 nam mias
if its true
quite a story

alex is relying on an old friend of father s and mine
sidney sham-freider
not exactly a gold cored guy
and yet
it demostrates on both sides hanoi and washington
how the inside game is played

unions must maintain a similar public front

but here's the key
the union must decide how layoffs will be conducted not management
and of course more fundementally
if layoffs are to be conducted

any other position is a sell out
go down fighting if its a process of final job liquidation
and if its just a flux
insiste the laid off become in reverse order the first to be rehired b4 any one from the outside

protect the membership

if there's to be performance firing
it has to pass union inspection and union guide lines

should those be along the lines suggested by some budding meritoids here...
maybe
and maybe includes lip service
as well as real merit driven purge hunts

at any rate
lay offs are no pretext for merit based purges
which amount to an institutional execution

blood on the shop stewarts hands ??
or the business agents ??

a jury of rank and filers ???

no way is that ever an easy business
if its after the contracted probation period

one recalls the gang instinct
the evil "your it dip shit"
play yard game

http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn05282010.html

u mean of course do away with the obligation to have a job that may extract work from a soul or two right ??

No.

I mean, why bother working?

Why do we even bother working?

I don't see anyone talking about that. And it's being ignored while discussing whether and how to organize workers.

Which, to me, is like trying to teach a kid how to throw a curveball before he even knows how to toss anything.

If the point of this blog is to tease up people you can mock then you're doing a bang-up job.

If the point is to actually analyze the things you pretend to analyze, you're failing despite your impressive polylingual Germanic and Latinate secret handshakes and bizarre prose stylings.

"look at that stalwart fb
i've shame fully mis used his good nature"

You just got off easy. I had a damning case lined up but I had to settle on procedural grounds... inadvertent quoting of propaganda.

Give me a break from the condescension and amateur psychoanalysis op. You telling me not to be so thin-skinned reminds me of a friend of mine, one of the most neurotic guys I've ever met, who whenever he falls to pieces tells me to stop being so nervous.

Your cryptic hieroglyphics may be near indecipherable at the best of times, but you are about as subtle as a flying drop-kick to the side of the head.

That you have been trying to get my goat is appallingly obvious. Hell, you even admitted as much saying you like to test people to see what they're made of.

My advice is to leave the head games to high school girls. Like them, you seem oblivious to the fact your audience knows when it's being played.

As I've said before, your response whenever I disagree with you has become entirely predictable, right down to this little whatsamatta u prickly puss Celtic tiger thing you do whenever you fly off the handle and get a mild rebuke from me for it.

Any disagreement is met with snide remarks, foppery, and accusations that I am a lefty lesser-than. Just go through this thread and tell me I'm wrong. I don't know why I grate on your nerves so much, op. Maybe it's the Celt vs Celt thing, or perhaps I remind you of some nasty old contrarian Paddy uncle who was always up your ass "testing what you are made of" as the Celts are fond of doing. Whatever it is, it's there. If I may venture a little psychoanalysis myself, we seem to have quite a bit of projection and maybe some transference going on here.

My advice is to can the cheap shots and use your considerable intelligence to rebut my arguments with reason and logic. I'm neither persuaded nor particularly annoyed by the whole op as judge of my leftworthiness thing. It's just tiresome and presumptuous, and another thing I have to wade through along with your mind-numbing prose to get to the meat of your argument.

C. F. O. wrote:

I mean, why bother working?

Why do we even bother working?

I don't see anyone talking about that. And it's being ignored while discussing whether and how to organize workers.

You had an earlier post about the hypothetical welder who isn't producing adequate welds. The idea that there might be some minimum standard of performance seems to me quite a different one than the idea of ranking people. But where is the link with your question about "why people work"?

On another angle to this question, I find it odd that we give any thought to how we would solve problems that are not our problems -- that are, in fact, our enemies' problems, under current conditions.

What do to about unsatisfactory workers is management's problem. What we would do about it under socialism seems to fall into that "cookshops of the future" category.

But perhaps it dosn't hurt to do a little commissarship of the imagination. I'll dance a measure or two of that hula, to the extent of suggesting the "minimum standard" idea and nothing beyond it. Like pass/fail grading in the credentialling sector.

got to be the purest squawk radio
demagogue line
of all time

Nonsense. Let's break down the reality of the situation for you:

1. Traffic jams are extremely frustrating for most people
2. Losing your job because of one is even more frustrating
3. Having a relative die in an ambulance caught in the jam, tends to be particularly frustrating.
4. People are not favorable disposed to those who cause them frustration.

Clear enough?

What you proposes as a "tactic" the Israelis use as a punishment against the Palestinians. They are a people with resistance in their blood and a culture of defiance, but this is demoralizing even to them.

I can't imagine a more counterproductive strategy. Why don't we all just SET OURSELVES ON FIRE while we are at it? Oh, that's right, you've already endorsed that "tactic" by linking to it.

as if the fault in that case dear sean
is in ourselves not our system

Doesn't matter whose fault it is, just whose fault the public perceives it to be. One person dying in an ambulance and you think the public is going to blame capitalism?

it goes a bigger distance of course

assuming the traffic is both literal and during rush hour
not figurative mostly
and stages sensibly

In that case you might try outlining a specific, literal plan, rather than counting on our mind-reading ability to fill in the blanks.

at any rate to think
that it deserves the same notice and evaluation as carpet bombing
how reactionary must one get over the fall out from the class struggle ??

Where did I compare this to carpet bombing?

a strike can lead to layoffs in plants up the chain of production
what if transit workers shut down the system
or utility workers shut off the electricity

These actions have specific, attainable goals like increasing wages or working conditions, not something as broad and long-term as the collapse of capitalism. You are comparing apples to oranges. Do you seriously imagine that the unions here do not consider the impact this kind of strike is going to have on the public? This sort of action invariably decreases public support of the union, and is always a tactic of last resort for that very reason. It is only undertaken when the reward is attainable and makes the risk worth taking. I suspect it is going to take a wee bit more to bring down capitalism than that. In your scenario, I see lots of risk of alienating the public but no real reward in terms of taking the system down.

you by that measure reduce all actions to terrorism

Pure hype. I never compared these actions to terrorism. But I'll bet my left nut after the first person dies in an ambulance Fox News will be doing so, and much of the public will buy it.

i expect you were just srambling to
score a few more points against the taunting menace calling itself paine

As always, you overestimate your nuisance factor, op. I'm just pointing out the kind of lefty tactics that have always striuck me as largely futile and counterproductive, long before I encountered the dreaded op. Perhaps if Your Royal Tauntingness could manage a logical explanation of how all this is supposed to work, rather than just making snide remarks, you might be able to convince me otherwise.

"Forgive me if I fail to find realism in those who can't deal with me or other humans in any terms but caricature."
then don't act like one
and a particularly dim-dull one at that sometimes

I bet you say that to all the kulaks, pwogs and yeomen, you big ole PC softy.

sean
i think we're getting somewhere at last
now if you could stop thinking this is a game of one upsmanship here
really lefty of the month has no claim on me
and for all i know you are the greatest lefty north of the bronx and south of montreal

what you do seem to me to reflect is fairly conventional fear of the public as reacting idiots
perhaps your fear of fox news sez it all

i can imagine the scene
a planed strike action is laid out

sean:
"well if we do that
what will fox news say about it ??"

now besides someone losing her job because she's late to work
someone else is late to the hospital and dies

i take it
unions ought to avoid that possibility
and all other nasty typothetical consequences of a demo
to draw attention to their job actions

why do yuo assumme stopping traffioc is considered by me the road to revolution did i suggest that some how ????

revolutions occur globally where the circumstances exits
they don't exist here

we are engaged or should be engaged
in class struggle here against corporate amerika
not trying to fire up a revolution
have i not been clear on this ????

yes i often suggest economic actions "the state" might take
that are of a progressive nature
that might task the corporate grip somewhat
but that is pure agitprop stuff

of the form
"don't think anything more then corporate special interest prevents this easy solution to problem n

"If the point is to actually analyze the things you pretend to analyze"

do you mean in this instance

analyze why we work ??

really ??? oxy

"These actions have specific, attainable goals like increasing wages or working conditions, not something as broad and long-term as the collapse of capitalism."
i reread that this morning and it really struck me
as wildly off target
and so fuill of elementary "schooling"
as to suggest i need a basics check

i don't or at least not that bing dong school stuff
much like your review of home owndership prospects

btw if you feel i similarly
underestimate your grasp of these matters
show where and i'll gladly "adjust"

but to assume i hadn't the wage and conditions struggle as the driver of union actions
-- btw traffic stoppage
literally
i find of limited application
prolly at least as much as you seem to ---

maybe this continuing misconstruction explains that: ...:

" You are comparing apples to oranges."
apples being i guess wage and condition struggle

oranges ...what ??
the revolutionary spark ???

once you assume stop traffic is the strategy of revolution i guess leads to this mis aimed
piece of rhetoric :

"I suspect it is going to take a wee bit more to bring down capitalism than that."
indeed as i pointed out above
our aim here in the metropole of metropoles
is far less ambitious then that
it is to test the balance of power here
ignite what class on class struggle conditions make possible
in the political and economic spheres

"Do you seriously imagine that the unions here do not consider the impact this kind of strike is going to have on the public? "

did i really need that chunk of the obvious
throw at me
as if i hadn't even that much of a clue ???

at least assume
i harbor a more serious underside
beneath my reckless chatter sean

actions are always to be as deeply pre considered carefully prepared for
and precisely executed as possible
though not revolutionary action
a anti corporate struggle is always hard ball time

on stopping traffic:

"This sort of action invariably decreases public support of the union"
nonsense
it might it might not context matters here
the weighing of uncertain potential outcomes is very circumstance specific
but to assume prufrock tip toes is always better ???
again nonsense

"and is always a tactic of last resort for that very reason."
utter dogmatic hooey
and particularly tea cup pinky ish

" It is only undertaken when the reward is attainable and makes the risk worth taking. "

now that is too obvious to merit comment
and yet so vague as to suggest once again
a hapless caution that leads to deadly
hamstringing
its as if a strike were an atomic bomb

" In your scenario, I see lots of risk of alienating the public but no real reward in terms of taking the system down"

that last bit gets itself deeply embriared
"risk of alienating the public"
what public
the rest of the wage class
the vast kulack middle ??

the corporate controled press ??

you over estimate the corporate grip
on the minds of the rainbow
of lower orders
its the orwell fallacy
its as if
totalitarians can't even be made to blink

and then this
"taking the system down" ??
that is who's mission here sean ???
taking it on
is hardly the same thing
as assuming you can take it down
would that it were so
but it ain't

in fact stop traffic if it has a coloration that might need perking up
its precisely the possible miss application of such tactics
to make gestural motions for their own symbolic and expressive effect

anti state terror's
non violent low contact
bloodless cousin

these symbolic actions have
kropotkinism at one end
ghandi ism at the other

on two dimensions

solitary vs mass
violent vs non violent
they share intrusiveness
and that i guess is enough to put you off
if the intrusion might be offensive
to ...fox watchers

much goes on here much to "analyze"
as oxy would have us realize
okay so let it commence

i'm game

but lets assume none of know anything the others don't till that reveals itself thru dialogue
i hardly feel i've under estimated any one here a priori
even if my style might falsely suggest that

what you do seem to me to reflect is fairly conventional fear of the public as reacting idiots
perhaps your fear of fox news sez it all

"sez it all"? Wow, everything you need to know in one comment. Amazing. I must be one of "those people" who obsesses over Fox news and the Teabgaggers, as opposed to one of "those people" who obsesses over pwogs and kulaks.

I don't assume that the public are reacting idiots, just that many people have been misinformed and misled. I don't underestimate the power of the media to influence public opinions and behavior, including mine. There is no way you can spend a lifetime with your brain parked in front of that tube and not have it influence your thinking if not your behavior.

The media determines who does and does not get elected to political office in this country. They can pull a Whitey-hating, Black Muslim terrorist from Kenya named Saddam Hussein Osama out of nowhere and make him president. This terrorist can follow the exact same policies as George Bush, and the media can get most of the people who loved GW's policies to hate Obama, and a lot of the people who hated GW to love Obama.

It is foolish to underestimate the power of mass media. This isn't an Orwellian fantasy. This is reality. I don't believe the power of the media is absolute. I believe people can be persuaded to see things a different way if they are presented with information in a credible way, preferably by people who don't despise them as Kulaks or pwogs.

i don't or at least not that bing dong school stuff
much like your review of home owndership prospects

btw if you feel i similarly
underestimate your grasp of these matters
show where and i'll gladly "adjust"

Sure. What you wrote here is meaningless gobbledegook which does absolutely nothing to explain why my view of the situation is wrong, just like your review of home ownership prospects. "bing dong school stuff"? WTF does that mean? A considerable "adjustment" is needed if you think this constitutes a meaningful explanation to anyone but yourself.

"and is always a tactic of last resort for that very reason."
utter dogmatic hooey
and particularly tea cup pinky ish

Whatever that means. At the risk of being accused of explaining the obvious to you again, unions usually like to try collective bargaining and taking their case to the public, followed by threats and promises of strikes, long before they undertake an actual strike.

Can you explain why this is "utter dogmatic hooey?"

" It is only undertaken when the reward is attainable and makes the risk worth taking. "

now that is too obvious to merit comment
and yet so vague as to suggest once again
a hapless caution that leads to deadly
hamstringing
its as if a strike were an atomic bomb

If it is too obvious to merit comment, then why in fact are you disputing the point here, let alone recklessly reading some sort of hysterical overcaution into the statement that has no basis whatsover in anything that I wrote.

in fact stop traffic if it has a coloration that might need perking up
its precisely the possible miss application of such tactics
to make gestural motions for their own symbolic and expressive effect

I believe that is the point I have been trying to make.

solitary vs mass
violent vs non violent
they share intrusiveness
and that i guess is enough to put you off
if the intrusion might be offensive
to ...fox watchers

I don't see why you have to go for the most extreme and far-fetched interpretation of my opinion, when the point I was making and the language I made it in should be plain enough. Do you seriously imagine that ANYBODY ON PLANET EARTH believes that no action is possible if it offends Fox News viewers? Even Rupert Murdoch doesn't believe that.

You act as if the mere consideration of the inpact of any given action amounts to some sort of political cock block in my mind. Again, I hate to point out the obvious here, but I am failing to see the basis of your dispute other than some imagined overcaution you impart to me where the O'Reilly show gets to determine the paramaters of the doable for mass action.

I think it should be clear that my point was that you should not go handing easy propaganda victories to the enemy for an uncertain and dubious gain. Basic common sense. Why this necessitated some convoluted harangue about bing dongs and pink tea cups is beyond me.

but lets assume none of know anything the others don't till that reveals itself thru dialogue
i hardly feel i've under estimated any one here a priori
even if my style might falsely suggest that

Fair enough. I'm here to learn and always assume someone has something to teach me.

sean
i think we're making real progress:

samples of convergence

" believe that is the point I have been trying to make"

"At the risk of being accused of explaining the obvious to you again"

"fair enough. I'm here to learn and always assume someone has something to teach me."