On the patterns of labor

[nadinbrzezinski]

well readying the historiography I came across a pretty amazing piece of evidence.

Think about this.

Until the 1990s very time we had rising boats the union movement tended to get stronger, et al. While very time we had a depression well they went down in popularity and lost some of the gains. This observation is in "Organized Labor in American History," published in 1920. That every time labor made gains there was an age of relative good times.

So I went, NAFTA broke that pattern. While the 1990s were an era of fast economic expansion labor lost a lot of ground. And the last stage in destroying it was laid in place.

So I was thinking... this is by far not a good time, not a good era. Perhaps we are at the turning point, when people will realize that in numbers there is a certain level of protection.

Of course as I write this the NEA is under massive attack, and outside of the Federal Government this is the largest union. It is no accident.

Now as they say, back to readying and getting that historiography down. I decided to move away from primary sources (for the moment) and go back to some of the secondary before going back to primary.

Oh and for those of you interested in the writing of history, Carlton comes from both the Scientific History and the Absolute Progress of humanity school... as well as well, I have to say it. American Exceptionalism school of history. Oh and if you are interested, the book is in Google Books.

[upi402]

1. The Clinton/Gore NAFTA came at the same time as the 'dot com' ponzi bubble

The fact that the media labels Obama a socialist tells me we are toast. People are so easy to fool and look for a group to blame.

In our educational system we don't teach labor history or workplace rights, though 95% of us trade our labor for money after we graduate. In uni, the Republican teacher's aid was touting school board involvement as an entree into politics. It really IS class warfare, don't let the DLC traitors get away with saying otherwise.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Why do you think I am doing all that damn readying?

TO write a BASIC history of labor... but first I need to become more than just familiar with it.

This means I will have to read John Steele Gordon (ugh) who is quite a right wing economic historian.

For some reason I have kind of put him (and commager) off.

(And I found some of the basic historiography on Google Books, saving me a few trips to your local university library)

I was wondering whether to do it or not, but Omaha Steve made the point, we need to do it, or others will do it for us (see both Commager and Steele Gordon)

Soon I will have to decide what era to focus on. Doing a full history is kind of crazee, so I was thinking of starting with 1880, and some into the the New Deal Legislation and of course modern situation, and the NEA. Of course that also means Reagan as the starting point for the current assault on labor.

[upi402]

3. Reagan & co. was the point of the spear, and we got the shaft eh?

At the end of the 70's when the business round table got caught flat-footed, they got busy. The media changed after that. There was a great book, 'On Bended Knee' which told how the press ended up as a pampered lapdog to Raygun. The beginning of the end, it turns out.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. This attack on labor goes father back than that

Look at Right to Work States for the true beginning of that.

Reagan's break up of PATCO was just obvious.

[Selatius]

5. Case in point. Ask a college entry level history class who knows about Eugene V. Debs.

My money says less than a quarter of the class would raise their hands. Hell, maybe one out of ten. I know that I didn't. I only found out about such a labor leader as Eugene V. Debs by searching ON MY OWN on the internet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_V._Debs