Our Communist Labor Unions

Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 5 months ago to Video
28 comments | Share | Flag

Been saying that unions are communistic for a long time and demand a part of something they did not create if in fact they want to own the means of production.

Listen to the video...this "Roofer" is a bit wacko.

"Yesterday, the AFL-CIO posted this bizarre tweet, which consists of a video starring someone named Dan Whelan, who is identified as “marxist, roofer.” The video is funny in all the wrong ways. Whelan tries to update Marx, who was wrong about everything 150 years ago and not worth the effort. Whelan says there is no such thing as a middle class, since everyone who does not own the “means of production” is a “worker.” What, exactly, are the means of production in a 21st century economy? This is my favorite howler: Whelan identifies three: factories (fair enough), plantations (we don’t have a lot of those anymore) and skyscrapers. Seriously. So you are a “worker” or a “capitalist,” depending on whether you own a part interest in the building that houses your office."

This is bizarre, We produce and or create value, we own Our means of production, whether we produce for our own business or produce for someone else's business. One has a skill in which to produce value and a mind in which to create value...I don't necessarily want to own the building, the machines nor the debt!; otherwise, I'd be the entrepreneur, I'd be the one taking the risk.

There is a lot to unpack here.
Public sector unions are Our Employees, are they not?...yet we don't own their means of production and as far as I am concerned, they don't produce anything except a tax bill at the end of the year.

The other question is...isn't a CEO, a president, an accountant, a congressman, (scratch that one), a worker?
Isn't everyone not homeless or on the dole part of the "Working Class"?
SOURCE URL: https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/05/our-communist-labor-unions.php


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by TheRealBill 4 months, 3 weeks ago
    "Been saying that unions are communistic for a long time and demand a part of something they did not create if in fact they want to own the means of production."

    I can't agree. They are Fascistic at their core, not Communistic. Fascism arose from the foundation of Syndicalism, which would be "unionism" if we translated it to America. What we call "labor unions" or "trade unions" were called "syndicates" in Italy. The growth of the Fascist party in Italy was literally right down the line of Syndicate-run territories.

    More specifically the commingling of syndicates/unions with government is the direct path to Fascism. Real Fascism, not what the punks in the street think it is. The unions controlling an area/industry/field are the linchpin for government control of those areas, industries, or fields without the burden of ownership. As blarman alluded to, "public sector" ones are the ones closest to the Fascist state already.

    The mechanisms by which Unions today operate are literally the same ones used by Syndicates in Fascist and pre-Fascist Italy. Private Unions should, of course, be permitted but with zero "protections" and "advantages" bestowed by any government agency. That means you can be replaced if you go on strike, you can't be forced to pay into the Syndicate if you don't want to be part of it, you can't be mandated to be part of one, no tax benefits for being in one, and so on.

    If we're going to have "anti-trust" laws, apply them to unions. Oh, we can't have monopolies? Guess what a labor union is when there can't be competition - to include not being in one? Yup, a monopoly on labor.

    A key distinction between Fascism, Socialism, and Communism is the putative ownership. basically:

    Fascism: "privately owned", government controlled
    Socialism: government owned, government controlled
    Communism "nobody owns", government controlled

    The quotes are there for a reason. I'd argue that fundamentally whomever actually controls the thing, effectively owns the thing. But that distinction is often lost on people, particularly Leftists.

    Real "anti-Fascist" protests would be protesting unions and laws/politicians promoting more special privileges to unions.

    Government schools: Socialism + a bit of Fascism. Socialism because the government owns and controlled the "public schools", a bit of Fascism because you're technically allowed to have private schools so long as you follow all these rules the government puts on you - right down to who you can/must admit, what to teach, and whom you can hire.

    Finally, yes, the "Green New Deal" is not Socialist; it is Fascist. Most of today's so-called "Socialists" are actually Fascists. Fascists who think they oppose Fascism.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  4 months, 3 weeks ago
      Progressives have confounded our language and definitions so much they can't keep it straight.

      I heard a video with an aflcio leader say they were communist...never broke that down...just shook my head in distaste.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by chad 4 months, 3 weeks ago
    People like this are amusing when listening to what they consider thinking logically and frightening when they seize the 'right' to use violence to enforce their ideas. They think that because they showed up for work (probably late) and screwed the headlights into the car they should have the right to drive it home, simply because they want it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  blarman 4 months, 3 weeks ago
    A couple of years ago my father warned his brother not to support the United Strike. (My uncle was a senior mechanic at the time.) The problem was that the unions kept agitating for more pay and benefits and it was driving the company into bankruptcy. Well, sure enough, the judge came down hard on the unions and dissolved their union contracts right there. Many of the senior mechanics were told to take a hike or accept lower pay.

    And that's the benign part of unions. I won't even go into all the money they funnel to Democrats which largely originates from taxpayers in the first place...

    I don't have a problem with people wanting to create private sector unions, but they shouldn't be protected by either State or Federal laws nor allowed to monopolize industries. Public sector unions of all kinds should be banned outright.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  puzzlelady 4 months, 3 weeks ago
    Unions are legal by right of association. They are unpleasant when their tribal domineering seeks to reduce others' rights and to exploit them. And when they become violent, they turn criminal. It's always about the loot. "Collective" bargaining--the name says it all.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 4 months, 3 weeks ago
    In a free and free market society anyone can own the means of production. It's called buying shares of stock or bonds. Additionally, in such a society you own yourself, which is your personal means of production. What you do with it is ultimately up to you. Of course, there are always certain risks involved, which now gets to the heart of the matter. That is, socialists/communists all want ownership with the fantasy of someone else picking up the tab and taking all the risks, meaning they really want to own what is produced not the actual "means of production".
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  allosaur 5 months ago
    That jerk on the screen reminds me dino of a college professor who stood out from others of others his ilk as educated beyond his intellectual capacity.
    Let's see now. Me dino ain't among no limo riding upper class rich and me dino ain't among no stolen grocery cart pushing lower class poor.
    So, um, where the heck would that put me dino?
    Um, um, um--tryin' really real hard to think here--um,um, let's see, I ain't upper and I ain't lower.
    So I must be--THAT'S IT!--stuck somewhere in the middle. Yay!
    Hot dang golly! Whew! Thet thar was so really dadgum hard ter go figure.
    But me dino done did it! A-huck! A-huck!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  25n56il4 5 months ago
    I was a lobbyist while we were getting the 'Common Situs Picketing Act' passed. And, I do believe in the right to work and will always oppose any attempts to prevent that from being ceased in Texas!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  25n56il4 5 months ago
    Hey, I learned this before I hit high school! When my daddy died, the Union sent two reps to his funeral. Everyone thought they were paying homage to daddy. I knew they only wanted to be sure he was in the casket! He knew their game!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  5 months ago
      Can't blame the average value producer though...it's a free market system inwhich one goes where the money and bennies are, I get that but I wonder if their pay would be equal or better given an original and honest owner of a corporation were present.

      There is no reason good enough to justify in my mind a need for the union in the public sector...why should they get treated better than the rest of us.
      It is a privilege to work for us but they are not privileged by doing so.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  mminnick 5 months ago
    Labor unions have a history of left leaning. The organizers originally were left leaning and pust the leftist agenda. Not necessarily communist but definitely left leaning.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  5 months ago
      It was a marxist idea and I heard some head idiot from the AFL-CIO state that they were essentially communist.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  mminnick 5 months ago
        We are now at the point where admitting you are communist is not something to be careful about. Same with Socialist. Both used to be a truly awful thing to say you were or to call another without proof. How times have changed.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by CircuitGuy 4 months, 4 weeks ago
          "How times have changed."
          I also think the nature of the socialism has changed. It seems like people used to debate about how much we the people should be forced through taxes to help the poor. The new socialist seem to be for government helping the poor middle class, and not asking anything of the upper middle class. They don't admit they want handouts, but they say they want to do something about "the systems" (they should mean markets) for goods and services that account for most expenditures: health care, education, child care, housing. They just want to tweak the systems, they say. Really it's a bunch of handouts for most of the population that supposedly someone somewhere else you never think about will pay for.

          I find this concerning because, regardless of what you think of gov't helping the poor, it's bad if most people see themselves as potential beneficiaries of help rather than strong agents who are capable of helping themselves and others.

          It's hard for me to tell if we've really become more inclined to feel the need for handouts or if I have the romanticized view of the past of an old man saying "when I was their age, people took responsibility and were respectful."
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  4 months, 4 weeks ago
            The younger generations are educationally and skill deprived; not to mention, programed and envious of those that have achieved competence in their field...everyone wants a free ride.

            They have no idea how humans have been undermined.

            Government can't do anything right except take the value of our labor.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by CircuitGuy 4 months, 4 weeks ago
              The kids seem strong on skills but horrible on basic life tasks, like playing, hanging out, and changing plans when a hiccup occurs. During the Occupy Wall Street protests, protesters were vague on what they were calling for but were clear they "had done just as they were told" and upset things hadn't worked out that well for them. I was confused because they were well past the age when people rebel and stop doing just what they're told. But it seems like kids don't rebel but instead remain in childhood. Instead of experimenting with drugs, sex and music that annoys their parents, they're carry on going to activities their parents orchestrate. I wonder if once technology came available to have TV easily available all the time on portable devices we began a worldwide experiment in what happens if as children you never experience boredom, disputes with other children, misunderstanding and being misunderstood, and finding secret places the adults don't know about. The result is like a dystopian story where kids never rebel and do just as they are told.

              I really think I may just be getting old. There are many young people who take the benefits for the modern world and are more go-getters than most Gen-Xers were at their age. But the ones who stay in childhood into their 20s, literally afraid to make basic decisions without a parent, stand out to aging people like me.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by TheRealBill 4 months, 3 weeks ago
              "Government can't do anything right except take the value of our labor."

              That they take the value of our labor "right" is even debatable. I'm not convinced they can do that well. :P
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  5 months ago
          They think is like a badge of honor or something.

          I always wondered in my younger days why we allowed people like that to live here but learned we have freedom of speech and freedom of religion. (yes, I think communism/marxism/progressiveism and environmentalism are a religion for these people)
          Same goes for islamism.

          Ok, I can accept that but Why the Hell do we let them into our government???
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  5 months ago
    I think all unions should be abolished especially because they manifest power and influence from others that actually do the work...just another Mofiosa scheme.
    They have also empowered the progressive communist movement throughout the world.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo