Saul Alinsky used to say, "you can always count on your enemies." That may turn out to be true in the case of the Wisconsin governor's attack on the right of state workers to choose a union.
Scott Walker's plan was a blitzkrieg attack that would catch the opposition with its defenses down, like Germany's attack on Russia at the beginning of World War II. His goal was to emasculate the ability of public service employees to negotiate with the state over their salaries and working conditions, and begin the destruction of the unions that represent public sector workers all over America.
Wisconsin was to be the first state to fall. Then other states with radical right governors -- like Ohio and Indiana -- would follow suit.
Well, the first casualty of war is the plan. Turns out that -- at least for now -- Walker's expectation of a lightning-fast victory has been thwarted by a determined Democratic Senate caucus that left the state and denied the Senate a quorum. But just as importantly, the right's entire nationwide plan has been put in jeopardy by the fact that when the alarm sounded, everyday citizens throughout Wisconsin and around the nation, answered the call.
All week, tens of thousands of people from every walk of life have swarmed the Wisconsin State Capitol in Madison. Retirees have set up camp, and kids and teachers have left high schools to join in the protests.
Walker's move has succeeded in launching a movement to defend the rights of Americans to choose a union. Not exactly what the radical right had in mind.
Of course a large turnout at an event does not necessarily translate into a movement. Movements have three defining characteristics that make them explosive:
1). When an organized protest -- or political campaign -- morphs into a movement, the organizers no longer find it necessary to mobilize individuals or groups one at a time. Like nuclear fission, movements involve chain reactions. One person mobilizes his or her neighbor -- who then mobilizes his or her neighbor -- and so on. What happened in Egypt was a genuine movement. Mobilization swept the country like wildfire through a spontaneous process of chain reaction.
2). That kind of spontaneous chain reaction is only possible because the issues involved in the conflict around which the movement is organized takes on a moral character. The conflict is no longer solely about specific, concrete matters -- like wages or health care coverage. The battle becomes a conflict over values -- over right and wrong. Instead of being entirely transactional, they become transformational.
3). It's hard to "launch" a movement intentionally, the way you launch an issue or electoral campaign. A "precipitating event" is always required to touch them off. The conditions for a movement can be ripe for years -- yet no movement occurs. Then suddenly an event causes an eruption. It's as if there is gasoline spread all across the ground and there is no fire -- until one day someone tosses out a match.
In Tunisia that precipitating event was the self-immolation of a fruit peddler. In Egypt it was the uprising in Tunisia. In Wisconsin it has been Governor Walker's sudden attempt to destroy collective bargaining in a week's time. Walker's move challenged a basic American value -- the right to collective bargaining. It seemed outrageous to everyday people because it sought to overturn half a century of labor relations in Wisconsin in a week, without public debate, and without the opportunity for the public to express their views.
For many years, Wall Street and its allies on the right have tried to portray labor as just another "special interest." The movement that has followed Walker's outrageous action has redefined the right to collective bargaining for what is -- as a moral question, a question of human rights. It has transformed the frame through which ordinary people view the labor movement. Instead of "big labor" focused only on wages and working conditions, it has once again become a "movement" for social and economic justice -- a movement that inspires our belief that we can take the future into our own hands -- that a truly democratic society is in fact a possibility.
The labor movement in Wisconsin -- and the Democratic Senators who have stood their ground -- have become heroic figures.
For three decades Wall Street -- and the top 2% of Americans -- have sopped up every dime of economic growth that has resulted from the increased productivity of American workers. Often those in that top 2% don't even work for a living -- or if they do, they don't produce a good or service. Instead they speculate for a living -- they gamble with other people's money -- they spend their time scheming about how they can get richer, not how they can produce a better product.
As a result the American middle class is in real danger -- and most Americans know it. That has turned the electorate into a combustible mixture. Walker's action may very well have provided the match to help set off a movement among ordinary citizens who see the right to collective bargaining as the way out. That, of course, would be absolutely correct. The only way that everyday people will share systematically in the fruits of their ever-more productive work is through collective bargaining that demands their fair share.
I suspect that's not exactly what Walker and his gang of right-wing ideologues had in mind either. But if the movement to support the right to choose a union continues to explode the way it has this week, that is exactly what they will get.
Robert Creamer is a long-time political organizer and strategist, and author of the book: Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win, available on Amazon.com.
Robert Greenwald: Bringing Home 150 Troops From Afghanistan Would Fix Wisconsin's Budget "Crisis"
Look folks, the system is broken and MUST be fixed or state and local governments will be bankrupted.
The "government" that "organizes the schools" is the local elected school boards, and in many places teachers unions have totally dominated these elections.
After their hand picked candidates win, they then “negotiate†pay and work rules with the VERY PEOPLE they just put in! Can you not see a fundamental problem with that?
The only people who have no say are the taxpayers.
It's like the wolves guarding the hen house, and the farmer loses.
Then we ALL starve!
I beg to differ. The Koch brothers control all the elections in Wisconsin.
creepy.
http://www.sott.net/image/image/s2/58749/large/Union_percent_1950_2010_442x33.png
and
http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/01/us-trade-deficit-graphs.html
lead too...
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3220
They are always so ANGRY at something or someone, and by the time they get hold of the reins, there is no room in their minds for the idea of negotiation, middle ground, or (especially) the idea they might be wrong -- they have been "em-bubbled" so long that they are WAY out of sync with the people they supposedly represent. Apparently, by the time they bust loose on one of their "jihads", they simply don't CARE if what they're doing represents anyone but themselves.
That was Germany, and it was never going to happen again.............
They are the group that can boost their pension plans higher than anyone else. It's common knowledge, and affects EVERY STATE, these groups retire early and start a second career thus drawing 2 handsome pensions. This is really where COMPROMISE has to come in.
But now for the rest of the inglorious plan—while they're screaming 'shortfall!', pugs see a wonderful opportunity to r-pe the benefits of common people, so that workers will never EVER have the ability to negotiate for those benefits again. Stomp them down where they belong, make them subservient to their wealthy masters. It's a plan of, by, and for the rich.
It's about redistribution of wealth, pure and simple. We still have some, they still want it...and make no mistake, they want ALL of it. Forever.
This is a line drawn in the sand— perhaps the beginning of our Egyptian Moment.
I think that this attack on labor will work as badly for Governor Walker as the attack on air traffic controllers worked out for Reagan. In other words, so great that he may never be subject to a serious challenge for election again. What is more important, is that the unions will most likely come away from this fight with the same sympathy that the air traffic controllers got back in its day…meaning none.
The well-spoken Mr. Walker has not moved with blitzkrieg speed. He campaigned on public union entitlement reform, he told everyone what he was planning to do, got elected and, unlike many politicians that pander to special interests to get elected, he is now executing on what he promised his electorate he would do. Not just bold, but also courageous.
The problem with public union is that they think they are attacking the ‘radical right’ actually they are attacking the moderate taxpayer who voted in Mr Walker to od what he promised he would do. They are not sypathetic to having to pay more and live worse so others can be paid more and live better The result will be a loss for unions, their Democrat enablers, and the radical left.
Kai
More telling is the governors strategy of not attacking the police union. This is a tactic common to autocrats. First they go after the intellectuals - that's always the way of totalitarians.
I agree. I also do not know how it will turn out. The problem with Wisconsin public unions is that they are not experiencing the same pain as members in their community. The public is tired and they have elected someone to deal with this issue. It is what the taxpayer wants.
The issue is not one of not recognizing the union, it is the fact that they can no longer collectively bargain, something that has put the state/taxpayer at a disadvantage in how it determines what it can and is willing to pay. That simple. This is about the rights of citizens not to be taxed unfairly by an entity that does not allow them due process…didn’t we fight a revolutionary war over being taxed like this?
I agree with Christie on this, if they do not like what they are getting…get another job…just like everyone in their community must do.
Kai
You seem to have difficulty understanding my question and you have yet to defend your point. I will restate, again:
Your point:
‘Before public sector unions came into existence their pay was influenced by market forces that were very much influenced by private sector UNION wage rates is what I was trying to say.’
My question:
‘Upton Sinclair did not take the time to write about the injustice of the lowly government worker but I would be interested to see your research for how private unions liberated the lowly government worker. Please send.’
In other words please send me the research that civil service wages prior to 1962 were adequate BECAUSE of private sector unions.
To your point on the current remuneration, wages are just part of the equation and that one must take into account non-wage benefits to determine whether public sector workers are being underpaid.
These guys found a 12% to 22% premium based on similar skillsets: http://www.aei.org/article/103132
Another article in the WSJ puts it closer to 30%: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704657704576149941061124736.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
Regardless, I will not argue whether they are being paid to much or not enough, I would argue that just like everyone else, if they feel it is not enough, let them go somewhere else to work. Let the taxpayer/citizen decide what they can afford to pay not let the unions decide what the citizen can pay.
Kai
Unless those "others" happen to be billionaire CEOs who are taxed at a little more than half the rate of their secretaries, apparently.
I have no answer to that (for a change). I would disagree that the taxpayer/voter who voted for Mr. Walker did not know what he was about. He was very transparent.
Kai
“..the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power that ..becomes stronger than their democratic state itself.... fasc!sm — ownership of government by.. any controlling private power.†-- FDR
Just throwing it out there.
Rand h8ted government contractors generally - which just makes modern Randians ridiculous people that water their plants with Gatorade.
“Upper classes are a nation's past; the middle class is its future.†-- Ayn Rand
See Republicans - We must keep our Middle Class!
“Power and lust are NOT good motives.†--- Ayn Rand
The political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities." Â --- Ayn Rand
The man who speaks to you of sacrifice is speaking of s1aves and masters, and intends to be the master. -- Ayn Rand
However, one of Rand's observations might be pertinent, especially in the context of Sarah Palin's clarion call for others to make sacrifices: when people in power start prattling about "sacrifice", take a good hard look at who's collecting the sacrifices.