Originally Posted by Texas Curl

spoken by a guy who's never tried to cross a picket line.

I need to cross a picket line to understand plain English? I need to cross a picket line to see that the picketers are carrying signs, not guns? I need to cross a picket line to see that unions don't advocate revolution?

Matt: OK, point taken.

Yeah, I'm sure that string of firebombings in Flint has nothing to do with the recently unemployed firefighters.

Fact is, you don't get to be a side in the political debate unless you're bringing some muscle. The capacity for organized violence is the real cornerstone of political power.

Any attempt to summarize human nature in a paragraph or two is going to fall short. Still, this is an internet forum not a book. I can't spend several chapters establishing my premises. Instead I'l reference Dave Grossman's On Killing. Grossman is a former army guy, currently an academic, who specializes in cultural inhibitions against use of force and how societies deliberately overcome such inhibitions for their armed forces and police. Mankind in general creates societies that avoid use of force, but there are times when force is necessary. Laws and traditions that specify when force is allowable and sanctioned are part of any well rounded culture.

For the United States, Jefferson's words pretty much cover it...

We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

In more abstract terms, I'll fall back to a summary of human culture I used during last year's discussions of anarchy. Humans are social animals. They tend to form groups. These groups will elect leaders, establish territories, and make rules to be followed by those living within these territories. They will establish values, things which are considered very important to the continued existence of the community. They will have world views, a shared understanding of how the world works.

The right and left have distinctly different values and world views. They do not see the same things as important to the continued well being of the country. They do not share a common view on how the world works. Given these clashes, each group to some degree sees the other as a threat to the continued existence of the culture. To the degree this remains true, that either group sees the other as a threat to their way of life, violence for the purpose of continuing the existence of a culture is a possibility.

A spiral of rhetoric should be expected to precede a spiral of violence. The agitator would emphasize an element of values and/or world view. The pattern would be X is necessary for the continued existence of the country and its way of life. The opposition is out to destroy X. Violence against the opposition is thus justified in order to protect X.

There would be a real difference between liberal rhetoric and conservative rhetoric. The liberal or radical has to justify creating something which hasn't existed before. The 1960s and 1970s blue awakening dealt with racial equality, gender equality, protection of the environment and ending the Vietnam War. To some degree, they could reference Jefferson's "all men are created equal" on the equality issues. Love of nature and a desire to avoid war are not unique to he 1960s and 1970s, but ecological values made major strides in that time frame, while for decades after Vietnam the United States avoided major conflicts.

Conservatives only have to maintain tradition, continue things as they have been. The King has rights granted by God. What man would void God's power? All major civilizations are built on the cornerstone of slavery, and so it will always be. Farmers have always been able to dump unlimited untreated wastes in the rivers. Fossil fuels have always been burned without limit. If something has always been so, it should always be so? How is it that the world has changed so much that what has always been should no longer be?

There is often enough difference between these two ways of looking at the world that people can see their way of life threatened. If one's way of life is threatened, there will rise pundits, politicians, preachers, and other talking heads that will aggressively defend values, sometimes asserting that one set of values or another might be more important the the Right to Life, to the prohibition against violence within a community.

Anyway, especially in an awakening or crisis, one should keep careful watch on the rhetoric and the violence. By the nature of human beings, violence is possible if a culture's values and way of life are sufficiently threatened. At the moment, with progressives having the advantage in Washington, I am not surprised that the rhetoric and violence on the conservative side is the greater. This could change.
.

Originally Posted by independent

Yeah, I'm sure that string of firebombings in Flint has nothing to do with the recently unemployed firefighters.

Fact is, you don't get to be a side in the political debate unless you're bringing some muscle. The capacity for organized violence is the real cornerstone of political power.

The point of representative democracy is to provide a check on the power of the ruling elites short of violence. For the most part, the ruling elites will acknowledge the power of the ballot box just enough that the use of violence does not become a real threat to the ruling elites. The possibility of violence might be a political tool, but by far most issues are resolved without holding a revolution.
.

Originally Posted by Texas Curl

the unions are the left's traditional source of muscle. they have a long and proud history of violence and the icing on the cake is that they're "connected". we glimpsed their propensity to violence in st louis last august. give them card check, and we've given official sanction to a voracious group of intimidators and provacateurs.

Just out of curiosity, what is the current % of the USA labor force that is unionized? I know it's less than 10%. What is it now, 7%?

How does one put together an overwhelming political machine with today's unions?

And when has any significant number of folks had to penetrate a picket line? The current rash of ridiculous "picket lines" in Albuquerque hired by the Carpenter's union consists of people who do not know why they are even there. They have been hired to hold up signs. No one entering or leaving the businesses being "picketed" is challenged in the least. What an anemic, weak vestige of what used to be a voice of the people.

Originally Posted by TnT

Just out of curiosity, what is the current % of the USA labor force that is unionized? I know it's less than 10%. What is it now, 7%?

The Bureau of Labor Statistics puts it at 15% of all full-time workers and 7.8% of part-time workers in 2009.

Spiral of violence not happening:

"The country's chief tax collector pushed back Monday against assertions that working for the Internal Revenue Service has become more dangerous as a result of growing anti-government sentiment and the recent passage of President Obama's health care plan. "No, the risk has not increased," IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman said. "There has been a lot of stuff in the press about increased threats, which is actually inaccurate."

More here: http://bit.ly/a7krEK

Most of what people term the spiral of violence is for political consumption.

James50

Originally Posted by Xer H

The Bureau of Labor Statistics puts it at 15% of all full-time workers and 7.8% of part-time workers in 2009.

Well, according to the quote I pulled from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (see below) it appears to be 12.3%. Certainly more than my estimate of less than 10%. I guess that instead of wondering out loud on this forum, I should have simply got off my ass and looked it up myself.

Thanks Xer.



For release 10:00 a.m. (EST) Friday, January 22, 2010 USDL-10-0069

Union Members - 2009


In 2009, the union membership rate--the percent of wage and salary
workers who were members of a union--was 12.3 percent, essentially
unchanged from 12.4 percent a year earlier, the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics reported today.

Originally Posted by TnT

Well, according to the quote I pulled from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (see below) it appears to be 12.3%.

Yes, that's when the full-time and part-time are factored in to the total labor pool. I found the breakout more interesting, so I posted that. I guess that's because I know so many part-time unionized workers (e.g., p/t electricians who also are civil servants).

Originally Posted by independent

Yeah, I'm sure that string of firebombings in Flint has nothing to do with the recently unemployed firefighters.

Fact is, you don't get to be a side in the political debate unless you're bringing some muscle. The capacity for organized violence is the real cornerstone of political power.

Perhaps even more so than you realize.

I once read of a study that suggested many firefighters are closet pyromaniacs... who've channeled their fascination by and obsession with fire into doing something positive for humanity. My first reaction was "yeah, RIGHT!"... but after mulling the idea over, I decided it just might have some merit.

I remember back in the 1990s in Seattle there was this string of arsons all around town... and the perp turned out to be a nerdy wannabe-fireman who didn't have the physical aptitude for such work. But he was constantly hanging around the firehouses, making friends with the firemen, and going on ride-alongs every chance he got. I believe it was his own father who turned him in.

With that in mind, just imagine adding unemployed firefighters, denied their regular fix, into the mix along with the garden-variety arsonists.

Originally Posted by Roadbldr '59

Perhaps even more so than you realize.

I once read of a study that suggested many firefighters are closet pyromaniacs... who've channeled their fascination by and obsession with fire into doing something positive for humanity. My first reaction was "yeah, RIGHT!"... but after mulling the idea over, I decided it just might have some merit.

I remember back in the 1990s in Seattle there was this string of arsons all around town... and the perp turned out to be a nerdy wannabe-fireman who didn't have the physical aptitude for such work. But he was constantly hanging around the firehouses, making friends with the firemen, and going on ride-alongs every chance he got.

Now just imagine adding unemployed firefighters, denied their regular fix, into the mix along with the garden-variety arsonists.

Most Boy Scouts are pyromaniacs as well--in fact they teach us to be pyromaniacs & encourage to be so inclined. When I think of the bonfires we used to make... I'm surprised we didn't burn entire forests down.

~Chas'88

Texas Curl is speaking for something very important in American history.

Although my family was solidly middle-class at least, both my father and an uncle were connected to the labor movement through their work. I learned a lot. There were (and still are, barely), two types of private-sector unions in the US, craft and industrial. The craft unions are the older ones that dominate construction trades. And a good many of them have had organized crime ties at one time or another and some probably still do. That was how Robert Kennedy got interested in the problem of organized crime.

The industrial unions dated from the 1930s (except the railway ones, which were older.) They were formed by the CIO, made possible by the Wagner Act and sitdown strikes, and they changed the stature of the American work force. Unions were one of the dividing lines between what we now call Blue and Red States. The south and lower midwest knew they had one thing going for themselves in national economic competition, cheap labor. The South had already used it to steal the textile industry from New England. Southern politicians (with a few exceptions like Hugo Black) turned union organizers into villains next only to civil rights workers. The Taft-Hartley Act of 1946 cut back significantly on union protections and allowed states to pass "right-to-work" laws outlawing union shops (you had to join the union, under the contract, to work.)

In 1959--ironically after a huge Democratic victory--a Southern Democrat/Republican coalition passed another anti-union act, Landrum-Griffin. According to a well-informed contemporary source, the whole point of it was to make it impossible to organize the South. It succeeded. Within ten years more industry was moving to the South. In the 1980s the Republicans began destroying the union movement by destroying American industry. The deals with Japanese car makers, who located in non-union areas, pushed the process along.

The strongest unions now, as many have noted here, are public sector. They too are facing some threats.

The American industrial labor movement deserves some blame for its own demise. In Germany union leaders always understood that the future of the membership depended on exports. They didn't ask for more than Germany as a whole could afford. US labor leaders rarely, if ever, took those factors into account, and that helped destroy their industries--although the bigger problem was the decision by American business to move manufacturing overseas where it was cheaper and emphasize low-skill service jobs at home.

Originally Posted by James50

Spiral of violence not happening:

"The country's chief tax collector pushed back Monday against assertions that working for the Internal Revenue Service has become more dangerous as a result of growing anti-government sentiment and the recent passage of President Obama's health care plan. "No, the risk has not increased," IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman said. "There has been a lot of stuff in the press about increased threats, which is actually inaccurate."

More here: http://bit.ly/a7krEK

Most of what people term the spiral of violence is for political consumption.

James50

I don't think the IRS has become a significant target of violence, nor do I think the Spiral of Violence is significantly escalating at this point. Some, mostly on the right, are talking violence a bit. There are lone nuts, again, mostly on the right, committing the occasional act of violence. The government, understandably strongly committed to suppressing terrorism, might be erring a bit in fighting domestic terrorism in such a way as to inflame distrust and hatred.

But the spiral really only gets out of control when both sides are responding to acts of violence with greater acts of violence, and where there is considerable propaganda efforts to justify and glorify the violence. That is not happening... yet. Still, I believe it a worthy exercise for those who believe in cycle theory to keep an eye on things.

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

I don't think the IRS has become a significant target of violence, nor do I think the Spiral of Violence is significantly escalating at this point. Some, mostly on the right, are talking violence a bit. There are lone nuts, again, mostly on the right, committing the occasional act of violence. The government, understandably strongly committed to suppressing terrorism, might be erring a bit in fighting domestic terrorism in such a way as to inflame distrust and hatred.

But the spiral really only gets out of control when both sides are responding to acts of violence with greater acts of violence, and where there is considerable propaganda efforts to justify and glorify the violence. That is not happening... yet. Still, I believe it a worthy exercise for those who believe in cycle theory to keep an eye on things.

The reason I posted the IRS link is because of the guy (seemingly a left winger, but off his rocker at any rate) who flew a plane into the IRS office last month. If the IRS leader says there is no problem after that, then I am inclined to believe him.

James50

I am wondering about the upcoming April 15th protests. Given all of the tension (wars, financial, health(s)care) and what I am hearing from the alt media, this thread might be getting more traffic in the next couple of weeks. -The 4/19, 4/20 anniversaries are less than a week from 4/15 tax protests as well.

Originally Posted by SaintStephen74

I am wondering about the upcoming April 15th protests. Given all of the tension (wars, financial, health(s)care) and what I am hearing from the alt media, this thread might be getting more traffic in the next couple of weeks. -The 4/19, 4/20 anniversaries are less than a week from 4/15 tax protests as well.

From what I've been hearing from those who actually have filed their taxes, many middle-class people are getting bigger refunds than they expected.

Originally Posted by annla899

From what I've been hearing from those who actually have filed their taxes, many middle-class people are getting bigger refunds than they expected.

Yes. This is true.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

Texas Curl is speaking for something very important in American history... The strongest unions now, as many have noted here, are public sector...

The American industrial labor movement deserves some blame for its own demise. In Germany union leaders always understood that the future of the membership depended on exports. They didn't ask for more than Germany as a whole could afford. US labor leaders rarely, if ever, took those factors into account, and that helped destroy their industries...

Will the "strongest unions now," likewise, end up destroying the "public sector"? The recent revelations about the impending demise (to the tune of a resounding $550 billion) of three huge California "public sector" pension funds suggest a very real affirmative answer to this question.

But... The real answer is a Big Nadda, of course. The Big Fed will just bail 'em out, print money money and leave the Big Tab for the American tax-payer to pick up.

Ah, just like the Big Liberals, er Progressives love it, eh?

Originally Posted by Publius

Will the "strongest unions now," likewise, end up destroying the "public sector"? The recent revelations about the impending demise (to the tune of a resounding $550 billion) of three huge California "public sector" pension funds suggest a very real affirmative answer to this question.

Half the story. I agree that "public employee employee" unions are but 1 route to the coming Ragnarök_62 ?

But... The real answer is a Big Nadda, of course. The Big Fed will just bail 'em out, print money money and leave the Big Tab for the American tax-payer to pick up.

Ah, just like the Big Liberals, er Progressives love it, eh?

Sorry, but in a microcosm, why the fuck does this fuck shit deserve what he garners?

Unions , whether public or private don't hold a candle to this sort of pillage? Publius, sorry, here's the dude that layed me of. I'll be blunt and honest here. I want this motherfucker dead, or a bitch for some bubba in Texas, or exchanged for biomass for roaches and rats. FEEL my anger, feel my rage, I shall do anything to DESTROY him and Marathon Oil within legal bounds. I HATE HIM, I HATE HIS ILK, I HATE any apologist for BIG OIL. I'll also agree that BIG BANKING deserves the same fate. I want Angelo Mozillo to be some bubbas's bitch. To hell with the upper class and their rape of the mdddle class. May my realm destroy them all.

Originally Posted by annla899

From what I've been hearing from those who actually have filed their taxes, many middle-class people are getting bigger refunds than they expected.

1. See my prior post.
2. The refund amount is due to crashing wages, during the on going "great recession".
3. "I fully indend to break to myth of perpetrated by "big media" that "McWages are a "good thing". I actually heard some dumbfuck economist say on my paranets' Fox network that low wage service jobs were actually good for the USA".
4. I'd like to see that economist live off of $7.2/hr. Oh how I hat FOX....

In Albuquerque our new Republican mayor promised he would not end the budget crisis with layoffs, but with salary cuts across the board including his.

Then in his search for things not working, he came across a meth rehab program that was costing a lot and had graduated only 12 people in 14 months. It has 8 employees. He found city jobs for 4 of them, put one on disciplinary action, and laid off 3.

AFSCME started screaming "You promised no layoffs! Unfair! We're going to sue!"

I'm sorry. Their heads are in an earlier, more prosperous day and they are giving unions a bad name. "Not solving the budget crisis with layoffs" doesn't mean he can't fire people.

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

Sorry, but in a microcosm, why the fuck does [Marathon Oil CEO Clarence Cazalot] this fuck shit deserve what he garners?

Unions, whether public or private don't hold a candle to this sort of pillage? Publius, sorry, here's the dude that layed me[off]. I'll be blunt and honest here. I want this motherfucker dead, or a bitch for some bubba in Texas, or exchanged for biomass for roaches and rats. FEEL my anger, feel my rage, I shall do anything to DESTROY him and Marathon Oil within legal bounds. I HATE HIM, I HATE HIS ILK, I HATE any apologist for BIG OIL. I'll also agree that BIG BANKING deserves the same fate. I want Angelo Mozillo to be some bubbas's bitch. To hell with the upper class and their rape of the mdddle class. May my realm destroy them all.

Duly noted.

And, I doubt anyone here at this non-partisan history website will take exception to your expression of abject violent hatred toward, uh, your fellow man.

Peace & Luv, bro. Oh, and thanks for the "honesty," man.

Cussing out the boss, or the ex-boss, especially one who has screwed you over, is a perfectly understandable response. Though on my path we're taught that cursing someone can backfire so badly it's better to work (pray) for justice - and be prepared to be dealt with justly even if it's not what you hoped for.

So. May Ragnarok's ex-bosses get everything they deserve.

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

I don't think the IRS has become a significant target of violence, nor do I think the Spiral of Violence is significantly escalating at this point. Some, mostly on the right, are talking violence a bit. There are lone nuts, again, mostly on the right, committing the occasional act of violence. The government, understandably strongly committed to suppressing terrorism, might be erring a bit in fighting domestic terrorism in such a way as to inflame distrust and hatred.

But the spiral really only gets out of control when both sides are responding to acts of violence with greater acts of violence, and where there is considerable propaganda efforts to justify and glorify the violence. That is not happening... yet. Still, I believe it a worthy exercise for those who believe in cycle theory to keep an eye on things.

And yet the IRS is purchasing shotguns:

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportun...1&cck=1&au=&ck=

While you may not believe the IRS is a target, it appears that someone in the IRS does.

Originally Posted by annla899

From what I've been hearing from those who actually have filed their taxes, many middle-class people are getting bigger refunds than they expected.

I certainly did. Both state and federal.