Sunday, February 2, 2014
Are Trades Unions hostile to the Nation?
The Social Democrats understood the enormous importance of the Trades Union movement. They appropriated it as an instrument and used it with success, while the bourgeois parties failed to understand it an d thus lost their political prestige. They thought that their own arrogant VETO would arrest the logical development of the movement and force it into an illogical position. But it is absurd and also untrue to say that the Trades Union movement is in itself hostile to the nation. (Adolph Hitler)
..... Until.....now. Actually that's not true either, but his take on trade unions at that time, the 30s, was quite accurate. The point though of quoting him, is not so much to shine the critical light on to the Unions, even though they are guilty of being absolutely hostile to the nations they are in, but that's another story. This time, it is the employers who are far too comfortable and cozy with just 'getting things done' that they operate not from a moral or principled level but are purely pragmatic.
When it comes to understanding the social conditions of 1920s and 30s central Europe, there is seldom a better text to use than...believe it or not, Mein Kampf. The reasons should be clear, Hitler understood the national mood, and the various elements and dynamics at work in it, and was able, almost miraculously, to rise up above it and grasp the nettle and 'juice' it into nationalistic fervor that took him and his party to the dizzy soaring heights of absolute power.
Are they any valuable lessons in this? Absolutely! The primary lesson I draw from his quote above is his reference to 'bourgeois' parties. They totally missed the fact that the 'Social Democrats' (communists) had harnessed the shop floors and factory workers, and had begun wielding them like a huge sledge hammer against the German monarchy and the apparatus of state itself. They were cunningly and inflexibly intent, on bringing down the nation to replace it with a Soviet Socialist Republic. (see Bavarian Republic).
So, the failure of business interests to see past their own bottom line, in a period where workers did suffer greatly, toiling long hours for little return. That suffering provided fertile seed beds for the utopian message of the Communist agistors like the Spartacus league. Hitler realize that without the masses he was nothing and the movement would be stillborn, nothing more than a putrifying rotting carcass on the social ground of Germany. He made it his mission to capture their minds and hearts. He turned their passions into Nationalism and racially inspired visions. His strategy was much more comprehensible than the vague Communist and distant vision of an "International" utopia that had not materialized in Russia, so why would it materialize in Germany?
In the West, it seems (with the notable exception of Germany!) the Unions have long ago left behind any ideas of justice and have abandoned such goals. Now.. the continue to use the same rhetoric about 'workers rights' but the do so from a platform of 'only ever dreamt of' pay and conditions. For example, in Australia, a builders laborer on a major Union site will receive around $120,000 per annum when all allowances and perks are factored in. A teacher here (Australia) get's around $55k starting and up to around $85k after much experience. A paramedic get's around $60k.
So it should be obvious that Trades Unions in Australia have outlived their need and reason to exist.. now they have become like drunken tyrants and despots, swimming like Scrooge McDuck in his money vault. I don't know what the solution is to this dire situation of inequality, it is certainly NOT to suddenly add to the public tax burden millions more dollars for Teachers and Paramedics so they receive the same as a builders laborer. There might be a hint of a solution in Hitlers observations, albeit with absolute avoidance of any racial or territorial ambitions.
i) Employers must be fair. Unfortunately, while the likes of John Setka or Dean Mighell reside on the high seats in the temple of Union dominion, it will not matter how generous or fair the employers are, these men will demand more...ever more. This is why a different solution must be found to deal with them. Persuasion won't work, these men are hard core and must be treated as such. They could be given one chance to reform, but only one.
ii) Unions must be restained and constrained by the state from unrealistic and unfair pay claims. (even to the point of incarcerating their leaders)
iii) If construction unions begin to engage in civil unrest and violent street outrages, they must be dealt with in the harshest way... even to the point of using detention camps for their leaders (who are spruiking the mantras of equality and rights, while they lead the pack way out in front of everyone else.. they are the most unequally rewarded segment of the community -unequal in the sense of having so much more.)
The biggest battle in all this would be with the international labor unions. This is no longer the threat that it once was....Unions are fading and fading fast. Some liason should be done between Nations on this, but left wing governments will ulikely be partners in this big clean up. So, any nation wishing to cleanse it's house and put it in order will need to look closely at it's economic ties to ensure it cannot be bankrupted by dodgy Union blockades in far off places. Perhaps a pre-emptive strike would be justified in this war?
Posted by John Sobieski at 6:37 PM