|
Author
|
Topic: Bigotry in a British trade union?
|
|
|
|
|
Steppenwolf Allende
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13076
|
posted 15 June 2007 10:47 PM
quote:
As a longtime activist in the labour movement I know all too well that bigotry and racism is alive and well, though trade union activists are FAR less racist than average.
Very true. And it's an historic fact that all across the globe today and throughout history, labour unions and guilds have not often been at the center of struggles and efforts against racial bigotry and for equal rights, mutual respect and cooperation and democracy. However, having said that, it's both inaccurate and stupid to think that these facts in themselves make labour unions immune to racism. They do not. For example, even though unions are democratic cooperative associations, here in Canada there's still a dearth of ethnic mix at the elected leadership levels of most labour organizations--even ones that have a relatively high degree of ethnic diversity among their memberships. It's also true that the racial or ethnic alienation and mistrust in society generally is also found in unions. It's true that it's much less so (since unions bring people of all ethnicities together in common economic and class interests and concerns), but it is still there. And this is a problem, since racial alienation and mistrust directly weaken the effectiveness of labour union activity. If the member mistrust each other on the basis of race, that can reduce their ability to stand united against the boss.
From: goes far, flies near, to the stars away from here | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steppenwolf Allende
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13076
|
posted 22 June 2007 12:30 PM
I read the piece, and was amused by one paragraph: quote:
Jeremy Newmark, chief executive of the Jewish Leadership Council, said the vote was "not in Britain's or the Palestinians' interest. We might see a tit-for-tat boycott of British goods. At a time when Israel and the Palestinians are engaging with each other at last, this UNISON vote flies in the face of common sense. We should all condemn this impractical and foolish decision."
"At a time when Israel and the Palestinians are engaging with each other at last???" What is this guy talking about? Here's the article on UNISON's vote to endorse the boycott campaign.
From: goes far, flies near, to the stars away from here | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312
|
posted 22 June 2007 03:29 PM
Appreciating that you look up to Dearthowits, I understand that facts aren't at all important to you, Ohara. But what I said was: "Finkelstein was in the way of a powerful interest group (led by a man ruthless in his lies and who would make Goering proud) determined to crush academic debate in the interests of crushing a people and human rights. "But it is telling that you knew who I meant. Goering, of course, was commander of the Luftwaffe, the Nazi air force, while Goebbels was the propaganda minister. And that's what Dearthowits does. He promotes Israel, and seeks to undermine and attack the critics of Israel, with the understanding that Israel is an occupying power that exercises racist policies over a majority population. I think what you find so offensive is that the criticism fits so well. "You can always call your enemy a terrorist,"
-Alan Dearthowits. [ 22 June 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
a lonely worker
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9893
|
posted 22 June 2007 09:12 PM
A few things struck me from this article:1 - The author lets it be known that the person opposing the donation is "a member of the Socialist Workers Party". For an article purportedly about tolerance and tackling bigotry, the last thing I expected to see was a comment straight out of the McCarthy era. 2 - Although I receive Labour Start updates and frequently assist whenever possible, the last thing I expected was the head of this progressive organisation to say he supports Tony Blair's view of anything to do with the Middle East. There was nothing "measured" about Israel's destruction of Lebanon. 3 - I took a further look at the linked website and saw great sentiments about equal acceptance of both Palestinian and Israelis. When digging deeper the definition of "Palestinian" clearly did not show any of this tolerance toward the democratically elected and internationally boycotted Hamas government. It's clear this "say no to the boycott" website supports the boycott of Hamas. I can understand people being extremely uncomfortable with dealings of any kind with the religious fundamentalist bigoted aspects of Hamas' beliefs. What I don't understand is why the silence when the shoe is on the other foot? An equally compelling case can be made for the religious fundamentalist bigoted aspects of Likud's and in particular Netanyahu's leadership. When Netanyahu was PM I don't seem to recall the same "progressive Zionists" (their words not mine) demanding a boycott and treating his government as an international pariah like the calls against Hamas. This is hypocrisy. This only fuels the beliefs of many of us not emotionally attached to either side that no meaningful debate can every occur without one side consistently calling the other "anti-semite" or dragging out which political party you belong to. I'm extremely disappointed in Eric Lee and his refusal to stand up for the politically downtrodden in the Middle East as strongly as he does for the workers in the region.It's great to fight for their rights in the workplace but it's a meaningless struggle if these same workers get maimed on their way home by illegal Israeli cluster bombs. [ 22 June 2007: Message edited by: a lonely worker ]
From: Anywhere that annoys neo-lib tools | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Email this thread to someone!
