Skip to main content

View Diary: Supporting the Status Quo vs. Enhancing the Status Quo (21 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Nothing has changed (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bobswern, nchristine

    You could lift almost everyone of your argument to describe why the labor movement would never succeed in America.

    1) the police would shoot down the protestors/strikers by the dozens, and beat them as a matter of principle.

    2) The Democratic Party and AFL would undermine the strikers.

    3) the MSM would be against them, including lying.

    4) the labor movement's structure would be imperfect, divided, flawed.

      Nothing has changed. Nothing at all. Except that the generations before us were more willing to fight for their rights.

    “Wall Street had been doing business with pieces of paper; and now someone asked for a dollar, and it was discovered that the dollar had been mislaid.” ― Upton Sinclair

    by gjohnsit on Sat Apr 27, 2013 at 11:59:06 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I disagree on two significant matters: oppression (0+ / 0-)

      ...and mass media. The level, intensity and institutionalization of selective political oppression in this country is far greater now than it's been in a very long time; and, the media (mass communications, in general) has devolved to the point where the fourth estate is much more focused upon aiding and abetting that oppression, as well. Perfect case(s) in point: compare the Daniel Ellsberg case to any one of a large handful of stories from the past couple of years. Better yet, just send fellow Kossack Jesselyn Radack a Kosmail asking what her sentiments are on this issue; or, have a little chat in the comments with OPOL with regard to what he thinks about this issue, and ask him to cite Don Siegelman's situation and how the pertains to what I'm writing now. And, then of course, there's the extreme rightwing turn of our Supreme Court...

      "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

      by bobswern on Sat Apr 27, 2013 at 12:37:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bobswern

        I grant that there was more diversity in the media in those days than today. Plus, I'll grant that the propaganda skills are much more well honed these days.

         But seriously, they were literally shooting down strikers by the dozens. Kangaroo courts were common. The corruption of the Gilded Age was no greater than today.
           I grant that the oppression is probably more organized today than in those days, but the brutality levels were at least as great, if not greater, back then.

          As for the Supreme Court, it was an extreme right-wing court back then as well. Remember that it justified slavery, made almost every strike illegal, and made corporations people.

        “Wall Street had been doing business with pieces of paper; and now someone asked for a dollar, and it was discovered that the dollar had been mislaid.” ― Upton Sinclair

        by gjohnsit on Sat Apr 27, 2013 at 01:24:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well, one out of two.... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          gjohnsit

          I stated:"institutionalization of selective political oppression." Back then, the oppression wasn't really all that "institutionalized." Labor Laws were more akin to the wild West, in many ways, and that's why they evolved towards the end of that period. Don't know my Supreme Court history as well as I should. And, that's pretty shameful, since I majored in 20th Century American Studies in college (cross-discipline: history, poli-sci, literature).

          "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

          by bobswern on Sat Apr 27, 2013 at 05:11:48 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site