Organized Labor; The World’s First Meta-religion

[Bill_Wiltrack]

.

I believe, you are viewing, in the quote you used, the phrase organization of labor as the same as Organized Labor.

You are confusing a function with a system.

For example;

You need to organized your socks.

That is not the same as…

You need to appreciate your socks manufactured by Organized Labor.

They are two different creatures.

One is a description of a function the other is a particular system.

In addition to the quote that you used earlier in this thread, you may want to educate yourself about the subject of Organized Labor.

Wiki would be a GREAT place to start.

Cheers!

And good luck to you.

.

[James_S_Saint]

@Bill Wiltrack

I believe, you are viewing, in the quote you used, the phrase organization of labor as the same as Organized Labor.

Gee… I can’t imagine how I could get those confused…

@Bill Wiltrack

You are confusing a function with a system.

Haha… emm or one of us is.

@Bill Wiltrack

For example;

You need to organized your socks.

That is not the same as…

You need to appreciate your socks manufactured by Organized Labor.

They are two different creatures.

One is a description of a function the other is a particular system.

@Bill Wiltrack

In addition to the quote that you used earlier in this thread, you may want to educate yourself about the subject of Organized Labor.

Conspicuously you need to take the advice you give.
Blame-shifting doesn’t really work all that well against me.
And I appreciate a wife darning a sock far more than I do forced labor camps manufacturing socks.

[victorel21]

@Typist

There’s no fundamental difference between organized labor and organized big business. In each case, labor or business, the party involved is attempting to use it’s leverage to maximize the consumption of resources by it’s members.

While I do agree that a healthy state of affairs would see the demands of both parties fairly balanced, the underlying problem remains the same, however the pie is divided.

Our resources are finite, and our desires are infinite. Seven billion human beings, soon to be ten, chewing their way through a limited supply of natural resources at any ever increasing pace.

Members of labor unions want to do this chewing just as much as the tycoons of big business, they just aren’t as good at it, which is why they have to work for somebody else.

thank you for saving me the explanation… organized labour is the same as any other organization seeking the benefit of some. (unfortuanately in detriment of others, due to scarcity).

[Bill_Wiltrack]

.

[size=120]I really appreciate your opinions.

I know where you are coming from.

Don’t change.[/size]

.

[Only_Humean]

@James S Saint

It would help if you bothered to investigate exactly what Communism is and isn’t.

[size=150]com·mu·nism[/size] (kmy-nzm)
n.

1. A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the [size=150]organization of labor[/size] for the common advantage of all members.

There’s an “and” in there. I bolded it, for clarity.

Is Bill advocating collective ownership of property, or the appropriation and distribution of the means of production from the capital owners? I seem to have missed that.

[James_S_Saint]

@Only_Humean

@James S Saint

It would help if you bothered to investigate exactly what Communism is and isn’t.

[size=150]com·mu·nism[/size] (kmy-nzm)
n.

1. A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the [size=150]organization of labor[/size] for the common advantage of all members.

There’s an “and” in there. I bolded it, for clarity.

Is Bill advocating collective ownership of property, or the appropriation and distribution of the means of production from the capital owners? I seem to have missed that.

Well I had ask for him to make his distinction several times. He merely replied that he didn’t like Communism.

Of course, it wouldn’t have mattered because the first concern of ownership of property is being established by the state anyway. After that, organized labor is all that is left.

Basically it goes like this;
A) Terrorism and protectionism are used to extort control over all “resources” (already proclaimed by Obama). That is the “ownership of property”.

B) Labor leaders squeeze out all independent laborers and organize to extort control of the State and become the Communist ruler party.

All of this for sake of World Order Socialist/Communist control (Agenda 21).

The Communist Manifesto contains Marx and Engels’ theories about the nature of society and politics, that in their own words, “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”.[4] It also briefly features their ideas for how the capitalist society of the time would eventually be replaced by socialism, and then eventually communism.
.
.
Some of these communists have specific plans for the types of administrative bodies that would replace the current ones, while always qualifying that these bodies would be decentralised and worker-owned, just as they currently are within the activist movements themselves. Others have no concrete set of post-revolutionary blueprints at all, claiming instead that they simply trust that the world’s workers and poor will figure out proper modes of distribution and wide-scale production, and also coordination, entirely on their own, without the need for any structured “replacements” for capitalist state-based control.

Dialectical materialism is a strand of Marxism, synthesizing Hegel’s dialectics, which proposes that every economic order grows to a state of maximum efficiency, while simultaneously developing internal contradictions and weaknesses that contribute to its systemic decay.

The International Workingmen’s Association (IWA) (1864–1876), sometimes called the First International, was an international organization which aimed at uniting a variety of different left-wing socialist, communist[1] and anarchist political groups and trade union organizations that were based on the working class and class struggle.

Leninism adds to Marxism the notion of a vanguard party to lead the proletarian revolution and to secure all political power after the revolution for the working class, for the development of universal class consciousness and worker participation, in a transitional stage between capitalism and socialism.

[Only_Humean]

@James S Saint

@Only_Humean

Is Bill advocating collective ownership of property, or the appropriation and distribution of the means of production from the capital owners? I seem to have missed that.

Well I had ask for him to make his distinction several times. He merely replied that he didn’t like Communism.

Of course, it wouldn’t have mattered because the first concern of ownership of property is being established by the state anyway. After that, organized labor is all that is left.

Basically it goes like this;
A) Terrorism and protectionism are used to extort control over all “resources” (already proclaimed by Obama). That is the “ownership of property”.

B) Labor leaders squeeze out all independent laborers and organize to extort control of the State and become the Communist ruler party.

All of this for sake of World Order Socialist/Communist control (Agenda 21).

The Communist Manifesto contains Marx and Engels’ theories about the nature of society and politics, that in their own words, “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”.[4] It also briefly features their ideas for how the capitalist society of the time would eventually be replaced by socialism, and then eventually communism.
.
.
Some of these communists have specific plans for the types of administrative bodies that would replace the current ones, while always qualifying that these bodies would be decentralised and worker-owned, just as they currently are within the activist movements themselves. Others have no concrete set of post-revolutionary blueprints at all, claiming instead that they simply trust that the world’s workers and poor will figure out proper modes of distribution and wide-scale production, and also coordination, entirely on their own, without the need for any structured “replacements” for capitalist state-based control.

Dialectical materialism is a strand of Marxism, synthesizing Hegel’s dialectics, which proposes that every economic order grows to a state of maximum efficiency, while simultaneously developing internal contradictions and weaknesses that contribute to its systemic decay.

The International Workingmen’s Association (IWA) (1864–1876), sometimes called the First International, was an international organization which aimed at uniting a variety of different left-wing socialist, communist[1] and anarchist political groups and trade union organizations that were based on the working class and class struggle.

Leninism adds to Marxism the notion of a vanguard party to lead the proletarian revolution and to secure all political power after the revolution for the working class, for the development of universal class consciousness and worker participation, in a transitional stage between capitalism and socialism.

In amongst the digressions, I’ll take that as a “no”.

[Bill_Wiltrack]

.

[size=121]
I REALLY appreciate this opportunity to assist you in making a distinguishable association between the polar opposites of modern, independent, legally recognized Organized Labor agreements and communism.

You will find the differences important and worth repeating in the future.[/size]

…

[size=131]
Look at this site I think you will find it extremely helpful and revealing.[/size]

…

Here is an article, though dated, serves as a timeless example of the differences of the philosophical concepts that you seem to be having difficulty with:

[size=200]
Honda Workers Bypass `Toothless’ China Unions, Fueling Strikes[/size]

By Bloomberg News - Jun 30, 2010 7:25 PM ET

July 1 (Bloomberg) – Shaun Rein, managing director of China Market Research Group, talks with Bloomberg’s Linzie Janis about the threat of inflation in China and its potential impact on cost of living expenses. At least nine Chinese provinces and cities raised minimum wages by as much as a third today after Premier Wen Jiabao called for measures to head off growing worker unrest in the world’s third-largest economy. (Source: Bloomberg)

[size=120]When Huang Fengxia and her co-workers at Honda Lock Co. (Guangdong)’s factory in Zhongshan, China, decided to strike on June 9 for higher wages, the last person they considered contacting was their labor union representative.[/size]
[size=120]
“I have no idea what a labor union is or what they do,” said Huang, 26, whose one yuan ($0.15) monthly union membership fee gives her no access to collective bargaining, just a twice- yearly 200 yuan gift voucher during Chinese festivals. “It’s like a school club.”[/size]

Strikes at plants of Japanese automakers Honda Motors Co. and Toyota Motor Corp. mark an escalation in labor disputes in China, the world’s biggest manufacturer after the U.S., as a dwindling supply of cheap rural labor pushes up wage demands. [size=120]With no effective labor unions to negotiate with to head off stoppages, China’s factories face increased costs and lost production, said Mary Gallagher, director of the Center for Chinese Studies at the University of Michigan.[/size]

“These disputes are troublesome for employers and employees because they require time and money to resolve,” said Gallagher. [size=120]“If there was an apparatus that allowed for collective bargaining and negotiation, we might see a decline or stabilization in labor disputes.”[/size]

Profit at Honda may be cut by as much as 10 billion yen ($113 million), after Japan’s second-largest carmaker suffered the worst strikes in its 18-year-history in China, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. said. At least 10 suicides at Foxconn Technology Group, the maker of Apple Inc. iPhones and Hewlett-Packard Co. computers, led the Taiwanese electronics company to double wages for its lowest paid employees in Shenzhen.

‘Toothless’ Unions

“Historically, China’s labor unions have been rather toothless,” said Li Qiang, founder of China Labor Watch, a New York-based labor advocacy group. “When Honda factory workers went on strike they had no intention of using the union to negotiate. Workers had no idea about the concept.”
[size=130]
The All China Federation of Trade Unions, which represents China’s 169 registered labor unions, is closely affiliated to the government, hindering its efforts to win concessions and higher wages, Li said.[/size] The federation, founded in 1925, uses “the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China as the fundamental criterion for their activities,” according to its website. A spokesman for the federation said it “represents the interests of the Chinese workers” and was not a government agency.

[size=118]Labor organizations in the West such as the Detroit-based United Auto Workers union and the U.K.’s Trades Union Congress operate independently of the government and hire their own lawyers to advise on labor issues. [/size]

[size=120]
There are only five widely recognized countries that are clearly Communist in structure.
They are:[/size]

1. China
   
   Mao Zedong took control over China in 1949 and proclaimed China as the People’s Republic of China, a communist country. China has remained consistently communist since 1949 although economic reforms have been in place for several years. China has been called “Red China” due to the communist party’s control over the country.
   Sponsored Links

2. Cuba
   
   A revolution in 1959 led to the taking over of the Cuban government by Fidel Castro. By 1961, Cuba became a fully communist country and developed close ties to the Soviet Union.

3. Laos
   
   Laos, officially the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, became a communist country in 1975 following a revolution that was supported by Vietnam and the Soviet Union.

4. North Korea
   
   Korea, which was captured by Japan in World War II, was divided following the war into a Soviet north and American south. Despite being led by the USSR beginning in 1945, North Korea did not become a communist country until 1948.

5. Vietnam
   
   Vietnam was partitioned at a 1954 conference that followed the First Indochina War. While the partition was supposed to be temporary, North Vietnam became communist and supported by the Soviet Union while South Vietnam was democratic and supported by the United States. Following two decades of war, the two parts of Vietnam were unified and in 1976, Vietnam as a unified country became a communist country.

[size=120]

Here is the part that all of you may be missing;

Modern, independent, legally recognized, Organized Labor organizations DO NOT EXIST IN COMMUNIST COUNTRIES. PERIOD.

Organized Labor thrives in a Liberal Democracy.[/size]

[size=121]Do not feel bad or inferior if you still do not quite understand or feel comfortable.

THESE ARE PHILOSOPHICAL CONCEPTS that we are working with now. Give this time…[/size]

*Here is a trick - ALWAYS associate modern, independent, legally recognized Organized Labor agreements as the most important expression of Democracy!

[size=120]I hope this information helps!

I welcome you as you learn more about this important and fascinating subject of Organized Labor.[/size]

[size=130]Again, thank you for this opportunity!

Crafting the above for you was beyond GREAT!

[/size]

.

[James_S_Saint]

Well hey, if reality is merely the names we call it, we can do this much more easily.

Since it isn’t communism if it isn’t called communism and isn’t a labor union if it isn’t called a labor union, all we really need do is call our current state “Organized Labor”.

That was easy. Instant cure and established Global religion.
…should have done that years ago, huh.

[Bill_Wiltrack]

.

[size=115]
Welcome to the fold my friend![/size]

.

[captaincrunk]

@James S Saint

Of course, it wouldn’t have mattered because the first concern of ownership of property is being established by the state anyway. After that, organized labor is all that is left.

Basically it goes like this;
A) Terrorism and protectionism are used to extort control over all “resources” (already proclaimed by Obama). That is the “ownership of property”.

B) Labor leaders squeeze out all independent laborers and organize to extort control of the State and become the Communist ruler party.

All of this for sake of World Order Socialist/Communist control (Agenda 21).

Agenda 21 sounds better than what we have now. What do you think the end result would be like, and how would it compare to the current situation where the control is in the hands of the capitalists?

[James_S_Saint]

@captaincrunk

@James S Saint

Of course, it wouldn’t have mattered because the first concern of ownership of property is being established by the state anyway. After that, organized labor is all that is left.

Basically it goes like this;
A) Terrorism and protectionism are used to extort control over all “resources” (already proclaimed by Obama). That is the “ownership of property”.

B) Labor leaders squeeze out all independent laborers and organize to extort control of the State and become the Communist ruler party.

All of this for sake of World Order Socialist/Communist control (Agenda 21).

Agenda 21 sounds better than what we have now. What do you think the end result would be like, and how would it compare to the current situation where the control is in the hands of the capitalists?

The “control” isn’t in the hands of the capitalists.
Capitalism died in the West beginning in 1913 and finally and fatally in 1981.

Much like the Constitution, such notions are merely being used to keep the average person subject to plausible deniability hiding the fact that the USA is already a socialist police state, merely undeclared. I expect that to change very shortly. The original plan was for 100 years. Capitalism merely allows for your socialist dictators to extract money and blame-shift, again, and again, and again.

The plan, as outlined in the Marx papers is to quite intentionally cause financial collapse (financial terrorism replicating the USA depression in 1920 and again in 1930) so that people will have no choice but to grasp onto the only hope available - Socialism, specifically, “Democratic Socialism” which is merely the designed precursor to World Communism through the means of none other than “Organized Labor”.

[Bill_Wiltrack]

[size=120].

Tell me again. Whats so bad about Democratic Socialism?

Vienna Austria was just voted the BEST place in the world to live.

Vienna has the BEST quality of life on earth.

So tell me again…

…

“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires”

       [size=50]          

........................................................[/size][img]http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee233/cmp-stuff/flags/n/norway/ANIMATED/norway-flag.jpg[/img]



Tell me again...while I am linking [url=http://travel.yahoo.com/ideas/the-world-s-happiest--and-saddest--countries.html]the happiest places in the world to live.[/url]



excerpt from that article;
[size=110]
At No. 1 for the third year in a row: [b]Norway.[/b] What’s it got that the rest of the world doesn’t? For one thing, a stunning per capita GDP of $54,000 a year. Norwegians have the second-highest level of satisfaction with their standards of living: 95% say they are satisfied with the freedom to choose the direction of their lives; an unparalleled 74% say other people can be trusted.

Joining Norway and Australia in the top 10 are their neighbors [b]Denmark, Finland, Sweden[/b] and New Zealand. Equally small and civilized [b]Switzerland [/b]and the [b]Netherlands[/b] are also up there. Rounding out the top 10 is the United States at 10th and Canada (sixth).


After studying 40 years of data and outcomes, they settled on eight areas – the ingredients of prosperity: economy, entrepreneurship, governance, education, health, safety, personal freedom and social capital. Then they looked for reliable data from the likes of the Gallup polling organization that would let them rank countries on their performance in these areas. Add up the scores and you get the Legatum Prosperity Index.[/size]








I'll just wait right here...take your time.



[img]http://www.inbetweeness.org/waiting/images/waitingWithBeards.jpg[/img]






.

[James_S_Saint]

@Bill Wiltrack

Tell me again. Whats so bad about Democratic Socialism?

Mindless dictatorships
Egocentric assassinations
Vanishing of dissidents
Murder
Thievery
Deceit
Torture
Genetic manipulation
ORGANIZED LABOR CAMPS
Homosapian replacement with more loyal and capable androids

Gee… other than that, off the top of my head, I can’t think of much wrong with it.

[Bill_Wiltrack]

.

[size=115]The concept of Organized Labor is pure and divine just as the concept behind Organized Religion. The institution of Organized Labor, like all other institutions infused by man, needs to have every human characteristic displayed.

A union is nothing but human. Whether you consider human characteristics good or bad they are present in all of us; in all our institutions, in all of our moments. [/size]

Thank you for all of your robust responses.

.