The NYT's alignment of themselves squarely within the center-right Clinton style Democratic Party (which would be considered right-wing in Europe) is perhaps the more blatant in this article than in any article I've read. It invalidates the efforts of the DSA and tries through a quote to deny they've played a major role in changing state politics in New York in recent elections; it only reluctantly at the very end acknowledges their growing importance, almost with a sigh.
There are too many invalidating and 'otherizing' statements of the (to the contemporary US reader's view) 'far left' people involved here to go over in detail, but this one seems a good example:
'At its heart, the debate is one between pragmatism and idealism, working within the system versus burning it down.'
As someone not in the DSA, but who has attended a few meetings, I have seen first hand the focused, difficult and often thankless efforts they put in, working within the legal system to empower tenants, organize, canvas for politicians they support.
The phrase of 'burn it all down' betrays the centrist fear of NYT paper's overall perspective toward the actually drastic change that is needed in our time. Corporate pseudo-woke limousine-liberal incrementalism that is really a clandestine rallying cry for the status quo is not going to fix climate change, income inequality, or the host of urgent issues we face today. The DSA is by no means perfect but I felt the need to speak up about the bias here.
10
What’s the difference between cannibals & liberals?
Cannibals don’t eat their own.
2
Honestly, characterizing young Democratic Socialists as "far left" is weird and ahistorical - not to mention cribbing from Fox News or the Federalist. What does that make social democracies in Scandinavian countries - "extreme?!" You do realize that Socialist International is an international party platform with membership in virtually every major European country and also many Middle Eastern (including Israel), Latin American, African and Asian countries - except for the US. At some point the Democratic Socialists of America let their observer status lapse with SI (now that would be an interesting back-story). Its breakaway splinter group Social Democrats USA only exists on paper these days as committee members died, turned into neoconservatives, or pivoted back to union (and Dem Party) politics.
It's too bad since the substance of the article is informative. Intergenerational (and classist) conflicts between young DSers and establishment labor union organizers of the aging CWA should be covered more. But so should the intra-union conflicts within - and the complex rivalry/cooperation between establishment unions with workers' rights movements which hardly get any coverage outside of niche newsites.
18
You have to have a job and be a member before you can go to a union meeting. If DSA members have jobs where there are unions, they have every right (and really a responsibility) to go to union meetings and participate. There is no DSA member in this situation who has any illusion about taking over anything without being elected by their members. The reporter makes illusions to taking over in some other unspecified way. Ridiculous, inaccurate and divisive.
From a retired lifelong union activist and DSA member.
16
What a great country!
1
AOC won in one of the most liberal districts in the country. She's a self-promoter of the first degree. Republicans are trying to make her and the rest of the squad the face of the Democratic Party, and the media likes to play up that story. We can't afford another four years of Trump or McConnell in power. Most Americans aren't ready for radical change. Trump will send the economy down before the election. The only way he wins again is for Democrats to let AOC and her compatriots to be painted as the face of the Democratic Party.
9
The DSA is the "far-left"? The journalist is far off-base.
13
The DSA is not "the far left". Ms. Wang ought to read some labor history, and basic political theory primers. The whole purpose of the movement that led to the DSA – from Debs through Harrington to today – has been to distinguish itself from the Far Left of the CP, SWP, etc. etc.
17
With increasing regularity, The Times is doing Trump's work for him. The more I read, the more certain I become that they would prefer Trump be re-elected than for a progressive to win the White House.
18
it's called journalism. The NYT is not here to be your progressive voice.
16
No, it should very occasionally reflect the concerns of ordinary working men and women. Those concerns have to do with the increasingly desperate struggle to meet basic needs with their take home pay. The fight to make workers organizations more responsive to them and inclusive to more workers is not “progressive”. It’s life and death
9
You might almost think that the DSA are a Republican infiltration group seeking to fragment and destabilize the progressive movements in this country and leading to continued Republican political and economic dominance. Good job so far DSA.
7
I am reading Kershaw's biography of Hitler. It came out in 1998. I recommend it highly.
The politics of 1920s Germany were highly polarized and very complex. There were extremists of both the left and the right. Communists and fascists marched in the streets, often at the same time. The center was torn to shreds as extremists prevailed. The nail in the center's coffin was the Great Depression.
We have seen this before, many times. Radicalism, left or right, is just not the answer.
7
I suspect Ms. Cortez will end up as a wealthy TV infotainer.
old joke. how can you spot the FBI plants at a left wing group. .. they are the only ones who pay dues.their dues. circular firing squad anyone ? could we please just build the democratic party. fringe people that are always threatening to go home with their toys have delivered every Republican president in my lifetime.
7
Ocasio-Cortez is punching above her weight. No shame in trying to shake things up, but for the Love of God, learn to not knife your fellow Americans in the back.
If you can't figure that out, Ocasio-Cortez, then you are truly a flash in the pan.
11
Wow, another desperate Right-Wing Red-Baiting anti-Socialist rant by the Corporate Dems, determined to protect the status quo.
This is pure demonization, as most of these people who decry the "slippery slope' of Democratic Socialism are clueless about places like Sweden, Norway, and Finland where people are the HAPPIEST in the World.
And Scandanavian's aren't exactly running around town wearing red berets carrying hammers & sickles wearing Che Guevara t-shirts trying to take all of your private property...
But that won't deter the Far Right from labeling all Socialism as being the same as the engineered failed states of Venezuela & Cuba which have been under covert & overt attacks and blockades by the US Military Industrial Complex for decades.
The Fascists have tilted the Political Spectrum so far to the Right that the Left is now in the CENTER...
18
@Marek Edelman Sweden tried widespread socialist policies, but ditched most of them, because the Swedish economy went downhill and the cost became unsustainable. Swedes became UNHAPPY until they went back to free markets and privatization. And to pay for the social welfare Sweden chose to keep, low and middle income Swedes pay far more in taxes than their U.S. counterparts. The rich pay plenty, but Sweden demands skin in the game from everyone, unlike the class warfare zealots in this country.
5
@Bruce Thank you for writing out all the Republican Talking Points that you could think of here; but your efforts were wasted. They're still not true.
5
Great counter point you threw there. Now where are your facts that counter his misinformation?
Democrats got on AOC’s leftist socialist bandwagon
Now the same is breaking them apart from the inside.
It has resulted in losing Amazon and 27B in tax revenue, plus the tens od thousands of jobs it would have created. Now you are trying to upend Unions which have been in this fight a lot longer than AOC and her cadre.
Please tell me how electing AOC and making her and her people was a good idea at all?
What I do not understand is how the DNC allowed this to happen. And why the GOP is not taking full advantage to turn this place red.
3
@AutumnLeaf Guy from across the East river in Queens here. I agree with everything you wrote. Lets keep in mind that politicians like her and her lapdog State Senator Gianaris threw away 25k jobs, 27B in revenue, thousands of Union jobs during construction, tens of thousands of supporting jobs and businesses in the community, and billions more in multiplier revenue. What have they offered in it's place? Absolutely nothing! This is the desolation the far left brings. Queens has not forgotten and do not forgive! See you in 2020!
5
There is a thread that runs through the dimensions of this division, be it the inside/outside, reform the system/reject the system split or the racial and demographic split: It is listening vs. telling, and representing vs. championing. The unions, and other established elements respect that other people have different perspectives, priorities and views and try to persuade and negotiate to a consensus. They ask what their members—drawn from a pool defined by employment occupational often diverse in other ways—want and think to set their organizational priorities and agenda and then ask again what other players and allies want and think when they try to deliver for members in the larger society. The D.S.A. and company, start with an ideology and build their ranks from a pool defined by those who already agree on the core of that ideology; when they listen, it is only so that they can then present you with their ideologically determined solution to your concerns. Other players who think and want different are enemies, opponents, and idiots, rather than equal folks with different, perhaps wrong but legitimate, viewpoints.
That is why ideologically driven efforts (of right or left) are more cohesive and passionate and invigorating (all that constant affirming and egging each other on) but find it more difficult to build a majority, deliver on their promises, or sustain results when achieved.
4
As a pro union person. Those at the top of unions got fat dumb and happy and brought on the current situation because of a failure to do the job. For example in New York State every large labor leader as a number one priority should have the right to strike. Crickets. They all want a seat at the table except they haven’t realized it’s the kiddie table where you get served grilled cheese
11
This earlier comment is Worth Repeating Louder....
"Not true. Socialists built the American labor movement, which is the reason why McCarthyist red-baiting tactics have been (and continue to be) employed by people who fear the left. Ever heard of the CIO?"
12
Lol, if young progressives think that Unions are going to play nice, they're going to get their teeth kicked in. They have no idea what's going to hit them.
7
Why does the Times label progressive activists as "Far Left"?
Far Left is communists, or anarchists. Far Left is not, organized citizens working to get better labor conditions within the system that already exists.
What is wrong with you people ?
You are so educated by the plutocratic American corporate class you don't even know about the true width of the political spectrum. People in Europe laugh whenever they hear Americans referring to social policies they take for granted as "Far Left."
17
So, is it still red baiting if your favorite color really is red? The history of American unions, with the single notable exception of the IWW, has always been pro-worker but firmly anti-communist/socialist.
On the contrary, the basic American industries, such as automobiles and steel, were organized, for the very first time, in the 1930s, by Communist activists, working for the new Congress of Industrial Organizations. The San Francisco General Strike was led by the Communist longshoreman Harry Bridges. . . . . In New York City, the garment workers were Socialists and Communists organized the Teachers and Transit Workers and, among other unions, the reporters and typesetters of the N.Y. Times . . . Communists organized writers and technicians in Hollywood and miners and share croppers in the South. They dominated major unions such as the Electricians and were strong in the National Maritime Union, Steel and the UAW, among others. . . . In fact, it was the forced expulsion of idealistic, committed Communists from the Labor Movement, by the US government in the 1950s, that marked the beginning of the Unions' current corruption and decline.
7
Instead of an imaginary "infiltration" of the labor movement by its own rank and file members, why do you not report on the actual subversion of left wing organizations by the US government? . . . . Specifically, how many FBI informants are currently members of the Democratic Socialists of America? And why the massive disinterest by the mainstream media in this topic?
5
"In New York, the Far Left Is Targeting a Close Ally"
Is this a new form of news story modeled after "suspense fiction" in which you never know what the story is about until you read a ways in?
You couldn't just say in the headline who or what the so-called far left is targeting?
Oy.
5
@polymath
Yes. And use of the word 'targeting' is a gross misrepresentation.
I would've said 'Bickering', because let's face it, that's what's going on in reality. In the end, activists and unions will help each other and become more politically powerful.
2
“Red baiting”? Isn’t it a perfect example of how the radical left is stuck in the past? But at the same time, they actively falsify the very history they constantly refer to. So let me remind them that the red menace was real. The USSR did infiltrate labor unions, communist and socialist parties in the West. It did pour money into its lapdog publications. It actually had a number of spies in the federal government and security services. Do I really need to remind how it all ended? The only question I have for the clueless “democratic socialists” (a true oxymoron) is: who is giving you money now? Venezuela?
1
@Mor
"a true oxymoron"?
The opposite of a democracy is a dictatorship, and there are dozens of 'socialist' countries around the world that are democracies - many more representative than our own, btw.
Clueless? (for example, see comment above)
3
One only has to remember that the first thing Castro did on coming to power was put his fellow revolutionaries up against a wall and shoot them. There is actually gruesome footage of them being led out from their factory or office work places and executed on the spot. Seems the Democrat Socialists are taking a lesson from history.
2
Just wait until they try to take away union healthcare, LOL.
1
On the evening of April 3, 1968 Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was speaking on a rainy night in Memphis looking forward to planned Poor People's Campaign in the District of Columbia.
King hoped to unite the black and white working class along common educational socioeconomic political lines instead of dividing them across color aka race aka ethnicity aka national origin caste lines.
Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan helped to slay King's dream. Lyndon Johnson opined that if you can convince the lowest white man that he is better than the highest black man then you can watch them fight and pick both of their pockets.
Unions particularly craft unions are known for being bastions of white European American Judeo-Christian majority ethnic supremacist bigoted prejudice towards black African American Judeo-Christian minority.
Indeed from the beginning jobs typically performed by blacks were excluded from national labor law protections.
3
Hard core socialists acting more and more like the no so democratic counterparts from Cuba and Venezuela. Not surprising....
1
What a clown show: corrupt unions vs. loony activists! Maybe we can attain the condition of France with 9% unemployment and 1% growth. Where are the asylums when you need them?
2
Or we can strive for old good time when half of population was slaves. At least at that time they could not complain of unemployment
1
Far left?
Is the Times now edited by Trump and Tucker Carlson?
Has the Industrial Workers of the World just been reincarnated? AOC is a wobbly?
I thought not. And yet the Times reads as if it had. She is.
Disgusting. Dishonest. Smug.
9
Finally something good out of the left.
I have always felt that the Unions are a outsize cost on the government and indirectly us the tax paying citizens.
Here in Massachusetts the police have a deal where there has to be a police presence for every road closure. The firemen will be summoned to every emergency, regardless of its nature. There is this constant barrage of sirens as firetrucks go by on any emergency call.
The unions on top of it protect their own over public interest, the cops are never held accountable as they hold cities hostage.
I am over the idea that unions are good, they are just another organization ready to suck any extra revenue from the state government. If the homeless had a union there wouldn't be homeless.
1
Good God! Am I reading The NY Post or Wall Street Journal? What a misleading and provocative headline Ms. Wang. OOohhhh, the big, bad far left!!! Oh no, they want us to have medical coverage, oh no they want workers rights! This hatchet piece has me very angry.
I didn't want the Amazon HQ in Queens and was glad when it failed but that doesn't mean I want to start planting bombs. This is sickening. Keep it up NYT...stop trying so hard to be liked. Facts people, facts.
11
The NYT really needs to get someone writing headlines who has better judgment and/or reads better.
"Organized labor" - i.e., the ever-dwindling number of union members - put President Trump in office. I hate to assassinate personalities, but both the PBA and the UFT stand in obstinate opposition to the citizens of NYC - particularly those of color.
In the case of the UFT, yes, they HAVE supported plenty of Democratic candidates ... because there really has been no alternative in NYC, by and large. But they have given so much money to upstate Republicans to - among other things - fight accountability and charter schools that they are decades overdue for being reminded of both "where their roots are" and how NOT to lose some future right-to-work plebescite in NY State. Make no mistake, when middle class people resent some of the excesses of government workers' contracts and working conditions ... and lower class people are afraid that one such group will literally kill them and their kids and that another will contribute to their kids NOT having a chance to get out of the ghetto, ...
an organization (union) with its head screwed on has got to be changing both its message and its lobbying tactics!
consider me radicalized.
i left a large corporate job for one that participates in profit sharing and employee ownership.
i'm also making 30k more a year before we vote on what to do with the profits. last year everyone got a 5k bonus.
so, i've invested my extra money to teach myself coding and i go out to eat dinners more than once a week.
lemme tell you. it's good to be radicalized.
7
The falsely self-named "progressives" are as much a threat to individual liberty as are the far right. The only people who deny it are the misrepresenting "progressives" themselves and the mainstream politicians who want their support.
4
What liberties we are talking about? Liberty one people to exploit others?
1
Both sides seem so contemptible that it is hard to determine which side to root for.
2
Complacency is not an option. Unions have to be on their toes to protect what’s left of memberships and listen to all constituencies. The article presents “activists” as almost neo-Maoists , they’re not. Nor is their activism “radical”, not when it’s fighting, or trying to fight against a neo-Fascist President who’s demonizing the homeless, the poor, women and all groups and communities he deems inferior.
Unions are structured organizations which should be receptive to all opinions to grow their reach and heft.
2
Terribly biased article that ignores totally the corruption endemic in the city's unions. The late Robert Fitch exposed this bleeding wound of the labor movement in his 2006 book, "Solidarity for Sale." In the words of one reviewer, "Nobody has written of trade unionism's fatal embrace with the underworld, and its own demons, more eloquently."
When the DSA and other activists challenge labor's privileged fiefdoms, the media should either delve into the real facts or get out of the way!
7
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is about as "far left" as Angela Merkel.
Amazing, that advocating for social policy taken for granted in Western Europe by all political parties for generations now brands you as a radical in the U.S.
Maybe the Times needs to get out more? How about some foreign travel?
9
This is a disgraceful anti - union, anti -worker ( forget about fifth rate red baiting) article. All over the country young people, black white yellow brown, all genders and ethnicities are either joining labor unions, trying to organize the unorganized (and the organized). With few exceptions , union leadership has done little to nothing as the accommodate to corporate and government pressure. And as to the reds? There would be go garment workers without socialists, or the IWW, no Teamsters Union without the Trotskyists, no steel, warehouse, long shore men without Communists. Reds of all stripes have fought and died to organize unions. And that has been a good thing.
7
Just come out and say it - the dsa activists in this article believe they know better then the lowly workers. Vangaurdism at its finest!
3
The DSA has consistently tried to claim the mantle of success for Democratic majority wins in the NY state Senate and Assembly, but from what I saw, the unions -- in particular, 32BJ -- spearheaded many of the volunteer efforts, together with established Democratic organizations. Union members seemed to have a very large presence in efforts to elect, for example, Andrew Gounardes, Alessandra Biaggi, and yes, Julia Salazar. DSA was a self-promoting add-on. So maybe instead of trying to "infiltrate" the unions, they should start learning from them.
2
Aw yes, those left wingers trying to take over the unions for their own political cause.
This has been in the news for at least the past 100 years. And, of course, it is left wingers who need to be feared which is why the government for years tried to deport Harry Bridges, the left wing head of the west coast longshoreman's union, while turning a blind eye to the east coast union run by the Mafia.
Bridges kept his union clean. You can guess what the Mafia did with its union.
And of course, when the Reuther brothers and their colleagues tried to get the UAW recognized back in the 1930s, they were smeared as communists trying to destroy capitalism.
3
I’m a socialist but I find DSA’s obsession with unions pathetic. We need to focus on politics. Instead members are led astray into fantasies about how unions were important leftist organizations 100 years ago. That is, when DSA isn’t focused on open borders, prison abolition, and other childish utopian idiocy.
DSA doesn’t speak for the millions of people who vote for democratic socialists. They’re just a niche cult engaged in some ridiculous purity competition amongst themselves.
2
The unions should remember the good old days when joining a union was considered in many places to be synonymous with being a communist.
"I was born in Harlan County,
Kentucky born and bred,
But when I joined the union, boys,
They called me a Rooshian red."
Which Side Are You On? 1931
2
DSA is not "far-left". Describing it that way is part of the very red-baiting that the organization contests.
7
Unions’ top priority is the best interests of their members. That is as it should be. While there is often overlap with progressive positions, it is not a given.
It’s up to political movements to explain how their goals will help unions and their members. To do otherwise will be futile. While activists can begin to bring about changes, they become lasting in neighborhoods and workplaces, where most people spend the majority of their time.
3
Now that New York is a one-party state, the infighting can rage on. It's no longer about defeating the right. It's about which faction will control the levers of power.
4
Vivian Wang wrote "At its heart, the debate is one between pragmatism and idealism, working within the system versus burning it down."
These are not the choices.
The choice is between believing that Donald Trump is the problem and if he is removed everything will be fine or believing that for too long Congress has gutted its power and empowered the executive branch and that Democrats are too worried about their jobs, inclined to tinker at the margins, and frequently afraid to lead.
Trump should be a wake up call, but too many Democratic leaders just want to postpone difficult decisions through November 2020.
Trump is not a symptom. He is a pre-existing cancer now metastasized. These activists have the cure while those on the left who oppose them just want to apply band aid.
7
How is it that they could join the union in the first place without actually working in that specific field? In most countries, you cannot be a member of a trade union without certifying your work in that trade.
4
"Bianca Cunningham, a leader of the New York City D.S.A., said unions’ entanglement in political relationships “prohibits them from being able to take real chances.”"
Well, engaging politically and forming relationships is how things get done. Can't blame unions for trying to protect the gains they've got in an era when so many groups are trying to destroy unions and the worker protections that unions brought about.
9
So political liberals are cutting off their own noses to spite their face, by moving the politics of labor unions to the left? I disagree. Those cutting off their own noses to spite their faces are union members who vote for candidates who pledge to weaken labor unions.
7
@Scottilla
I agree; however this is the biggest challenge of the democratic party. How do we get union members and rust belt people back to the democratic party where they belong?
I have to confess, I just don't get it. Trump's personal life reveals over and over how amoral he is. His business ethics show him to be a thief. His political life shows he is a white supremacist. And, in addition, he has only benefited his 1% friends.
Color me stupid. What is there to like?
1
Bringing more political topics much less increased activism into unions will only serve to drive away more members and potential members. Look at Abood, which seems like a reasonable compromise but which led to Janus.
3
All this talk of “targeting” and “burning [the system] down” distracts from the true issue missing from this article. Unions are suffering in America and have been for decades. Janus is just the most recent example of Unions’ failure to effectively mobilize against anti-union forces. The recent strike wave has revitalized the conversation about the role organized labor can play in shaping society and advocating for working families. To argue that encouraging young people to join unions is somehow divisive and anti-union is red-baiting at its worst, at a time when unions need all the enthusiastic support they can get.
5
This misses the point that unions are more than political organizations and have a duty to further their members' interests in the workplace and out. They have a real constituency who they must be accountable to, and sometimes that might mean negotiating with someone like Cuomo rather than trying to kick him out.
13
How the trust in the Unions helped miners? The Unions should understand no matter how big they are, they will lose if they will not connect with general population. If they will stands for good of their members only, they will breed the resentment against them. Left offer them connection with general public.
‘And a barmaid shall lead them.” No self respecting union man or woman who lives by their sweat is going to trust their future to AOC, Bernie, Elizabeth and their fellow travelers. The distance between an iron worker and the Quad could not be greater. Union members have pride and the good sense not to kill the hands that feed them in exchange for a handful of magic beans. Their leadership may speak otherwise, but union members value the system that pays off the mortgage, puts food on their tables and provides accessible and affordable health insurance.
43
@Irving Schwartz. The 1911 fire of the Triangle Shirtwaist owned by Max Blanck and Isaac Harris was horrific.
“ In New York City, a Committee on Public Safety was formed, headed by eyewitness Frances Perkins – who 22 years was appointed United States Secretary of Labor and worked on a bill to grant workers shorter hours in a work week, known as the "54-hour Bi”. It’s what AOC-types can effect.
2
Irving, the people you wont support think the same as you. They are not the enemy. You have it wrong.
1
@Irving Schwartz. And gives billions in socialist style welfare to oil companies whose policies are giving their children asthma and them cancers. Short sighted to not want change.
2
“At its heart, the debate is one between pragmatism and idealism, working within the system versus burning it down.” As a progressive trying to support those values on a union board, as they are understood in the present: equity, transparency, and inclusivity, all I hear is this statement repeated by this articles’s writer. That is such a facile way of understanding a desire toward progressive practices that forefronts the view of entrenched members of institutions who no longer see their work as having to live and practice the values they see themselves striving toward, but in terms of battles and retaining their own entrenched power. I’ve been stunned by the regressive, male-dominated power structures that silence women, view questions and a desire to follow bylaws suspicious, and are actively surprised that members of the same standing have the audacity to consider themselves equally able to voice ideas and bring new perspectives. I was naive to think that so-called progressive institutions were invested in progressive values for their members and that such an investment would trump the desires to maintain power structures. Becoming more involved in my union allowed me to see the entrenched misogyny, patriarchy, and indifference to diversity that gets papered over because unions have traditionally supported democratic candidates. My union reflects the neoliberal values of our times.
8
This is what happens to (social inspired) organizations in general, when they become an institution in and of themselves. The original reason to exist often gets lost with the necessities that comes with being an institution, (as in consolidating power, balancing and managing staff and money), all to stay an institution.
3
@Amy being a reitiree and a uaw member for over 50 yrs, and seeing my father that was a uaw member also for over 40yrs, anyone that can be a union member at they're job is a fool if that don't belong to their union. Because you have know support, and backup at work without it, and it's your legal advocate on the job. Not to mention you can have someone that can in some ways share the same political views, and put your view into the system(why do you think Washington has been trying to get rid of us since the Regan years). So get and stay involved in your Union...… Only in America
1
While I'm sure there has been some conflict between Unions and political groups on the left in NYC, I doubt this conflict is widespread or serious. Most of the comments here are either taking the side of the activists or the unions, and that's exactly what the corporate media wants. They print stories like this to sow division on the left. That this "story" was first published by Politico doesn't surprise me. Politico is very close to being a right-wing new source. The "left" and particularly Bernie Sanders, can't do anything without Politico spinning it as something bad and vaguely creepy.
12
@E. Vincent
Politico is not remotely close to right wing.
2
Unions exist for the purpose of getting their members better contracts. Period. Getting involved in national or global politics is not their place. Especially as they are spending the mandatory dues of their members, and those members may have totally different politics.
It's un-American to make people fund causes they don't agree with.
23
@Chorizo Picante
"Unions exist for the purpose of getting their members better contracts. Period." Who says so?
Here's an alternative: unions exist to advance the interests of the entire working class, of which they are an essential part. Unions should organize the unorganized, should fight for civil rights, should oppose monopoly power.
(And, as to your rather narrow second point: no employee who does not want to join the union has been required to pay dues for political causes for 30 years.)
7
Their ability to get better contract will be severely limited if the general population will see it as nothing more than greed of their members. They need support of general public, otherwise they are doomed.
@Chorizo Picante
Unions like you describe have never existed like that ever.
For many years the foreign affairs dept. of the
AFL-CIO worked with the CIA in subverting foreign governments we didn't like. And, of course, we had many unions such as the Teamsters under Jimmy Hoffa and the east coast long shoremen under various mob bosses who saw their primary role as enriching their leaders and the Mafia.
On the positive side, union leaders like Walter Reuther of the UAW viewed a union's role as not only to serve its members but to improve society in general.
1
When I pass most construction jobs I see mostly white men and maybe a few people of color. Why can’t the left open up unions to a more diverse crowd? This would provide mobility and provide a pathway to prosperity like past generations but the far left efforts seem to stop short of diversifying unions. Why?
4
@Paul
Most construction jobs in Southern California aren’t union.
Why do you think “the left” is opposed to diversity in unions?
I guess the question should be more like why unions are not open for people of color?
I belonged to a major union and the leaders of the union were corrupt, and gave us less benefits than we had had before being incorporated into that union. They did provide a few thing we hadn't had, however, they only benefited a certain subset of members, which was only 50% of us at most.
Thus my loyalty was to my employers, and I took care of my needs before the unions, i.e. scab. Finally I quit. It has colored my views of unions ever since.
In short I can see why a far more left group is trying to infiltrate them, and make them honest.
7
The red-scare of the 50's and 60's has succeeded over the years in reducing union membership from 35 to 8 million. Since1975 Income for the top 1% has increased by 250%, while that of the middle and working classes has stagnated.
If the government and our society accepts Democratic Socialism (not communism, but that practiced by other developed societies,
particularly in Europe), we can and should expect an increase in labor union membership, and consequent increase in working-class income.
23
Democratic Party began to lose the working man vote with RR's southern strategy back in the 1980's and it's been downhill ever since. Recall confrontation in 1980 between construction trades union members and far left activists in streets of New York, and hunch is that politics aside, what the union members really objected to is that while they were working, earning a living, demonstrators, mainly liberal whites were not, but demonstrating. What once is lost cannot be regained, and union membership and support for the "party of the working man "has continued to dissipate.Trump has their votes, since he identifies with them, moreso than the coastal elites running for the presidency.Would not be precocious in declaring Cortez a rising star in the party. She won with less than a quarter of her district participating, and hunch that Crowley had had it with politics, seldom campaigned, and sought greater rewards in the private sector. Remember GW BUSH looking impatiently at his watch during debate with BC in 1991.That was after a news report had come out that in a conversation with then Mayor Koch in the WH, Bush confided that he felt as though he was in a prison, that is to say he had had it with electoral politics.THAT, in my view, was Crowley's motivation for not actively campaigning against Cortez!
5
I voted for AOC. My daughter convinced me. Crowley was in the pockets of developers who are ruining middle class neighborhoods.
@Alexander Harrison
Where do you get the idea that demonstrators in the '80s were not working? I was (as was everyone else that I knew). And you think Trump identifies with "the working man"? LOL
Many labor union members are highly skilled well-paid people who fully understand that all the socialists want to do is endlessly tax them to pay for massive welfare schemes. Even in a 'union state' like NY most workers do not belong to unions.
Many if not most union members in NYC are also homeowners who also fully understand that the socialist's opposition to private property (thankfully guaranteed by the US Constitution) means their private property. A neighbor is an operating engineer, the rank and file in his union was overwhelmingly pro-Trump in 2016 and looks to be the same in 2020.
28
You would be surprised by how many union families struggle to pay for expensive for profit health care and high interest student loans.
I was in a union and I’m grateful for the health insurance my union negotiated. But we took a lower salary increase to compensate for the rising cost of health insurance.
With Medicare for All our unions could negotiate higher salaries and pension contributions
14
The unions themselves are product of socialism, to give workers leverage against owner of the companies, basically telling the owners how run their establishment , and hence limiting their right. Seems like the union members don't mind socialism for themselves, but resent same privilege for other.
4
Organized labor cannot claim the progressive, activists label anymore. They are the entrenched establishment with vast power, deep pockets and high priced lobbyists.
Of course, they don't support Medicare for all, they like their premium healthcare.
Of course, they don't support liberal immigration policies, that would mean more workers competing for their premium jobs.
This is one of the reasons why a truly progressive presidential candidate won't beat Trump.
7
@Prodigal Son They don't support efforts to protect the environment either.
So it's 'Far Left' to advocate union and other organizing to strengthen the power of working people and the made-poor? Why not "Resurgence of Progressivism in Unions"?
16
@GRL Thank you!! This article (or at least its headline) would be better suited to Breitbart and its ilk. Only in publications of the "far right" would labor activists get tagged as "far left." Does anyone know what that phrase even means, apart from being a spark to ignite redbaiting panic?
The purpose of labor unions is to better the lives of their members. From there many unions go on to fight for all working people and for a better society. These "activists" seem uninterested in bettering the lives of union members, but in using the strength of the union to fight for a different agenda. I'd like to see some of these self-described "middle class white people" do the work and live on the pay of hotel workers, for instance. Then let's see how much energy they have left for the rest of their agenda.
19
And what is agenda of these activists are? Isn't it improvement of the lives of all workers including hotel workers, that they could have more energy to fight for their own right. I doubt that the hotel workers want nobody to fight for their right. I refuse to believe that they prefer everybody to be miserable as they are, instead of improving their own lives.
1
It's no about "pragmatism vs idealism," it's about being more pragmatic by trying harder.
If union leaders are worried DSA will arbitrarily undermine some necessary web of relationships and alliances, well DSA should listen to that concern and not come off as trying to reinvent the wheel.
But here's the problem: a lot of Labor leaders, like the Dems, can't get over the 80s. They're still so shell shocked by the conservative revolution, they seem incapable of even imagining any practical strategy that goes on the attack. And, many high-up "progressive" leaders wield this defensive posture like a club, tamping down rank-and-file aspirations while preserving their own institutional power.
The left should be in the business of undoing that defensive, small-minded posture, while empowering workers who find no comfort or benefit in that defensiveness.
12
So, why do the unions oppose M4A? Is it because they don't want to negotiate wage raises for its members? Or they just afraid that they will lose a carrot to seduce people to their Unions? Why do they oppose to the Green Deal? The new economy is coming, they want be able to keep their member employed if their branch of industry disappears. Look at coal-mining industry, or automobile industry. Isn't it better for the Unions to work across industries to make sure that their member will be better off because they could find new jobs when their jobs disappears. And wouldn't it influence of the Unions grow bigger when they will fight for all workers not only for their own members? With their number dwindle they really need changes to stay relevant, they need support of population outside of members and far-left offers them such opportunity. Opportunity to show that the Unions want to unite the workers, not to divide them by their groups.
6
I think it is best for labor unions to stay as apolitical as possible. For example, unions should never endorse candidates. Their political activeness became an Achilles heel when it came to busting closed shop and required union dues. Once you support a particular candidate you aren't just fighting for workers, suddenly you are pro-choice or radical left and this can become a wedge issue for some members. Unions certainly can endorse or deride legislation that directly affects them, but beyond that I think political activeness by unions is a political mistake. Unions have a very narrow focus, and that is the contract with their employer. As an organization, that's it.
22
This is quite strange advice that will make unions completely irrelevant. Policies affects every aspects of workers, policies are adapted by politicians. Giving up on support of appropriate politicians that just give up on opportunity to influence these policies. The owners know that is stupid, that is why they support politicians who are friendly to them. If the Unions give up that venue, they put themselves and their members in huge disadvantage.
Why do unions support immigrants which depress wages? Unions think they can unionize poorly paid workers so that unions have more dues-paying members. Union's do not care about their workers anymore.
I am a union member.
17
Why would they do that? If anything, they would like to unionize wealthy workers who can afford much higher fees.
2
I was a union member for 30 years and your broad stereotyping of all unions is simply wrong, ludicrous, and ignorant.
1
The tension between the economics of trade unionism and the social conservatism--and worse-- of the large majority of its white members has been apparent for quite some time. In 1972 I was working on a union construction job and not one of my crew-mates--laborers, teamsters, operating engineers, carpenters...not one was planning on voting for anyone other than Nixon. They've since reaped what they've sown and voted themselves right into political irrelevance.
9
Union members as well as those who are unorganized components of the working class would benefit by developing a socialist orientation within unions and in supportive social movements. Socialist activists need to build a base inside workplaces and unions, as well as communities. There are certainly common interests between these union leaders and the activist layer underneath them, and socialist political activists on the outside. They need to be build upon. But the lack of any real socialist presence within the working class in the US can't be overcome overnight. It is reflected in the orientation of the leaders of these unions, and the general opinions and feelings of workers across the board. This will take time to change, even in an era where the impossibility of building a decent future, or good, secure and rewarding jobs in a system dependent on private capital accumulation and growth is becoming more and more evident.
10
DSA should be looking to organize the unorganized, not fight over the remaining good union jobs. If DSA members are part of a union, they should be vocal and active. But it looks like DSA is shying away from the hard and necessary work of going into an unorganized workplace and building the infrastructure to win an election or better yet strike for recognition. They are playing revolutionary, instead of being revolutionary.
8
Why would it be better than to fight for improvement for ALL workers independently of their union membership?
1
Noam Chomsky has provided a relevant example of the problem facing US unions. He pointed out that, in Canada, the UAW supported a program of national insurance that became the “Medicare” program which insures all Canadians with basic health care (not pharmaceuticals, dental care, etc.). On the other had the US branch of the UAW has historically supported benefits for their own members only and rejected such proposals as the “Cadillac tax”.
It seems to me that the activists are making the point that unions must recognize that they are part of a broader organization that has interests extending beyond their membership. I muse that, if teachers in Wisconsin had understood that argument, the Scott Walker would not have been able to drive a wedge between the people who pay taxes to support teachers and the teacher unions. The unfortunate result was Act 10 which stripped teacher unions of bargaining rights.
And what is with the title of the article: “The Socialist Plan to Radicalize Big Labor”? That title is so inflammatory and incorrect that I nearly (and am still considering) canceling my subscription.
40
@William McLaughlin
Well said. Organized labor ceased to be a genuine force for progressive change and the greater good long ago.
As for the NYT generally, it's visceral hostility to the those who advocate the type of fundamental changes we need if we're to met the challenges facing us only grows. At times it seems like before they are hired reporters must swear an oath to standing guard at the Overton Window.
9
Have never been in a union myself, but I've had several friends and family members in unions, and pretty much without deviation, most are right of center, to far right, for whatever reasons. Misguided? perhaps in some respects.
They don't trust most authority, particularly the union leadership, because they've been sold down the river so many times before.
My brother in law is a retired member of the UBEW, and a Vietnam combat vet, and he's pretty far right. So he or people like him, probably wouldn't have much in common with man-bun wearing hipsters.
13
Forget about centrist Democrats, they have don nothing for working people in the last 30 years.
9
Unions, notwithstanding all the amazing work they did to create a middle class and a better life for millions in this country, have already unfairly gotten a bad rap over the years. If they get hijacked by Socialists, whose views represent less than ten percent of the voters, they will lose even more influence. Watching a Socialist takeover of the union movement would be like watching a Koch brothers dream coming to fruition.
14
“Far left”? Ridiculous. They are social democrats at their most leftward. In other words, still capitalists.
11
@Seamus Callaghan
Well said!
Many NYC unions are bloated, corrupt, self serving and often surprisingly conservative - think hard hard riot during the Vietnam war... so how they will ever come together with a DSA type group is beyond me.
4
There is no far left.
3
They call it Democratic Socialism but in reality they're Communists. Exactly 1 century since the Russian Revolution, we're seeing Bolshevism rising in America. The red flags speak volumes. Communism died in Russia but thrives in New York.
Beware.
11
So wanting everyone to have health care -like citizens of every first world nation on earth—makes me a communist.
Wanting free college education—which I enjoyed in the ‘60s—makes me a communist.
I suppose wanting paid family leave and clean air and clean water also makes me a communist.
So call me a communist.
9
There must be a reason? American capitalism?
1
@Mel Ironically, this comment figures just three comments underneath the one accusing Democratic Socialists of being capitalists.
My intuition is that you couldn't define communism if you tried.
1
"A group of far-left activists..."
Thanks, author Wang, for giving mainstream play to a Fox News talking point with your careless use of loaded language.
If you think progressives or democratic socialists like Sanders and Warren are "far-leftists", then you need to go back to Yale and take some history courses.
We're not talking Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemberg here. We're not talking anarcho syndicalism here.
We're talking people who think employers, elected officials and union bosses should be more responsive to the people who do the actual work. We're talking FDR. We're talking Sweden, Canada, Germany and the rest of the civilized world here.
35
@AACNY
Yes. it has.
Has it occurred to you that 30 percent of Americans are uneducated and intellectually lazy dupes?
It has also occurred to me that Fox News is creating views, not reflecting them.
1
NYC DSA are rich white transplants from Ohio educated beyond their intelligence. They do not have the standing they think they do, to speak for minorities, the working class, or people who have lived a generation or two or three in these 5 boroughs. The Queens DA race taught me a lesson, the DSA is not interested in actually providing solutions, but instead to burn down our institutions to further their own agendas.
46
Maoists are far left. Trotskyists are far left. Left-wing populists are far left. The DSA isn't close. Terrible reporting, speaking of red-baiting.
13
Union workers want secure jobs, good pay and benefits and some modicum of respect in their work places. After that they may have concerns about more esoteric concerns.
But for 'activists' to plot to take over workers' unions to further their own political goals is to overlook the needs of union members.
If D.S.A. and other activists want to influence politics they need to go about it openly and without trying to infiltrate workers' groups.
The guy driving the garbage truck may be sympathetic to more global goals but what he really cares about is feeding his family.
39
"prepared a “rank-and-file strategy” for their members to join unions and remake them from within."
This retired union member says "no" to any one wanting to take away hard fought pensions and union sponsored health care which I pay out of pocket. I may lean left, but from what I've seen since 2016 and the ignorance and bullying from hard left activists, I'm moving back to the center.
16
@tecknick
I wonder if the UAW workers feel the same now that GM has taken their HC plans away.
M4A would have taken that leverage away from GM.
1
@Dobbys sock
And when exactly do you think M4A will be enacted? The ACA is holding on but hemorrhaging patients and is one step away from the SCOTUS sticking a fork in it.
When Progressives were kicked out of unions (red scare in the 50's) Their places were taken over by middle class types (careerists} who eventually sold out all the gains that were made before. Obviously they are still in power in the unions. The best example I know of is how the railroads cut the crews on their freight jobs.
18
The reduction in workers in transportation industries, including maritime, of which I was a long time member, was done on the regulatory level, not by the unions themselves. More automation and unceasing pressure from industry lobbyists made it happen. Your armchair musings are ill-informed. In fact, many of the comments here are in the same depressing vein. All unions are this, all unions are that, the problem with unions is......All these half-baked opinions makes one wonder what else these enthusiastic young activists don’t understand about the world. It’s the blindness of their zealotry that repels many blue collar workers.
1
@Zamboanga I was a freight conductor for the New Haven RR, Conrail and Amtrak. My book "Head Pin and Wash Up" will lay out the way we fought the crew cuttings. No Industrial Nation other than the US would entrust its Railroads to the private sector.
Someone should look into the possibility that these "leftist" activists are on the payroll of the RNC. Seriously, the only thing that can come out of a confrontation of this sort is the reelection of Donald Trump.
7
Yeah because you are so sure that Americans love their expensive for profit health care and those wonderful high interest student loans
Unions should embrace the far left. Regular Democrats want slow, steady, orderly change. This process can take several years. The far left wants a speedy departure from whatever they oppose.
3
When Progressives were kicked out of unions (red scare in the 50's) Their places were taken over by middle class types (careerists} who eventually sold out all the gains that were made before. Obviously they are still in power in the unions. The best example I know of is how the railroads cut the crews on their freight jobs.
12
The actions by the DSA are meant to empower the rank and file members of unions and allow them to hold leadership accountable. Before you denounce these activists as interlopers, ask a union member you know about the internal politics: do they feel they have a voice? Is leadership responsive to their grievances? Is there any sort of democratic accountability? These are the issues at stake, and there are members of the labor movement that are on the same side as activists.
16
I’m in a branch of Communications Workers of America, and while I feel like I have a voice in my Local, the National-level seems distant/indifferent at best.
8
The Working People's Party, a far left group which in 2016 endorsed Bernie, just offered its endorsement to Warren.
She enthusiastically accepted it.
When Sanders was endorsed, he sent an email to his New York supporters urging them to vote for Hillary Clinton on the Working Families Party line on their ballots. In the same email, he described WFP as “the closest thing there is to a political party that believes in my vision of democratic socialism.”
Sanders and Warren are embraced by and proudly identify with Democratic Socialism and the far left.
They are attempting to hijack the Democratic Party.
Like the labor unions described, we shall oppose their hostile takeover.
We need to get rid of Trump in 2020.
Socialism is not the way to do it.
11
@simon sez
it is the Working Families Party, not the Working People's Party. And it is hardly a "far left" organization, having endorsed (after considerable internal conflict) Andrew Cuomo in his most recent re-election campaign. It is an alliance of labor unions and individual progressive activists.
The present Attorney General of New York began her political career as a member of WFP. If you appreciate her vigorous investigation of Trump's corrupt business activities, keep that history in mind.
Full disclosure, I am a Democratic Party County Committee member, and not affiliated with WFP in any way.
11
@simon sez your argument is that the Working Families Party is "far left"?
@simon sez
The Working Families Party endorsed Bernie in 2016 and Warren this last week.
The party is, as Bernie says, “the closest thing there is to a political party that believes in my vision of democratic socialism.”
Their tactic is to infiltrate the Democratic party. It is a familiar leftist tactic called boring from within.
Read about it here:
http://ideasandaction.info/2015/06/boring-wont-work/
The DSA and other groups parading with red flags aren't as subtle as Warren who is doing the same thing.
These people are the enemy of the Democratic party.
let them run under the banner of the Working Families Party and, as usual, lose.
1
The labor leaders may well be aware that one of the (many) things that led to the decline of unions was that the leaders in the late 1960's and 1970's were active in supporting leftist causes that their members didn't support, instead of sticking to the bread and butter issues for their members. Unions may be natural allies of the left on issues of economic distribution, but on most other matters, they are not.
16
What sort of issues besides economic ones were inions even pushing on? If they were pushing against discriminatory policies, or the rise of evangelism in government, then why is it bad for them to know the direction things are heading and pre-empt that?
4
@Mike S. This is a gross misreading of history. The union leadership of the 60's and 70's worked against grassroots movements on the left, and alienated their membership who were in support of those causes. They created a rigid structure that consolidated their power at the expense of democratic will of their own members. Most of the leadership are un-elected, and therefore immune to accountability. Please do more research before smearing activists working with union members
7
Here’s an effective strategy - continue to calcify through NYC’s notorious political constructs while being hounded by radical idealists with minimal real stakes in the game.
Upwards and onwards?
Here’s hoping their is a next chapter for the union’s America so desperately needs.
5
DSA's rank-and-file strategy is a long-needed push to rejuvenate a labor movement that has been meekly dying out for 40 years.
Thankfully unions are democratic organizations that anybody can join and participate in, regardless of their political affiliation. Long live the "infiltrators"!
18
Even Ms. Salazar said she understood the unions’ defensiveness: “There’s a little bit of, ‘We’ve been doing this for a long time. You just got here.’”
This pretty much says it all.
17
History will show us in a democracy that the extremes on either end will bring discord, trouble or worse in the end.
From the rebels in the Civil War, to the limo liberals in 1970s NYC, both of which came close to destroying America/ NYC, history has shown it to be true.
The left extremists like Salazar and AOC are apparently looking to give Trump second term with their extremist left views.
Learn from history or forever be condemned to repeat its worst mistakes.
35
@Paul I'm not sure what history books you're reading. The important reforms of FDR and the New Deal were a direct result of socialist and communist activity in the labor movement and decades of overt class warfare. In fact, it was the Communist Party that started the UAW, now one of the country's strongest unions. The wealthy ruling class doesn't just give up their wealth and power. Everything working people have won was through struggle.
13
@danasteer-Thank you for your reply. FDR was not a socialist or communist. In fact he made great pains to remind people he was a capitalist.
If we left it up to the communists in 1935 or the opposite end the rebels in 1861, our country would have been most likely broken up and resembled a third world country like So Africa was until recently in our American south and a USSR type disaster in the north instead of what great "capitalistic" leaders Like Lincoln, FDR, MLK and to a certain degree at least domestically LBJ did.
Learn from history or forever be condemned to repeat its worst mistakes.
3
What is so extreme about thinking Americans should have what citizens of every other first world nation have had for decades?
What is so extreme about investing our tax dollars in our health care and raising taxes on the rich (instead of cutting again) to pay for our children’s college education or vocational training?
This would in fact bring far greater dividends to our nation than continuing to throw trillions at our bloated military industrial complex.
6
“Burning down” a system essential to the fight against inequality is not “idealism”; it’s arson, and it’s end result might be self-immolation.
21
@Daniel I'm not sure where the article suggested that activists wanted to "burn down" the labor movement. Maybe I'm missing it. Can you offer a citation?
5
Sounds like the Democrat Socialists want to leech off of the power labor unions have garnered by doing the day to day work of representing their members and claim it as their own. Much like Bernie Sanders leeching off the Democrat Party simply as a power base to run for President. Neither give two hoots in the end about labor unions or the Democrat Party.
29
@Patrick Bernie Sanders isn't leeching off anything. He's running openly in the Democratic primary, and if democrats don't like what he says, he'll lose. But there seem to be a lot of democrats who think he's the guy for the job, and by discounting their voices you're spitting on members of your own party.
Maybe you'd prefer a return to the candidates being decided by party grandees in smoke-filled back rooms, but that kind of politics gave us Hilary as a candidate, which gave us Trump as president.
5
@KM
Sanders will do the same thing that he just did in Vermont if he get the Democrat nomination. Refuse to accept it, then run as an Independent, locking out the Dems in the general election. If that isn’t leeching on the Party, I don’t know what is.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/21/bernie-sanders-democrat-independent-vermont-601844
@Patrick Your first sentence says it all. It is unfortunate that you then go on to attack Bernie Sanders, who has a long record of support for labor and working people.
2
"A group of far-left activists huddled in the basement of a labor union in Manhattan..." — word choices say a great deal. Did they scurry like roaches from their huddle when the lights were flicked on? And "far-left..." does this make Biden et al. "far-right" because they oppose providing all Americans access to health care? Are Germany, Sweden The UK, Canada etc."far-left?" Is addressing, pro-actively, the climate crisis and the future of most species on the planet "far-left?"
56
So when the UAW leadership was taking bribes from the auto makers, that was “pragmatic” and “working within the system?”
9
Bunch of rich kids from NYU going up against the NYC unions? They better measure their feet for cement shoes.
12
Unions backing Clinton when Bernie was the more exciting candidate certainly played a big role in helping seal the Democrats' fate in the last election. One can only hope the elite will quit the reins in these organizations.
17
@Imagine
Actually it was the rank 'n file that backed Sanders.
It was the leadership at the top that backed Clinton, often against its memberships wishes.
See the teachers unions and the nurses unions...
https://time.com/3961869/hillary-clintons-labor-unions/
inthesetimes.com/working/entry/18321/bernie_sanders_machinists1
By the by...the largest employment heading of donors to candidate Bernie Sanders is...Teachers. We'll see this year what the management decides to do.
"They've changed how they tally endorsement;
The American Federation of Teachers has adopted a four-step process that includes questionnaires for the candidates and getting as many of them as possible in front of rank-and-file members at local town halls so members feel they “have ownership of the process,”" Weingarten said.
As have the machinists union;
The machinist union’s new endorsement process will hinge on a vote by the group’s members, according to two people familiar with the plans, a significant departure from its 2016 endorsement, which came after a unanimous vote by union leaders and an internal survey of 1,700 of its active members.
Agreed, Union officials blew it last election. Seems many have received the word.
17
I lost all respect for my union when it endorsed Clinton over Sanders.
1
I’m a progressive and a Bernie supporter both in 2016 and now, but I’m sorry to say that I don’t think unions are the right vehicle to achieve radical social and economic change. For various historical reasons and with only a few exceptions, American unions have since the 1930s been focused almost exclusively on getting employers to give more money and benefits for their members, period. Do you hear the GM strikers clamoring for single payor health coverage and measures to combat global warming? You don’t and you won’t. If anything, the big unions will oppose both of these. With the possible exception of unions dominated by low-paid minority workers, the left is wasting its time trying to achieve anything via unions and should instead concentrate in developing alternative grass roots organizations.
31
@Paul S. Is that their role? They're not politicians. By definition, they are advocating for their own well-being, which ultimately benefits other workers as well. Unions are 'one' vehicle for progress, not 'the' vehicle for change.
9
@Paul S.
"unions have since the 1930s been focused almost exclusively on getting employers to give more money and benefits for their members"
"the left is wasting its time trying to achieve anything via unions"
Why is getting more money and benefits for workers something you think the left shouldn't be trying to achieve? Of course it's not the only goal, but it ought to be a big one, in my opinion.
1
Progressive activists are trying to change the culture of unions. The unions themselves have been in decline for years and, in New York City, they have long been complicit with organized crime and the kind of payoffs that make the city the most expensive place in the world to build anything. The Times itself has done wonderful reporting on all of this, but now, this article--with its alarmist headline--suggests that the "radical left" is doing something nefarious and completely at odds with the way things should be. If anything, these activists are trying to rescue and revitalize organized labor, which has been co-opted and corrupted for half a century. And that would be true of the Democratic Party as well.
149
@Kurt Spellmeyer
Call it Democratic Socialism, as Warren and her buddy Bernie do, or whatever you want.
It is not mainstream American politics and like all fringe groups will never win a general election.
We need to get rid of Trump, not indulge your pet political theories.
Move aside and let the adults win this election.
13
@simon sez
Just a reminder that progressives and even members of the DSA are winning elections in NYC and New York State, and that up here, their views have become the mainstream in their communities. Notice that this article quoted one, state senator Julia Salazar, and mentioned another with a national profile: congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Progressive groups have stepped up and organized to get out the vote locally and in purple states, and they've done it along with people who specifically target Trump and the administration's policies.
We can walk and chew gum at the same time. The Democratic party is a big tent, and we should be welcoming people from across the spectrum, not asking people to "move aside". Turnout is key in big elections, and if we alienate any branch of the party, those activists won't work as hard to turn out the vote and get less-likely-voters on our side. I know that I'm to the left of most of our country, but I prefer to persuade people rather than tell them that they aren't adults or capable of making good changes to our country.
24
I think Americans should have what citizens of every other first world nation have had for decades.
And I am grateful that my granddaughter has dual citizenship. She will graduate university with no debt. And she will never have to worry about the cost of health care.
And she’s bilingual.
I wish that her American friends could say the same.
5
Labor has always refused to associate with the socialists and should continue that stance. This is not Europe.
38
May Day was born in Chicago...
9
Not true. Socialists built the American labor movement, which is the reason why McCarthyist red-baiting tactics have been (and continue to be) employed by people who fear the left. Ever heard of the CIO?
44
Yeah we like shoveling our money into the pockets of billionaires. We like expensive for profit health care and we want our kids to graduate college with high interest debt.
Tax cuts for the rich!
5
What a growing shock for dying Boomers! They've run America into the ground on their neoliberal Clinton and Obama, W, and finally Trump watch. Now, as they die off ever faster, the actual largest generation in American history, the Millennials are gong to take over, whether rump Boomers like it or not. And it's a good thing, too. Sorry, Wall St.
12
Yeah. Good luck with that.
12
The left fringe is just as bad as the right fringe. Say no to extremism!
75
@PeteH
Exactly.
We need to get rid of the extremist Trump.
We will never accomplish this with left extremism such as Democratic Socialism that Warren and her friend Bernie preach.
Warren just accepted the endorsement of the working people's party, which Bernie in 2016 called, “the closest thing there is to a political party that believes in my vision of democratic socialism.”
This will not win a general election and that is what we must do.
5
@PeteH
How many children does the “fringe left” hold prisoner? How many environmental laws has the “fringe left” gutted? How much money has the “fringe left” unethically diverted to their wealthy benefactors?
As far as I can tell, the “fringe left” wants health care for everybody, fair wages, and for the earth not to become uninhabitable. They are in no way as bad as the fringe right.
16
@simon sez That is the only way we will get rid of Trump. Democratic socialism of Warren and Sanders is a populist movement, a good place to start a movement for we the people. Trump won because he said he would drain the swamp and help the working people - populists. He lied.
We don't have time for status quo before Trump as Trump and previous republicans before him have moved us to a everything for the wealthy nothing for working class people.
4
"At its heart, the debate is one between pragmatism and idealism, working within the system versus burning it down."
What a lot of nonsense! The D.S.A. is not the far left. (Do your homework and find out who the "far left" are.) The D.S.A. and others are fighting to get the unions to embrace principles like "Medicare-For-All" and the Green New Deal. These are mainstream principles that are surely on the left of the Democratic party, but certainly not "burning down" the system. And they are working within the system, by becoming more active in their unions in pursuit of democratic change.
119
@Grandpa Bob except they aren't in unions from what I gather. They'd like to join unions to try and remake them without having any idea what the membership wants. A union is supposed to serve it's members first, not society at large or the political system. When those interests are aligned that's great, but what do these people know about the interests of a union they don't belong to?
62
@ryan
Part of the reason unions in the US have weakened over the past few generations is due precisely to the kind of thinking you promote here. The more that unions have made the interests of their membership the only thing that matters, the more they have lost their muscle as champions for working people generally. The only hope for gaining members and reinvigorating the union movement in America is for unions to take on a vision that is wider and deeper than their own parochial interests. If unions don’t have what is finally a moral vision for working people and the country as a whole, their historic decline will continue.
42
@Mr. Ed - As a union member, I could not disagree with you more. It's precisely because unions have decided to focus on political campaigns, to the detriment of their dues paying members, that those those bread-and-butter issues are not being addressed.
There was alot of truth in what Trump recently said about union head Trumpka that while the union leaders would vote Democratic, their member would vote for Trump.
15
An echo of history in this from the nineteenth century, where communists and socialists considered trade unions to be a hindrance to revolution. Trade unions were working for and would settle for higher pay and better conditions within the system while the socialists and communists considered that to be selling out a change in the entire structure.
And in the same way today’s progressives spend pretty much all their energy in trying to fight and purify what would otherwise be natural allies. Like Trump, they seem more interested in cementing a minority than in expanding a coalition.
64
@Yeah
Hmm...Where as I see todays progressives trying to enact policy's that would be for the betterment of ALL~!
Much of the resistance is from those comfortable with the current system 'n establishment. Too afraid to attempt change, or profiting from those struggling beneath them.
Agreed, you'd think they would be natural allies, yet, betterment for all might mean they give up a little.
Seems people are highly resistant to helping the many up, if that means they themselves might not be able to have more.
12
@Yeah
These statements are completely wrong in so many ways. Socialists and Communists have historically been very strong promoters of the creation of unions. Democratic Socialist, which are not the same as Socialist are not for "revolution".
11
@Yeah
I don't know where you're getting you history from but it certainly doesn't correspond with reality.
Socialists and even a fair number of communists have worked with unions and even served as union officials seeking the best for their members and not to tear down society.
If you want a couple of examples, see Harry Bridges and David Dubinsky.
2
Union membership and education are the twin cornerstones of the American middle class. In order to advance vital legislation, unions learned long ago of the necessity to compromise. It's seems as if the progressive movement, values ideological purity over results for union members. Their defacto motto, "death before compromise", may not help working people...at least not this generation.
77
@ Capt Al-
Not in this generation, or any generation.
6
@Capt Al
So does that make the Union defacto motto, "compromised to death"?!
Union's fell out of favor for a large variety of reasons.
Corruption and owned representatives didn't help.
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/general-motors/2019/08/14/feds-charge-ex-uaw-leader-widening-corruption-scandal/2012066001/
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/04/14/uawf-a14.html
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/09/19/pers-s19.html
Unions can also compromise with the progressive movement. As it seems an awful lot of the working members vote Left, while the leadership tends to vote Right or Center. The split was widely seen in the last election with Sanders getting the vast majority of workers, while the Leadership pledged to Clinton, often against the desires of those beneath them.
21
@Capt Al
These democratic socialists are working for the underpaid unions and the workers in the gig economy. Other unions like electrical workers and and some dwindling manufacturing unions are doing okay and hesitate to rock the boat.
We need to change the way we think about "socialism" and "democracy." Democracy gives us all a voice whether rich or poor; and democratic socialism seeks to wrest from the rich corporations a better life for the poor. All but the richest would benefit from fair taxation, restoring regulations on big business, and distributing the wealth more equally.
19
This country has nothing to fear from unions, they are all utterly corruptible and "Democratic Socialism" is a contradiction in terms. The "Left" in this country such as it is, will happily fight amongst themselves rather than actually figure out how to take on the banks and PR firms who really run this place. If anyone's waiting for the socialist revolution to upend the status quo here, they should make sure to pack a lunch, it will be a while.
17