Reply to comment

Not Cool

Pham Binh: Of course I didn't see fit to mention the Labor Outreach Committee. That was never my area of focus, so why would I? I responded to the questions posed, none of which touched on Occupy's relationship to unions.

David Berger: Cute but no cigar, Pham. My question is: Why wouldn't you deal with Occupy's relationship to unions? The essential socialist message to the Occupy movement is to form a relationship to the working class, which means, often, the unions.

Pham Binh: This so-called criticism is exactly the kind of thing I was talking about about the socialist left finding everything and everyone falling short of some abstract artificial ideal height.

David Berger: To me, this statement indicates that you do not understand the nature of the "socialist left." It is not a matter of "some abstract artificial ideal height." It is a matter that understanding that for movements like Occupy or the antiwar movement, to grow and succeed beyond a certain point, they must have a relationship with the working class.

Pham Binh: Occupy was never all or mostly about the unions; if it was, we'd see tons of occupiers canvassing for Obama as union members canvassed for Barrett in Wisconsin just recently.

David Berger: Cute but no cigar, Pham. No one, myself included, has ever said Occupy was "all or mostly about the unions." However, unions were involved with Occupy Wall Street from the beginning. Union demonstrators were present at Zuccotti Park within the first ten days of OWS. In fact, unions reached out to OWS before OWS reached out to unions. The Labor Outeach Committee was formed, I think, in late September. The first attempted eviction by Mayor Bloomberg was thwarted by union members.

And, as for canvassing for Obama, if you want to get into a debate on the development of the recall in Wisconsin and its relationship to the rank and file of the Wisconsin protests in the winter of 2011, the labor bureaucracy and the local and national Democratic Party, by all means. But to make a smarmy remark like "we'd see tons of occupiers canvassing for Obama as union members canvassed for Barrett in Wisconsin," is to distort what actually happened.

Pham Binh: The funny thing about the Working Families Party is they actually run people against the Democratic Party now and again. When was the last time labor did that, or backed a left candidate running against a Democrat?

David Berger: And an even funnier thing is that it mostly overlaps with the Democratic Party. There have been many groups like this before in New York: the Liberal Party being the most prominent. Their purpose is to keep groups who might otherwise start running candidates against the Democrats systematically within the fold.

Pham Binh: Let's see how many New York City unions endorse a Labor Outreach Committee statement refusing to endorse Obama in 2012. I won't hold my breath.

David Berger: Let's see how long it takes for you to be able to unravel the complex relationships between the working class, organized labor, a radical movement like Occupy, the Democrats, etc. Your remarks on the working Families Party show that it might take a long time. I strongly suggest that you start attending some Labor Outreach Committee meetings or meetings of the OWS Labor Alliance. Every Tuesday, Atrium of 60 Wall Street, 6:30.

Reply

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <b> </b> <br> <br /> <a> </a> <em> </em> <strong> </strong> <cite> </cite> <code> </code> <ul> </ul> <ol> </ol> <li> </li> <dl> </dl> <dt> </dt> <dd> </dd> <div> </div> <img> <style> <font> </font> <blockquote> </blockquote> <hr>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.