This page was last updated on March 1, 2011.
Worker Solidarity – ‘We Have an Enemy, and It Must Be Named: Finance Capital’; Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS); February 27, 2011.
CCDS started as a splinter group of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA).
A few local leftsters in CCDS leadership positions are Carl Davidson (co-chair) and Randy & Tina Shannon (members of the CCDS national coordinating committee). These folks also hold leadership positions in Progressive Democrats of America – PA 4th CD Chapter.
There’s more to the group’s name than you may think. According to CCDS, “Our name is taken from the history of the U.S. revolutionary war against British colonialism. In the 1770s, Committees of Correspondence were formed in all 13 colonies and became the catalyst for united action against British oppression.” Make no mistake; despite its efforts to pretty itself up by linking itself with our founders, CCDS views the U.S. and our founders as our founders viewed the British.
When CCDS says it’s “for Democracy,” keep in mind the U.S. is a republic, not a democracy. According to Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution, “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,” not a democracy. The word “democracy” does not appear in either the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. At the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, someone asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got - a Republic or a Monarchy?” Mr. Franklin replied, “A Republic, if you can keep it.” In an 1814 letter, John Adams (a Founding Father and second President) wrote, “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” The difference between a democracy and a republic is not semantics and our Founding Fathers knew the difference, as does CCDS.
Finally, if you are for socialism, you oppose the Constitution as it now exists. That’s because socialism and all other leftisms require government power beyond what the Constitution grants. The 10th Amendment states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people.” Absent a very creative interpretation ignoring both the actual words and clear intent of the Constitution, the policies/programs required for communism, Marxism, socialism, et cetera are unconstitutional.
I recommend everyone read the subject article so you can draw your own conclusions. I also recommend you read the discussion of the article on Mr. Davidson’s Facebook page. I never cease to be amazed how people can take something as inherently simple as a free economy and complicate it beyond recognition. The most elegant solution to a problem also tends to be the simplest.
The article is formulaic so there’s nothing new here. That said, I’ll pick out a few comments.
Right off the bat the article refers to the “right to collective bargaining.” There is no such right. Forced collective bargaining is a privilege granted by government. I’m not even sure how mandatory union membership (private or public sector closed shops) is constitutional. Funny how lefties’ precious “right to choose” doesn’t apply to employers and employees isn’t it?
The article says “teachers at the LaCrosse campus of the University of Wisconsin, galvanized by the actions of their co-workers, voted in overwhelming numbers to form a union.” Gee, a college faculty voting for a labor union. Who saw that coming? Seriously, though, given college faculties are overwhelmingly lefty, it would have been news only if the faculty voted against working for labor union management.
Predictably, the author found a way to link the situation with Martin Luther King, Jr. I always get a kick out of this tactic given the left’s history regarding racism.
What you won’t find in the article is mention of the fact FDR (patron saint of lefties) opposed public sector labor unions. In a 1937 letter to Luther C. Steward (President of the National Federation of Federal Employees), FDR wrote, “… meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management.” Likewise, George Meany (first president of the AFL-CIO, 1955-1979) opposed collective bargaining for public sector employees. I’m surprised lefties haven’t tried to convince us Messrs. Meany and Roosevelt were really conservatives. When politicians negotiate with labor union management, they negotiate with people who will return part of what they win to the politicians via taxpayer-funded campaign contributions. It’s called a conflict of interest. There’s a reason 93% of labor union management PAC contributions to federal candidates (over $62 million) went to Democrat candidates in 2010.
The article said “Republicans [are] threatening a government shutdown.” This appears to be a straw man. That is, I’ve seen no reports Republicans threatened “a government shutdown” but lefties attack Republicans as if they had. Indeed, all comments I heard from Republican leaders said they do not want a government shutdown. You may recall Democrats used this tactic before. Leading up to the 2004 election, Democrats in Congress and the media tried to convince us a vote for then-President George W. Bush was a vote for a military draft despite the administration’s opposition to a draft. In truth, only Democrats spoke of a draft. As a political stunt, Democrats sponsored two draft bills in Congress in 2003 then spread the rumor Mr. Bush intended to reinstate the draft if re-elected. When House Republicans called the Democrats’ bluff and brought the House version of the draft bill up for a vote, even the bill’s author and sponsor, Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), voted against it.
Getting back to the possibility of a government shutdown, I noticed the press is ignoring the fact Democrats put us in this position. You may recall President Obama and Democrat congressional leaders chose not to pass a budget for the current fiscal year (FY 2011) for political reasons. Democrats knew they were already in trouble for the 2010 election and another budget with increased spending and a $1+ trillion deficit would simply destroy any chances they thought they had. They couldn’t even pass a budget with some cuts for show out of fear this would discourage the Democrat base and reduce Democrat voter turnout, again hurting their election results. Instead, Mr. Obama and Democrat congressional leaders opted for continuing resolutions to keep spending at current levels, hoping voters wouldn’t notice. All Democrats had to do was pass a FY 2011 budget when they still held the majority in the House and we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
The article refers to “our hard-won human rights.” Given leftism is all about increasing government power at the expense of individual liberty, it would be interesting to learn which “hard-won human rights” leftists take credit for. Maybe it’s the “right” to be forced to buy something I don’t want, as we see in Obamacare. Or maybe it’s the “right” to be forced to join a union as a condition of employment.
The author writes of “this struggle for democracy.” Sure. Wisconsin voters spoke with their votes in November, but since Wisconsin Senate lefties don’t like what those voters said, the lefties chose to subvert “democracy” by running away to Illinois. For these folks, it appears “democracy” is OK only as long as lefties get their way. Running away appears to be gaining popularity with lefties when they don’t like election results. Early in the last decade, Texas Democrats ran away to Oklahoma when they lost the Texas House for the first time in over a hundred years and didn’t like the Republicans’ redistricting plan. Following Wisconsin’s lead, Indiana Democrats also ran away to Illinois to keep a right-to-work bill from being voted on. I’m only speculating, but you have to wonder if labor union management told Democrat fleebaggers in Indiana and Wisconsin to run or lose taxpayer campaign contributions laundered via labor union management. (I wonder who will be the first lefty to take offense at the term “fleebaggers.” I didn’t coin the term, but I have to admit it’s clever.)
Finally, apparently having worn out “neo-conservatism,” lefties now seem to prefer “neo-liberalism” as one of their boogeymen. I hope Thomas Finch gets the memo in time for his next letter to the editor.
In Peace, Friendship, Community, Cooperation, and Solidarity. <g>
© 2004-2011 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.