Why do capitalists attack striking workers?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-12-2012, 06:32 AM
Why do capitalists attack striking workers?
When capitalist countries utilize the government tools to enforce their power this is usually called things like "free market" "free choice" or as a few people on this forum jokingly called capitalist relations between worker and capitalist as "voluntary".

What happens before the "free choice" or before it's "voluntary"

When farming was the main occupation in England during the early 1700's the government under pressure from wealthy elites began to implement laws making it more difficult to even own a farm and support ones self, again here the initial act isn't voluntary at all, one group uses it's tools to force another group into a situation. The decades of implementing these laws led to many people not owning farms but needing to survive, this created a work force that was totally reliant on wages to survive. The point of forcing people into becoming wage workers is usually not talked about by capitalists, they usually start their "voluntary" historical revisionism after that point.

The historical revisionism of capitalists also forget much more recent uses of government apparatus by the capitalist class to enforce it's power of the working class. In many industrialized countries in the early 1900's personally hired police forces to break up strikes and protests, again you guys call the capitalist/worker relationship as purely voluntary. Ronald Reagan ordered workers back to work one time that were striking, again you guys call the capitalist/worker relationship as a purely voluntary one.

U.S. foreign policy of propping up dictators that are friendly to corporations and that use force to limit labor rights groups and union activities in other countries, again you guys call the capitalist/worker relationship as voluntary.

Here is a nice "voluntary" (wink wink) story of capitalist and worker relationship. http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/12/18/t...niversity/ In Kazakhstan the government like many other capitalist governments open fire and attack workers on the behalf of the corporations to force and control the labor force.

When society is structured like it is under a capitalist economic system how can one say that any aspect of capitalism is a free choice when it comes to the working class or how is the relationship between worker and capitalist voluntary?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2012, 06:49 AM
RE: Why do capitalists attack striking workers?
(18-12-2012 06:32 AM)I and I Wrote:  When capitalist countries utilize the government tools to enforce their power this is usually called things like "free market" "free choice" or as a few people on this forum jokingly called capitalist relations between worker and capitalist as "voluntary".

What happens before the "free choice" or before it's "voluntary"

When farming was the main occupation in England during the early 1700's the government under pressure from wealthy elites began to implement laws making it more difficult to even own a farm and support ones self, again here the initial act isn't voluntary at all, one group uses it's tools to force another group into a situation. The decades of implementing these laws led to many people not owning farms but needing to survive, this created a work force that was totally reliant on wages to survive. The point of forcing people into becoming wage workers is usually not talked about by capitalists, they usually start their "voluntary" historical revisionism after that point.

The historical revisionism of capitalists also forget much more recent uses of government apparatus by the capitalist class to enforce it's power of the working class. In many industrialized countries in the early 1900's personally hired police forces to break up strikes and protests, again you guys call the capitalist/worker relationship as purely voluntary. Ronald Reagan ordered workers back to work one time that were striking, again you guys call the capitalist/worker relationship as a purely voluntary one.

U.S. foreign policy of propping up dictators that are friendly to corporations and that use force to limit labor rights groups and union activities in other countries, again you guys call the capitalist/worker relationship as voluntary.

Here is a nice "voluntary" (wink wink) story of capitalist and worker relationship. http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/12/18/t...niversity/ In Kazakhstan the government like many other capitalist governments open fire and attack workers on the behalf of the corporations to force and control the labor force.

When society is structured like it is under a capitalist economic system how can one say that any aspect of capitalism is a free choice when it comes to the working class or how is the relationship between worker and capitalist voluntary?


You misunderstand what was happening in England at that time. This was a process of changing a society from serfdom to freedom. It occurred over many years, in many stages.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2012, 07:12 AM
RE: Why do capitalists attack striking workers?
(18-12-2012 06:49 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(18-12-2012 06:32 AM)I and I Wrote:  When capitalist countries utilize the government tools to enforce their power this is usually called things like "free market" "free choice" or as a few people on this forum jokingly called capitalist relations between worker and capitalist as "voluntary".

What happens before the "free choice" or before it's "voluntary"

When farming was the main occupation in England during the early 1700's the government under pressure from wealthy elites began to implement laws making it more difficult to even own a farm and support ones self, again here the initial act isn't voluntary at all, one group uses it's tools to force another group into a situation. The decades of implementing these laws led to many people not owning farms but needing to survive, this created a work force that was totally reliant on wages to survive. The point of forcing people into becoming wage workers is usually not talked about by capitalists, they usually start their "voluntary" historical revisionism after that point.

The historical revisionism of capitalists also forget much more recent uses of government apparatus by the capitalist class to enforce it's power of the working class. In many industrialized countries in the early 1900's personally hired police forces to break up strikes and protests, again you guys call the capitalist/worker relationship as purely voluntary. Ronald Reagan ordered workers back to work one time that were striking, again you guys call the capitalist/worker relationship as a purely voluntary one.

U.S. foreign policy of propping up dictators that are friendly to corporations and that use force to limit labor rights groups and union activities in other countries, again you guys call the capitalist/worker relationship as voluntary.

Here is a nice "voluntary" (wink wink) story of capitalist and worker relationship. http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/12/18/t...niversity/ In Kazakhstan the government like many other capitalist governments open fire and attack workers on the behalf of the corporations to force and control the labor force.

When society is structured like it is under a capitalist economic system how can one say that any aspect of capitalism is a free choice when it comes to the working class or how is the relationship between worker and capitalist voluntary?


You misunderstand what was happening in England at that time. This was a process of changing a society from serfdom to freedom. It occurred over many years, in many stages.
You said I misunderstood something then you agreed with what I said? You capitalists have strange ways....

Drinking Beverage

Are you implying that there was no concerted effort at all by politicians/elites to implement the laws that were put in place that led to the creation of a landless group of people that were formerly on farms and self sustainable?

Have you heard of NAFTA or farm subsidies in the U.S.?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2012, 07:21 AM
RE: Why do capitalists attack striking workers?
(18-12-2012 06:49 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(18-12-2012 06:32 AM)I and I Wrote:  When capitalist countries utilize the government tools to enforce their power this is usually called things like "free market" "free choice" or as a few people on this forum jokingly called capitalist relations between worker and capitalist as "voluntary".

What happens before the "free choice" or before it's "voluntary"

When farming was the main occupation in England during the early 1700's the government under pressure from wealthy elites began to implement laws making it more difficult to even own a farm and support ones self, again here the initial act isn't voluntary at all, one group uses it's tools to force another group into a situation. The decades of implementing these laws led to many people not owning farms but needing to survive, this created a work force that was totally reliant on wages to survive. The point of forcing people into becoming wage workers is usually not talked about by capitalists, they usually start their "voluntary" historical revisionism after that point.

The historical revisionism of capitalists also forget much more recent uses of government apparatus by the capitalist class to enforce it's power of the working class. In many industrialized countries in the early 1900's personally hired police forces to break up strikes and protests, again you guys call the capitalist/worker relationship as purely voluntary. Ronald Reagan ordered workers back to work one time that were striking, again you guys call the capitalist/worker relationship as a purely voluntary one.

U.S. foreign policy of propping up dictators that are friendly to corporations and that use force to limit labor rights groups and union activities in other countries, again you guys call the capitalist/worker relationship as voluntary.

Here is a nice "voluntary" (wink wink) story of capitalist and worker relationship. http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/12/18/t...niversity/ In Kazakhstan the government like many other capitalist governments open fire and attack workers on the behalf of the corporations to force and control the labor force.

When society is structured like it is under a capitalist economic system how can one say that any aspect of capitalism is a free choice when it comes to the working class or how is the relationship between worker and capitalist voluntary?


You misunderstand what was happening in England at that time. This was a process of changing a society from serfdom to freedom. It occurred over many years, in many stages.
Don't encourage it Chas.

I don't talk gay, I don't walk gay, it's like people don't even know I'm gay unless I'm blowing them.
[Image: 10h27hu.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2012, 07:30 AM (This post was last modified: 18-12-2012 07:39 AM by FZUMedia.)
RE: Why do capitalists attack striking workers?
Because when someone is paid artificially high, someone has to be paid artificially low- Unions seem to believe that their work means more money to base line workers and less to executives, although it backfires completely; ultimately it creates more disparity in wages since someone else will get the end of the stick, namely the outsourced workers in china, india, etc get paid artificially low. And in public sector unions, it often means more debt, which means the unborn and future generations have to pay off the workers living beyond their means- basically your fellow workers in another area/country get paid less and you get paid higher because you make more noise. The last person that will get a pay cut are the executives/investors- they are way too smart for that, and no new tax, no amount of screaming can stop that since they are already thinking 10 steps ahead of you.

Even in USSR, when complete market control took place, the oligarchs of the pre-soviet Russia migrated to high ranks in the communist party and what ended up happening is that the oligarchs had even more power and wealth than ever before.

If you try to play this game that the super elite play- you will lose- they will outsmart you every time.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes FZUMedia's post
18-12-2012, 07:31 AM
RE: Why do capitalists attack striking workers?
(18-12-2012 07:21 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(18-12-2012 06:49 AM)Chas Wrote:  You misunderstand what was happening in England at that time. This was a process of changing a society from serfdom to freedom. It occurred over many years, in many stages.
Don't encourage it Chas.


I know. The OP was so ignorant, I just couldn't help myself. I'm done.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
18-12-2012, 08:12 AM
RE: Why do capitalists attack striking workers?
(18-12-2012 07:31 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(18-12-2012 07:21 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  Don't encourage it Chas.


I know. The OP was so ignorant, I just couldn't help myself. I'm done.
Of course, when one is faced with facts that the relationship between worker and capitalist is not a voluntary one and it never originated in that way, it is better to just have a circle jerk with other people who don't care about facts or history.

Have you heard of NAFTA? oh yeah that's right, you want to get out of the conversation now because everyone knows now that farm subsidies in the U.S. and NAFTA led to a mass exodus of former famers that couldn't find jobs to then migrate to the U.S. Once again proving my point that the relationship between worker and capitalist is never a voluntary one, as in the case of the affects of NAFTA and many other past examples.

Oh yeah that's right, you are too busy ignoring history to be able to stay in the conversation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2012, 08:17 AM
RE: Why do capitalists attack striking workers?
(18-12-2012 06:32 AM)I and I Wrote:  When capitalist countries utilize the government tools to enforce their power this is usually called things like "free market" "free choice" or as a few people on this forum jokingly called capitalist relations between worker and capitalist as "voluntary".

What happens before the "free choice" or before it's "voluntary"

When farming was the main occupation in England during the early 1700's the government under pressure from wealthy elites began to implement laws making it more difficult to even own a farm and support ones self, again here the initial act isn't voluntary at all, one group uses it's tools to force another group into a situation. The decades of implementing these laws led to many people not owning farms but needing to survive, this created a work force that was totally reliant on wages to survive. The point of forcing people into becoming wage workers is usually not talked about by capitalists, they usually start their "voluntary" historical revisionism after that point.

The historical revisionism of capitalists also forget much more recent uses of government apparatus by the capitalist class to enforce it's power of the working class. In many industrialized countries in the early 1900's personally hired police forces to break up strikes and protests, again you guys call the capitalist/worker relationship as purely voluntary. Ronald Reagan ordered workers back to work one time that were striking, again you guys call the capitalist/worker relationship as a purely voluntary one.

U.S. foreign policy of propping up dictators that are friendly to corporations and that use force to limit labor rights groups and union activities in other countries, again you guys call the capitalist/worker relationship as voluntary.

Here is a nice "voluntary" (wink wink) story of capitalist and worker relationship. http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/12/18/t...niversity/ In Kazakhstan the government like many other capitalist governments open fire and attack workers on the behalf of the corporations to force and control the labor force.

When society is structured like it is under a capitalist economic system how can one say that any aspect of capitalism is a free choice when it comes to the working class or how is the relationship between worker and capitalist voluntary?


That's one of the things I do not like about communism is the splitting that happens.

There are only two classes proletariat and bourgeoisie, and that just isn't how life works, it's a continuum between the two, not polar opposites only.

What is really needed is a law establishing that as a company grows, so to does it's responsibility to it's workers and society. Capitalism is missing a bill of societal rights, that restrains them.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2012, 08:21 AM
RE: Why do capitalists attack striking workers?
(18-12-2012 08:12 AM)I and I Wrote:  
(18-12-2012 07:31 AM)Chas Wrote:  I know. The OP was so ignorant, I just couldn't help myself. I'm done.
Of course, when one is faced with facts that the relationship between worker and capitalist is not a voluntary one and it never originated in that way, it is better to just have a circle jerk with other people who don't care about facts or history.

Have you heard of NAFTA? oh yeah that's right, you want to get out of the conversation now because everyone knows now that farm subsidies in the U.S. and NAFTA led to a mass exodus of former famers that couldn't find jobs to then migrate to the U.S. Once again proving my point that the relationship between worker and capitalist is never a voluntary one, as in the case of the affects of NAFTA and many other past examples.

Oh yeah that's right, you are too busy ignoring history to be able to stay in the conversation.
No, it's because you bring an agenda to every question, and pose them in such a way that they are "when did you stop beating your wife?" questions.

If you would like to actually discuss things, it would be refreshing.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
18-12-2012, 08:22 AM
RE: Why do capitalists attack striking workers?
(18-12-2012 08:21 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(18-12-2012 08:12 AM)I and I Wrote:  Of course, when one is faced with facts that the relationship between worker and capitalist is not a voluntary one and it never originated in that way, it is better to just have a circle jerk with other people who don't care about facts or history.

Have you heard of NAFTA? oh yeah that's right, you want to get out of the conversation now because everyone knows now that farm subsidies in the U.S. and NAFTA led to a mass exodus of former famers that couldn't find jobs to then migrate to the U.S. Once again proving my point that the relationship between worker and capitalist is never a voluntary one, as in the case of the affects of NAFTA and many other past examples.

Oh yeah that's right, you are too busy ignoring history to be able to stay in the conversation.
No, it's because you bring an agenda to every question, and pose them in such a way that they are "when did you stop beating your wife?" questions.

If you would like to actually discuss things, it would be refreshing.
you did it again.

I don't talk gay, I don't walk gay, it's like people don't even know I'm gay unless I'm blowing them.
[Image: 10h27hu.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes earmuffs's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: