Reply #247: scabs are a separate issue [View All]

[Two Americas]

"You say that employers are 'desperate', as though it's the responsibility of working people to take care of them. Whose side does that put YOU on?"

Quite simple. Latin American immigrants are the fastest growing group of new farm owners, as just one example. Does becoming a farm owner suddenly put them into the class of "the elites?"

Scabs are a separate issue from immigration. The fact that immigrants and scabs are sometimes the same people does not justify your generalizations.

"The current system is based on exploitation of desperate working people. I notice that you have nothing to say about that. Why not?"

Begging your pardon, but I would not, and did not say otherwise.

"Bringing in cheap labor in the form of desperate people from other countries helps prop up the current system. Why don't you have anything so say about that?"

No one is "bringing in" cheap labor, people are making their way here. No doubt people are being exploited. But they are not the ones who should be punished.

"Without those exploited people in the system, the elites running it would be forced to change it in some way, either by employing more local people, or changing how things are done. Why don't you tell us what you think would be the result of all the exploited immigrant labor disappearing? Eh? Tell us."

You jumped on one statement of mine - the only one you could get any leverage with. You lump all employers together and paint them all with the same brush. There are many small employers - as I said - who are no different from you and who are not in a position, even were they so inclined, to exploit workers the way that corporations can. I am sure that somewhere in your life you are also dependent upon and take for granted unskilled labor. many small employers are much closer to working class then they are to your "elites."

As for these following statements, I have no idea where you stand on those things. Your posts are vague and obscure. If I mischaracterized what you are trying to say, so be it. It was by best guess.

"You claim that I 'choose to say tyrannical rule by the few is the real world, so therefore we should not get too excited or fight.' Why don't you point out where I said we shouldn't fight? Hey? Do that."

OK. Whatever. It wasn't clear what you were saying. So we are to fight, but not to focus on class? I am confused.

"You claim that I 'defend the status quo and promote the upper class'. Walk us through where I do that. Tell us how you got that out of anything I said. Give us chapter and verse. Walk us through."

Again I am not sure what you were trying to say. saying that we should not talk about class favors the ruling class. No? Explain.

"You say that I'm 'claiming the public is too stupid to understand' the fundamental principles I listed. Again, point out where I said anything of the kind. Quote me. Chapter and verse."

I don't know. What were you saying then? It was not at all clear, and if I understood you incorrectly - good. I hope I did.