Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Labor Day

dr sardonicus's picture
Submitted by dr sardonicus on Sun, 08/31/2008 - 9:37pm
Tags: 
Labor


Lincoln the railsplitter.

My Labor Day post from last year is a rare good 'un, and I can't improve on it. I recommend it to anyone who wants a quick 'n' easy overview of the history of American labor.

Abraham Lincoln on labor (Emphasis mine):

"The world is agreed that labor is the source from which human wants are mainly supplied. There is no dispute upon this point. From this point, however, men immediately diverge. Much disputation is maintained as to the best way of applying and controlling the labor element. By some it is assumed that labor is available only in connection with capital – that nobody labors, unless somebody else owning capital, somehow, by the use of it, induces him to do it. Having assumed this, they proceed to consider whether it is best that capital shall hire laborers, and thus induce them to work by their own consent, or buy them, and drive them to it, without their consent. Having proceeded so far, they naturally conclude that all laborers are naturally either hired laborers or slaves. They further assume that whoever is once a hired laborer, is fatally fixed in that condition for life; and thence again, that his condition is as bad as, or worse than, that of a slave. This is the "mud-sill" theory. But another class of reasoners hold the opinion that there is no such relation between capital and labor as assumed; that there is no such thing as a free man being fatally fixed for life in the condition of a hired laborer; that both these assumptions are false, and all inferences from them groundless. They hold that labor is prior to, and independent of, capital; that, in fact, capital is the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed; that labor can exist without capital, but that capital could never have existed without labor. Hence they hold that labor is the superior – greatly the superior – of capital. They do not deny that there is, and probably always will be, a relation between labor and capital. The error, as they hold, is in assuming that the whole labor of the world exists within that relation. A few men own capital; and that few avoid labor themselves, and with their capital hire or buy another few to labor for them. A large majority belong to neither class – neither work for others, nor have others working for them. Even in all our slave States except South Carolina, a majority of the whole people of all colors are neither slaves nor masters. In these free States, a large majority are neither hirers nor hired. Men, with their families – wives, sons and daughters – work for themselves, on their farms, in their houses, and in their shops, taking the whole product to themselves, and asking no favors of capital on the one hand, nor of hirelings or slaves on the other. It is not forgotten that a considerable number of persons mingle their own labor with capital – that is, labor with their own hands and also buy slaves or hire free men to labor for them; but this is only a mixed, and not a distinct, class. No principle stated is disturbed by the existence of this mixed class. Again, as has already been said, the opponents of the "mud-sill" theory insist that there is not, of necessity, any such thing as the free hired laborer being fixed to that condition for life. There is demonstration for saying this. Many independent men in this assembly doubtless a few years ago were hired laborers. And their case is almost, if not quite, the general rule. The prudent, penniless beginner in the world labors for wages awhile, saves a surplus with which to buy tools or land for himself, then labors on his own account another while, and at length hires another new beginner to help him. This, say its advocates, is free labor – the just, and generous, and prosperous system, which opens the way for all, gives hope to all, and energy, and progress, and improvement of condition to all."

Who's going to say that today? Barack Obama? John McCain? Joe Biden? Sarah Palin?

More Lincoln:

"All that harms labor is treason to America. No line can be drawn between these two. If any man tells you he loves America, yet he hates labor, he is a liar. If a man tells you he trusts America, yet fears labor, he is a fool."

The transformation of Labor Day into another generic American patriotic holiday greatly displeases this old union man.

(Crossposted at Pole Hill Sanitarium.)

0
No votes yet

Comments

lambert's picture
Submitted by lambert on

That's what we need today -- The Party of Lincoln!

[ ] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

daily democrat's picture
Submitted by daily democrat on

certainly deserves the repetition. Reading Lincoln's words not only thrills me, but also educates me. I didn't know he thought so deeply about the relationship between capitalism and labor, and I also didn't know about how he'd connected his ideas about that relationship to the practice of slavery.

You are right, world leaders today pay lip-service to Lincoln, but none seem able or willing to emulate his level of self-education in order to achieve such content-rich eloquence. I suppose they think they'd be wasting their time if they tried. For some reason, Lincoln didn't simplify his ideas in order to appeal to a mass audience. I don't think many world leaders today trust audience intelligence the way that Lincoln did.

Sarah's picture
Submitted by Sarah on

fictional, yet based in facts (from before BushII's first term). The UMWA used to be a power in the land. Like it or not, before Reagan this country did have a strong respect for work, and jobs. The US that Eric Flint writes about in his 1632 series of books is that America, not the one we have today. It was a richer and more free America by an order of magnitude; and it was only 8 years ago.

The years since 1981 have seen a steady erosion of the power of organized labor in politics in the US. Some of the same power that broke the back of the Soviet hold on Poland needs to be reinfused into the US, IMNVHO.

Oh, and by the by: "stockholder expectations" = leeching.

chicago dyke's picture
Submitted by chicago dyke on

the fall of the USSR must have been in part at least due to the erosion of the Ideal Marxist Work Ethic. my understanding is that by the end of it, people in the USSR aquired many things in their lives by looting, faking, and otherwise manipulating the system that had come to fail to deliver all that it promised. cronism by any other name, and all that.

today, in the US, the work ethic is startlingly similar. ponzi scheme, outright stealing from the company till, a scam-economy in which the only winners are those who can fuck a lot of people over and get away with the cash before they are caught.

my dad (a russia expert in his army days) tells an interesting story about the USSR. 'a train starts out in moscow headed to siberia, loaded with gov't provided supplies. at every stop along the way, "inspectors" would fail to notice that someone had lightened the load just a little bit. by the time the train reaches it destination, it's mostly empty. but the official receiving it is not surprised, and the official who'd made the original request for the supplies expected nothing more.' dad says this sort of thing happened a great deal in the later days.

anyway, the point i'm getting at is that a strong work ethic, one in which people take pride in fair contribution for fair distribution, is essential for any functional society. when that ends, society declines, it's a matter of luck and will to what depth things will sink after that. i worry we've passed a critical point here; so few seem to believe in "honest work," anymore, and understand that the law doesn't apply to the uberrich, so why should people beneath them bother with it?

Submitted by gob on

"We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us."

Sorry, I forget the source. I read a lot of samizdat lit in the '80s. Great stuff.

Policy not party!

Sarah's picture
Submitted by Sarah on

Abraham Lincoln wrote:
labor is prior to, and independent of, capital; that, in fact, capital is the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed; that labor can exist without capital, but that capital could never have existed without labor. Hence they hold that labor is the superior – greatly the superior – of capital. They do not deny that there is, and probably always will be, a relation between labor and capital. The error, as they hold, is in assuming that the whole labor of the world exists within that relation.

I submit, ladies and gentlemen and others, that no labor in the world has been so disrespected as the labor of the average woman, historically -- because she has not been paid with money for her work in the home and on behalf of her family. Today we see examples of disrespect towards extraordinary women, and are supposed to understand that the way of the world will always prefer a man -- even one underqualified -- as a leader; even one hostile to the needs of the people he aspires to lead.

But this is not new. The Founding Fathers made no mention of women as persons in the Constitution. They were not valued even as much as "Indians not taxed," or slaves, who were counted as 3/5ths as valuable as 'other Persons'.

We are never to think of the labor of women as valuable, then, even when that labor brings new life into the world -- the new life of a garden no less so than of a wanted and beloved child -- let alone the birth of a child whose future is not so guaranteed emotionally or financially as are the daughters of Barack Obama or Sarah Palin. We are never to consider the aspirations of women for their children to equal the aspirations of men for their empires. We are never to recognize that without the skills and attention and labor of women, much of what we take for granted today would not exist.

What of the legacy of Nightingale in public health? Long eclipsed by the work of men who built upon it. What of the legacy of Curie in advancing science and our understanding of radioactivity? Long buried beneath the 'genius' of men who turned uranium into the ultimate weapon.

The wonders of George Washington Carver's genius and Harriet Tubman's courage are not diminished by the color of their skin; yet the world does not value them as it does those whose work has done less lasting good. That I fail to understand why is my failing; but that we fail to advocate equally for recognition and respect for Carver and Tubman and Nightingale and Curie marks our much-ballyhooed blogosphere as refusing to acknowledge its failures, IMNVHO.

Damon's picture
Submitted by Damon on

Labor is very near and dear, and I've been so disappointed in recent years to hear many Democrats bashing labor as if they were Republicans. Labor still matters, and labor will always matter so long as their is someone left to do it.

Submitted by ohio on

How many of you praising labor pay the people you hire union scale for their work? None of that bullshit second-hand stuff---I'm talking money out of your pocket and into that of someone you hired.

chicago dyke's picture
Submitted by chicago dyke on

altho i rarely can afford to, as you say, "hire people," when i do, i always do at rates i'd want if i were in their shooz. i'm thinking of the last "cleaning lady" we hired to clean up after a Major Party we hosted (oh, if only i could relate that insanity to you all in text).

working people are the best people, period. i know this because i've been one, and i know some. equal pay is its own reward, and nothing can do more to expand the progressive base than reaching out, with cash, to those who "serve" you. treat them like you want to be treated, and you'll learn something.

did you see my flooring post? anything you have to suggest is greatly welcome, beauty.

leah's picture
Submitted by leah on

And wonderful comments, too. I always knew your Sardonicus moniker and point of view is a way of keeping your faith in the magnificent ideals of our founding documents even when the reality is so hideously contrary to what we say we believe - what I like to call the china in the bull shop.

Ohio, I don't have much occasion to hire people, but some friends did persuade me recently to employ someone once a week to help me keep my apartment clean and relatively orderly. I pay this charming woman from El Salvador twenty-five dollars an hour, and she's worth every penny of it. In fact, she's become a friend, She also works for my dear friend, Rosalie, whose garden has sometimes shown up here at Corrente. My Salvadorian friend is a single mother who has raised a wonderful daughter, who was getting ready to apply to colleges for admission in the fall of this year. Rosalie and her niece, Marde, decided to even the playing field and so they paid for Carolee to take one of those prep courses that prepares students to take the College Boards. I'm thrilled to be able to say that Carolee has won and accepted a scholarship to attend the University of California at Santa Barbara. On the other hand, it is precisely the point of liberal progressive ideas that the playing field should be evened out for all the Carolees, hence the value of union contracts and the minimum wage, which should be a lot less minimum than it is.

Turlock