In the unfolding of recent events, well-informed citizens have likely noticed the hypocrisy that has shown through the actions and inactions of many affiliated with trade unions and the modern civil rights movement.
Most recently, this hypocrisy related to union practices could be seen in last month’s union protest of then-pending right-to-work legislation in Lansing at the Michigan State Capitol.
Just as is almost exclusively true with all public union activity, many of the protestors gathered in this assembly spewed insults and foul language and carried out violence against not only their outspoken detractors, but even against reserved individuals who they perceived might be in disagreement with their cause.
Two examples gaining much exposure involved Steven Crowder and Clint Tarver.
Steven Crowder, Fox News contributor, comedian, and political activist, is known for his irreverent and politically incorrect humor, as well as his outspoken conservative stances on practically every major current issue. That said, based on video captured at the event featuring his encounter with union protestors, he seemed to be on his best behavior. At least one of the union protestors, though, launched a profanity-ridden verbal attack on Crowder, only before launching a physical one on him that left Crowder with significant injuries.
Clint Tarver, on the other hand, was on the sidelines of the event, simply doing his job when he became a victim of the violence. Tarver had been hired by the pro-right-to-work group Americans for Prosperity to serve hotdogs in a tent set up for the organization at this event. Racial slurs were spouted at Tarver, who happens to be a black man, before his vending equipment and other property was overturned, trampled on, and destroyed. As he scrambled to try to salvage what he could of his property, a friend reportedly told him “You gotta get out of here.” It seems obvious that as the stirred-up protestors were looking for their next victim, he must have made for an easy target in that he was perceived to be associated with AFP. The fact that he was also a black man seems to have only fueled the fire of the attack, in that popular sentiment now tells us that black Americans who stand up for, or associate themselves with, conservative causes are somehow disloyal to their race (or, to quote a recent statement from a certain sports commentator, they are “not down with the cause.”) The objectives of this “cause” seem to become more painfully clear every day.
It is very telling that in just these two examples, so much typical liberal hypocrisy comes to light. The same liberal crowd that aligns themselves with union interests is also typically the one that presents themselves as the exclusive champions of free speech and assembly and of the modern civil rights movement. If that’s true, the attacks on these two men and others serve as another of many poor examples in showing their loyalty to these interests; and they seem to tell an entirely different story. The message of this mob of union thugs (and of most other liberals) seems to be: “We support your right to free speech and assembly as long as you agree with us and fall into the roles and stereotypes we’ve assigned to you.”
President Obama and various union officials and supporters have continually maintained that unions remain vital to the survival of certain industries, as well as regional, state, and national economies. On their watch and under their control, though, businesses, entire industries, and state economies have increasingly failed. The outcome has been no different for the auto industry in Detroit and for the state of Michigan, the birthplace of the UAW and the nation’s organized labor movement, under union control. As the unions have gained power and saturated the local market, industry has increasingly taken a downturn.
With this knowledge, union proponents continue to hide their selfish and power-hungry intentions behind the lies of supposed intentions for the good of the public and business majority. The fallout that follows hurts the economy and industry (at all levels), as well as the public at large and even union members themselves.
Well, it seems that the working public and state legislatures in Wisconsin, Indiana, and now Michigan are forming a consensus that right-to-work states allow for greater growth and opportunity and that union membership and dues are no longer necessary. Closed shops now seem to account for little meaningful workplace protection but only offer unequal promotion, waste, a decline in product and service quality, and a lack of marketplace competition as a return on their investment.
As it turned out, of course, in spite of all the threats and violence of these union thugs, Michigan became the nation’s 24th right-to-work state.
If these events alone are not enough to show the hypocrisy and destruction that is union control, the modern civil rights movement, and liberalism in general, then we need only to look into their history in this country.
While it’s certainly true that many involved in the efforts and in receiving the rewards of these causes have remained honest and sincere, the core of their power structure has historically been dishonest and self-serving; and so it also remains today.
As for unions, American unions can be traced back as far as 1786, when Philadelphian printers conducted the first recorded labor strike for higher wages. But the tradition of 20th century unionism was largely the work of the American Federation of Labor (AFL) and its leader, Samuel Gompers.
This movement, beginning in 1881, enjoyed a small but growing membership throughout the 1880’s and 1890’s. Gompers and his federation enjoyed their greatest influence, though, during WWI, when Democrat President Woodrow Wilson appointed Gompers to the Council of National Defense, a position he used as leverage in convincing the president to enable government support for trade unions and collective bargaining in WARTIME! As this may sound familiar and similar to the current relationship between our government and unions, it also shows that unethical union practices are nothing new.
In fact, on AFL-CIO’s own official website, it is admitted that Samuel Gompers “…socialized with a group of émigré socialists and labor reformers whom he would always credit for his commitment to trade unionism as the essential vehicle for bringing about social reform.”
Like me, do you remember a time when “socialism” and “socialists” were seen as dirty words that were best kept unspoken, held at bay, or at least kept in secret? They now seem to be gaining acceptance and viewed, by some, as words to associate with and to be proud of. Even so, socialism and communism have always lain at the root of many societal problems that have been unnecessarily kept alive until the modern day.
Even to my own dismay in some respects, much of the history of the civil rights movement has evolved from less-than-honorable legacies. This is not in reference to the brave souls who defied an evil system, at the risk of their own lives, to rid society of very real and dangerous racism (they are to be commended and honored), but to those who used this cause, like many others, for personal and political gain, generally to the detriment of those they claimed to protect and defend.
The American civil rights movement of the 20th century is often traced back to 1948 when President Truman signed Executive Order 9981, which states: “It is hereby declared to be the policy of the President that there shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services without regard to race, color, religion, or national origin.”
The next notable advance usually cited in this movement occurred on July 2, 1964, when Democrat President Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, only after facing alienation from a Republican Congress that penned and passed the bill.
The same Congress also passed the Voting Rights Act the next year.
Johnson then issued Executive Order 11246, which first enacted “affirmative action” in the workplace. This was apparently a presidential overreach intended to secure a personal, politically expedient stance for the civil rights movement. In actuality, it was and remains a very discriminatory policy that placed race above qualifications for prospective employees.
The Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, and the president’s executive order were all met with strong opposition and opposing votes from the president’s own Democrat party.
Many have seen through what they believe to have been obviously dishonest intentions on the part of President Johnson, based more upon personal, political, and party-line gain of power and money than upon civil rights or equality. Many more seem to speculate that this historical reality seems plausible.
To that effect, after weathering strong racist and segregationist resistance from fellow Democrats to his signing of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Lyndon Johnson is quoted in John Kessler’s Inside the White House as saying, “I’ll have those n*gg*rs voting Democrat for the next 200 years!” That’s not the sort of language we usually look for in a modern champion for civil rights!
In the person and presidency of Barack Obama, American liberals and Sharia law proponents find an unprecedented 21st century dream connection of possibilities. What a veiled imposter, thinly as it may be applied, this president has turned out to be.
We would all do well to prepare ourselves for the damage that such an American leader and commander-in-chief might inflict upon his own nation and the world.
In spite of this overly cautious era of political correctness, we ought to consider that this man, in some measure, shares similar appearance and DNA with those brave and peaceful civil freedom advocates of the 1960’s, but with demonstrated racially divisive, anti-Israel, and pro-Islamic allegiances that could not be further from the noble cause so bravely fought by those devoted men and women of history.
Ironically, in the face of this reality, the sitting president now invokes the name of the most honored leader of the civil rights movement, Martin Luther King, Jr., every time it is politically expedient to do so (and will evoke his memory, as he reportedly intends to use the “traveling Bible” of King in the inauguration ceremony to usher in his second term.)
It should be obvious to even newcomer students of American history that there is a pattern of government interference into public life that is always followed by failure and destruction. Although our government is always seeking new avenues for corruption (i.e. green energy incentives) that always end in failure, their fraudulent use of unionism and the civil rights movement has become their traditional institution of deception. Gun control now stands to be their next institution, capitalizing upon tragedies that could not be thwarted by the addition of yet another law to the already saturated legal system. As informed and concerned Americans, we should not only be aware of the tricks and trade of the left. But we should also be vigilantly involved in the political processes of our communities, states, and country; in regular communication with our representatives (because corruption knows no bounds); and always relying on the Creator and ultimate founder of America, our Almighty God.
Photo Credit: DonkeyHotey (Creative Commons)