Comment by ericmay
13 hours ago
> I literally did not say that vaccine and vaccine adoption has anything to do with unions. Why would you ever think I did? It's an analogy.
???
> we don't need unions anymore are engaging with the status quo in the same way as people who say we don't need vaccines anymore.
> If you can't understand why I am comparing anti-union with anti-vax, then I think you don't really understand the point I am making about history, or about culture.
If you want to remove vaccines and these analogies that's fine but you're clearly doing something you're claiming you are not.
It's an analogy. In that sentence I'm not saying that one has to do with the other.
I am talking there about the relationship of people arguing against a concept with the status quo for that respective concept.
The way those arguments are made is similarly ignorant of history, is the simple point.
It's not that difficult. Really. Other people grasped it.
It's not a good analogy though. Unions aren't a clear public good.
> The way those arguments are made is similarly ignorant of history, is the simple point.
Yes and that point is rejected by me.
The comparison is the unambiguous gains for society union labour organisation achieved through industrial history, which was a clear public good, and what is lost if there are no longer unions to defend those gains.
Stuff can go backwards and currently in the USA absolutely is going backwards, at a federal, state and commercial level. Unions, even in their flawed American form, are a force pushing back on that.
You still need them. In just the same way that you still need continued vaccination to protect the gains made by vaccination.
I am obviously not bothered if you reject my points; I am disappointed with the way you argue, though.
4 replies →