Well, I wouldn’t call them scabs actually. That’s just encouraging infighting amongst the proles. When we have ‘the right to work’ campaigners being churned out by unemployment and elite-ownership of the materials of production, and strikers attempting to address exploitative conditions, they tend to work against each other don’t they.
In a way, both form a symbiotic union that help maintain the conditions that produce either. Prior to being a Striker, one, by way of placard or job application form, is part of the former cohort. Upon employment, they make up the potential Strike-force of the morrow – and thus unwittingly provide potential gainful employment for those seeking it. I suppose the only way to end this mutually compromising union is to seriously consider one’s ‘right to own what one works on’ as opposed to simply seeking ‘the right to work’.
Additionally, Royal Mail group chief executive Adam Crozier says:
“"We are continuing to urge the union to halt its appalling and unjustified attack on customers. At the same time, we are absolutely determined to do everything we can to minimise delays to customers' mail.”
Read the original article by The Guardian without leaving this page by clicking here ->Show
I recall this approach being utilised by those justifying the ‘war on terror’ or efforts to put down the IRA on the basis of its effect on ‘innocent civilians’. In either case, the possibly legitimate grievances of these sectors are cast aside by way of attention being drawn to the plight of those whose interests aren’t directly affected by the actions of the tyrants-that-be. And Nick Clegg of the Liberal Democrats steps into this as a 'moderate' who acknowledges that the strikers have a 'legitimate concern' but it is still unconscionable as, 'taking the whole country hostage like this is the wrong thing to do.' [bbc] One can again see the media onslaught against the strikers in the ITN news video below.
So now, grievances are being portrayed as an irrational ‘attack on customers’ by, um, ‘postal jihadists’ whom are bent on 'taking the whole country hostage'. It's ‘appalling’ and ‘unjustified’ how these strikers conducting an ‘attack on customers’ whilst Royal Mail presents itself as the saviour of the postally-challenged masses. Who cares about the 'cause' right. What we have here is the elite-serving contraction of empathy to include none other than the self - which fits in very well with the strategy of dividing a people right down to the very individual for the purpose of control.
Like the war-on-terror-rists, we are seeing an attempt to localise people's appreciation of a phenomenon by focusing them on how they are personally affected as opposed to the cause of it all. This way, people can stop looking for elite-indicting causes and just focus on their own losses – and its not like the complementary ethos of both capitalism and nationalism does not already provide a fertile bed for the flowering of such self-absorbed propensities. This 'Confucianisation' of the United Kingdom has just got to stop or we risk turning into one of those tin-pot asian fascist states that relies on popular absorption in self-interests for the elite to ply their self-aggrandizing traits with impunity.
And finally, Royal Mail's attempt to forestall the strikers taking them to court for employing workers in their stead is being justified as being required to clear 'backlogs' and contend with the seasonal rise in increase in mail volume. The question that has to be asked is if this same number would be employed if it wasn't for the strike. Such ludicrous reasoning is clearly beyond the pale of reason.
On a side note, Apple's having an ‘app’ for this-and-that is a way of narrowing the attention of the masses to deem something a problem only if it can be satisfied with an ‘app’. If not, then it is not worthy of concern, and all problems that cannot be addressed with the said ‘app’ can then be deemed to be ‘unjustified’ and ‘appalling’. In either case, the elite is left unscathed as people are drawn toward how they are personally affected in any event and not bother with 'causes'. This may not be the intention of ‘app’ producers, but I wonder if it is fast becoming its consequence.
according2,
ed
[in case anyone is wondering, no, I do not support terrorism of the national or transnational kind. But I do support an objective consideration of things despite one’s personal interests. I am always appalled by attacks on civilians. But I’m not averse to appreciating this attack as having a cause that is oftentimes located in the actions of the people we put into power.]
3 thoughts:
I absolutely agree with you Ed.Methink one should focus on the cause of the issue and try to resolve it rather than addressing the effect on the event.
It does not seem wise to spend money on untrained temporary workers instead of addressing the concerns of its staff and get the permanent staff back to work.
It's to weaken the unity of the Labour Unions.
Singapore Stylo !!
Post a Comment
The Inquisitive venture is a collaborative one. Let's collaborate.
Ad hominem is fine so long as it is accompanied with an argument, as opposed to being confused for an argument. In the latter case, deletion will follow.