From: Charles Hixson (charleshixsn@earthlink.net)
Date: Tue Oct 29 2002 - 17:21:56 MST
Charlie Stross wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 12:22:42PM -0500, Dehede011@aol.com wrote:
>...
>
> There's also the
>instinct towards collective self-defense, which crops up quite clearly
>in rhetoric about the need to keep the uppity workers under control. It
>seems fairly clear to me that a well-motivated work force with a stake
>in the profits will out-perform a bunch of serfs: which makes it rather
>peculiar that conservative interests seem obsessed with forcing liquidity
>in the labour market by applying the stick and not the carrot.
>
>
But this is also clearly individual self defense. If the workers at one
organization see that they could do better by moving to another, then
they may well do so. No assumption of collective self defense is
needed. Merely the assumption that the defender benefits by workers
being employed more cheaply than they could earn for themselves (or that
he fears they would believe the same).
Somehow this reminds me of quotes from earlier decades about "the
servant problem", which basically meant that the servants were finding
better jobs, and either leaving, or not applying for positions.
> ...
>
>-- Charlie
>
>
-- -- Charles Hixson Gnu software that is free, The best is yet to be.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:52 MST