Download a Permanent Printable PDF Version of This Article.
Vic Biorseth, Saturday, February 26, 2011
To fully understand the depth of the growing anti-union sentiment in America, you have to understand the core mission and true purpose of the organized labor movement, which is not what many rank-and-file union members think it is. The initial design and the initial motivational principle for the modern organized labor movement is spelled out in the closing lines of the Communist Manifesto. Allow me to paraphrase, in modern English, those infamous, inflammatory words of Karl Marx:
Those words were written in 1848, and they hit the world like a bombshell. All Communist organizing aimed at world revolution begins with low level, local community organizing, and the first community Communism ever sought to organize was labor. But the organizers rarely identify themselves as Communists or, as revolutionaries, or as anything other than labor organizers, working solely for the good of labor, acting as a counter-force to the “exploitation” of labor by the demonized bosses.
Divide and conquer is the name of the game. To accomplish Marx’s goals, society must be divided. The first place Marxism began to instill a sense of division and promote the beginnings of class warfare into the subconscious collective mind of any society involved the relationship between employee and employer. The idea is to create bogus divisions – classes, if you will – of citizens of a country, and then set them against each other, to lay the groundwork of instability and internal animosity leading to conditions ripe for revolution.
Community Organizers of the labor union variety rarely if ever publicly invoke any part of the Communist Manifesto other than the insidious WORKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE! They don’t want to be up front about what they are. You may have wondered why so many big labor unions have names that include words like United, and International. It’s not hard to figure out. The scope is global; it always was. The local union is not interested in merely recruiting the employees of Grandma’s Pizzeria, because Grandma is somehow exploiting them and they are not getting a fair wage. The local union is not really local, because it intends to recruit all employees of all pizzerias, whether they feel exploited or not. And, it intends to grow its own scope, and thus recruit employees of businesses other than pizzerias.
And, it intends to link-arms with other locals and other unions, in solidarity against all of the demonized owners of or investors in business. That’s how national, and perhaps one day international union strikes may be orchestrated, as we have seen in Greece, and as we are now seeing in Wisconsin.
Public sector labor unions, as seen in the current Wisconsin teacher situation, oppose not the bosses of any private business, but the taxpayers. They oppose us. Their pay and their benefits come out of the taxpayer; so do their deducted union dues. We are paying them to do this to us, and we – you and I – are paying their union dues, out of our tax dollars. Every union in America gives humongous contributions, out of their collected membership dues, which the taxpayer provided, directly to the political Party of their choice, which is the Communist Party. I mean Democrat. That taxpayer supplied public sector union money is the lifeblood of the Democrat Party in America, and the Democrat Party may be expected to stop working, shut down the entire constitutional process and go to actual warfare to prevent the stoppage of that big union cash flow.
Wisconsin union teachers, and Wisconsin Democrat lawmakers, both, have amply proved their animosity toward the rule of law, the Constitution and the established Democratic process. Wisconsin Senators actually act to defeat the established Democratic process and oppose the voters of their own state. That their actions are anti-American is just crystal clear. They act in open defiance of the voting public, and the tidal wave of citizen outrage at their open display of personal greed, selfishness, political corruption and wild spending of other people’s money. They would rather spend their state, and their nation, into bankruptcy than give up on any part of the “right” of collective bargaining, or give up one penny in pay or benefits, or one penny in union political contributions.
They actually hate America that much.
The Useful Idiot devoted union member who does not see the relationship to Marxism, has been tricked into a relationship of animosity with the one who pays his wages. The reason a man goes into business is to make a better life, which means, profit. So the purpose of the business is to produce profit. The devoted union supporter has been tricked into believing that the moral purpose of the business is to provide income and benefits to employees, at the expense of profit, which is considered to be evil. He doesn’t recognize that this is Marxist morality, or that it is logically upside down. He comes to work against the profitability of the business that pays him to work for it’s success. He thereby dooms the business that provides his job, while singing solidarity forever. His loyalty is to his union, not to his own employer.
I wrote about unions before, in the Argument Against Unions page. I copied Solzhenitsyn’s famous speech to American labor onto a page on this site, in the Solzhenitsyn Speaks page. Things are now coming to a head.
It is time to take off the gloves. We need legislation, at both state and federal level, to eliminate and make illegal
If government employees want to join or continue to belong to a union, that’s fine; they can pay their own dues, without any payroll deduction done by their employers. If employees want to petition for a raise or increase in benefits, they are perfectly free to do so, but not through any collective bargaining. They do not own the taxpayers.
Private industry should look at the conditions unions have brought to America and to all industry, and consider similar actions toward private sector unions. Government, including courts, should favor business over Communist organization on a case by case basis.
Marxist community organizing, which began with the labor movement, has infected many, many areas of human activity. The whole Green Movement; various student movements; civil rights movements; the environmental movement; the homosexual movement; the abortion movement; there is little if anything left out. Government dares to tell us what light bulbs to use, what to eat, what kind of cars to buy, or even make; there is no end to what our own government tells us to do. We are supposed to be free.
Note that whenever you see things blowing up somewhere, which is now a daily event, the first ones into the street, the first ones organized, the first ones who move at the drop of a hat are the unions. Look at Greece, and so many other countries. Look at the national strikes. Look at the national shut-downs. Students will get out there too, but note well that labor always leads the way.
It’s time to take the unions down.
Seek the Truth; find the Way; live the Life; please God and live forever.
Smart-Assed Acronym Hover-Link Footnotes: For the convenience of those readers using devises that lack a mouse, these footnotes are provided for all webpages, in case any webpage contains any hover-links. (If you don't have a mouse, you can't "hover" it over a link without clicking just to see the simple acronym interpretation.)SLIMC1 Secularist Liberal Intellectual Media Complex
Culture=Religion+Politics; Who Are We? Vic Biorseth
The Brilliantly Conceived Organization of the USA; Vic Biorseth
Return to the BLOG page
Return to the HOME PAGE
Respond to This Article Below The Last Comment
Date: Fri Apr 27 09:14:27 2012
Hey man, you are way off base here. Unions don't see a business owner's profits as immoral, they simply believe that employees deserve a fair wage and good working conditions arrived at through negotiation. And the labor movement has nothing to do with communism, no more than modern Catholicism has anything to do with the Inquisition. I really think that you need to do a bit more reading of history, because from what I can see, your views are very badly informed. In particular I would advise you to look into how coal miners and other industrial laborers were treated prior to the Union Movement gaining strength. Putting a worker's safety at risk IS immoral and that is exactly what happened on a massive scale.
Date: Fri Apr 27 21:02:36 2012
From: Vic Biorseth
Yes, yes, I’m sure all early coal operators fully intended to cripple, maim and kill all their employees, simply because it makes such good business sense.
When you read history, Chris, read it with an open mind and consider both sides in any contentious issue. And you might try historical sources other than the literature put out by organized national and international unions, or other Communist organizations.
The free market determines “fair” wages and conditions far better than any anti-company union or other subversive organization, or any government. In the end, if Communism wins, and we’re all working together in the great collective commune, do you think miners (or anyone else) will be making more, or less, than they’re making now? (Hint: Everybody’s making $20 per month in Cuba.)
Date: Sat Apr 28 18:25:56 2012
The history of the abuses of the coal industry are well documented for anyone to learn. Obviously you have pretended to really understand what the labor movement is really about. Do business really pay people what the market will bear? NO! They pay as LITTLE as they can get. And as long as they can find someone to work for LESS they will take them. What organized labor does is provide the common worker a voice in the workplace. Ask any Wal-Mart manager what he must do if he hears about any union organizing. Threats, intimidation, along with physical danger of the employees involved are part of an overall scheme to keep the workers "in line". Wal-Mart could pay all of their employees $50 dollars an hour and still be profitable. Besides, all the babies you want to save from Abortion makes you a good person. But as soon as that Baby is born, the "free market" takes over. Cause you wouldn't want a penny of your tax dollars to pay for the welfare of that baby or it's mother.
Date: Sat May 05 15:28:00 2012
From: Vic Biorseth
As much as I hate to pop anyone’s happy little equality and fairness balloon, employers pay as little as they can get away with, and employees demand as much as they can get away with. That's the way it works. It's called competition, for jobs, and for available labor. Nobody, including me, likes a monopoly, on either side. Collusion among industry captains is as much despised here as collusion among unions to bring down whole industries and even whole nations.
The very idea that Wal-Mart could or should pay all employees $50 per hour is simply ludicrous. Why not $1,000 per hour? What would that do to the price of any and every particular item sold at Wal-Mart? Show me the evidence that Wal-Mart threatened any form of violence toward any employee. That is a union tactic used to keep members (and non-members) in line. You’re just making this stuff up.
Show me the item in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution, or anywhere else in the Constitution, that requires a federal tax to support babies, or mothers, or welfare of any kind. It isn’t there.
Say what you will, I will not support unions, welfare, or anything else that came out of the Communist Manifesto. I mean Democrat Party Platform.
Date: Sun May 06 18:32:06 2012
THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare , and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Date: Mon May 07 05:49:31 2012
From: Vic Biorseth
Welfare: From middle-English phrases wel faren; fare thee wel.
Synonyms: good, interest, weal, well-being.
Definition 1: The state of doing well especially in respect to good fortune, happiness, well-being, or prosperity.
Definition 2: Aid in the form of money or necessities for those in need. Definition 3 (modern-English): Agency or program that distributes aid to needy.
The paragraph you quoted is called the preamble of the Constitution; it is the lead-in, or the introduction, explaining what the Constitution is and why it is being enacted. As such, it is not law; it is the preamble to the law. What follows it is the law.
The only other place the word welfare is used is in the opening line of Article 1 Section 8, as follows:
The Framers were clearly speaking about the providing for the common defense and general welfare of the whole United States, not of the needy only. And they intended the first definition, not the last, which did not exist yet. In America, the general welfare of the public has been a roaring historical success because of the unique rights, endowed by God, of
Identified in our founding document, the Declaration of Independence, and supplemented by the specific individual citizen rights spelled out in the rest of the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights. When citizens enjoy these rights, they may be expected to fare well on their own, as they historically have done.
You may be thinking of the Constitution of the Soviet Union. They didn’t fare so well there; re-check your history. Bottom line here is that neither the United States nor Wal-Mart has any legal obligation to spoon-feed you, lead you around by the nose or wipe your butt for you. That’s what your mommy is for. The American working place is for grown-ups who have the right and the ability to take care of themselves and their families, and to be charitable.
Date: Mon May 07 07:24:02 2012
I understand that you take your political beliefs from the Christian Bible. If Christ were a carpenter today, would he work union? Absolutely. What did Christ tell us to do? "...feed the hungry, clothe the naked, give comfort to those that are in hospitals and prisons." 37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ 40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ How much better it is to help the workers than by paying them a decent wage and healthcare? How much more Christian can you get than that? How about the Children of these working people? The real problem in America is that all the money is at the top. Now, how do you get that money to the bottom? Cause that's the way our economy works. As long as the lower classes have some money to spend, our economy booms. When America was about 1/3rd unionized( 1950's)America was prosperous because money was getting to the common working class. If you guys want to blame someone, don't blame labor unions, blame Regan for selling out our manufacturing base to the lowest bidder. I want to thank you for being honest and willing to publish exactly what I wrote. I think you have the courage of conviction, however, obviously deluded! ;)
Date: Mon May 07 20:08:29 2012
From: Vic Biorseth
I take my religious beliefs, my faith and morality from the Christian Bible. I take my political beliefs from the American Constitution.
When Christ was a carpenter he demanded nothing from anyone. He offered a day’s work, or a product, for a day’s pay, or a price. Very simple; nothing to it. You have fallen into the “social justice” trap of Marxist ideology that purposely obfuscates the issue to confuse charity with entitlements. Charity is given freely and voluntarily, else it is not charity. Charity is given from your possessions or abilities, voluntarily. If it is given from anyone else’s possessions or abilities, or not voluntarily, then it is not charity.
The Beatitudes in Matthew 5, and the Blessings and the Curses in Matthew 25, which you quote, address how men are to relate to one another. It says no more about how an employer is to treat an employee than it says about how an employee is to treat an employer. There is no division here; the only division, in the minds of men, was placed there by conjured-up, invented and unnecessary notions of class envy and class warfare. Unions (and Marxism, and the Democrat Party) work to put enmity between the employer and the employee, and to put them at cross purposes, and opposed to each other when they should be working together for a common purpose.
Note that, in Christian morality, envy violates a Commandment of God. Redistribution – which is really what entitlements, including the entitlement to a job and to pre-specified job benefits, is. Before you may redistribute anything, or use anyone’s property for someone else’s benefits, you must first take it from someone. And that is yet another violation of yet another Commandment of God.
In the political realm, redistribution of private property without consent is a direct violation of the right to private property established in Amendment 5 of the Bill of Rights, and reinforced by the 14th Amendment.
You seem to have a problem with the profit of the employer, but not with the profit of an employee. You are perfectly willing to confiscate enough from Wal-Mart to pay employees $50 per hour. Would you be equally willing to confiscate employee profit for any such sublime intention?
(Whatever excess an employee makes after paying for his food, shelter, clothing, etc., is his
profit = discretionary income = private property
which he really doesn’t “need” as Marxism typically determines human need.) Would you feel that it would be a good thing for all of this employee profit to be submitted to the good of Wal-Mart to keep the business in the black, for the good of everybody working at Wal-Mart?
Gee, I wonder why not.
In all fairness, you might think that the employees had a moral obligation to provide for the welfare of the employer's children.
Date: Tue May 08 07:03:08 2012
I do have a moral obligation to take care of my employers kids. I show up every morning and work my tail off to earn the wages he pays. Since I'm not independently wealthy, I can only give my TIME - chunks of my life in return for wages. That's what Marx was talking about. The value of, say cotton, is less than the value of cloth. And what makes cloth more valuable? The LABOR in it! So you call "Disposable income" profit? When in the history of man did he ever have this "Profit"? I would argue that it wasn't until the Labor reforms of the late 1800's. If you look closely at a Union logo, you will see many of the dates of establishment around 1880-90. It was not uncommon for a Man to work 12 hours a day just to eat . I doubt that Jesus just worked and hoped that he would be paid out of the goodness of his employer. I'm sure that you have worked "off the clock" knowing that your employer would recognize the effort. Did he? How do you know? Unless you were paid overtime wages there’s no way to know. I think the class envy is actually in the opposite direction than you make it. I have worked my whole life and paid my Taxes. So, when I'm ready to retire, my Social Security will be there. Unlike all the others who thought they we getting ahead by not paying their taxes (giving them 'disposable income'). Now, they are reaching retirement age and then they want to claim their SS. But when they apply, they realize that they didn't pay into it. I was a fool and paid my taxes, and now I have my SS. And since I worked Union, I have a pension too. So, who’s envious of whom? I'm not "greeting" at wall-mart for minimum wage just so I can eat. I'll leave you with a few quotes I find enlightening: "The hospital strikers have demonstrated that you don't get a job done unless you are willing to show the Man you are not afraid...if you are not willing to pay that price, then you don't deserve the rewards or benefits that go along with it" -Malcom X "Every advance in this half-century: Social Security, civil rights, Medicare, aid to education - came with the support and leadership of American Labor." -Jimmy Carter "Labor is prior to, and independent of, capitol. Capitol is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capitol, and deserves much the higher consideration." -Abraham Lincoln
Date: Tue May 08 20:58:22 2012
From: Vic Biorseth
Showing up and working is not enough, according to your Marxist rules. Whatever profit = wealth = disposable income = private property you earn above and beyond what you need for food, shelter, clothing, etc., is excess and you do not need it. In all fairness to the collective, you need to surrender it, every payday. The same goes for any retirement income you get. After all, that’s what you insist that your employer surrender.
Man has been making profit = wealth ever since the dawn of specialization. When a man makes more of whatever he makes than he needs, he has created wealth, or profit. The only source of wealth creation in the world is the working man. Governments do not produce wealth; they only spend it. Only human hands and human minds make wealth.
You need to look around, Kenny, and pay attention. Greece is running out of money. Social Security is running out of money. Your union will run out of money. America is running out of money. Your future is not secure. “Entitlements” like those are nothing but a Ponzi-scheme.
Regarding your aversion to working “off the clock,” I have worked off the clock all my life, although most of it was salaried rather than hourly; I have always taken pride in my work, and an interest in the success of the enterprises I worked for. Today I am retired from two careers, and still working over 60 hours a week. I don’t know how to not work. I like working.
Pride goeth before a fall, Kenny. There is nothing shameful in honest work, even as a Wal-Mart greeter. If any work is beneath your dignity, then you may be in for an unhappy future if the economy keeps going in the current direction.
See the Refuting Marx page for the total fraud that has infected your thought processes through no fault of your own; you have likely been mal-educated in it all your life. See the American Founding Principles for the antidote.
I bid you good thinking.
Monday, November 19, 2012
As part of the ongoing effort to upgrade this whole website, upgraded this webpage to the new BB 2.0 - SBI! 3.0 release and to make use of the new reusable code features.
An earlier phase of this major conversion corrupted or adversely affected some fonts, alignments, quotes and tables in the previously published webpages. Not to worry; this phase is converting them all, one by one. Eventually, every webpage on this site will have the same look and feel as this one.
LOVE this new release!
Date: Tue Aug 13 19:27:41 2013
This is insane. The title of this website is THinking Catholic. The Catholic Church is one of the biggest proponents of Labor Unions. Unions are mini democracies, workers coming together, and democratically electing leaders to represent them at the table. Public Sector Unions such as Firefighters and Policemen need unions to secure safety standards. Both are very dangerous professions. Who would be looking out for their safety if not for collective bargaining?
THere is so much anti Union sentiment around in the US that it is scary. The greatest generation brough us American Labor Unions. THey came back from the war and band together to form the greatest middle class in the world' history. Now idiots rant, and sheep move, and there is so much anti Union sentiment. One day everyone will wake up and hate their working conditions and say "We should form a union" But they won't have the courage and stick to it ness of the Greatest Generation to do it for them. It's all being taken away from the masses by a carrot on a stick.
People should google Pope John Paul Labor Unions and hear a recent Saint's opinion on Labor Unions. Conservative Catholics would be very surprised by his words.
Date: Tue Aug 13 06:00:54 2013
From: Vic Biorseth
Your "mini democracy" doesn't represent me, nor does your employer have any representation in it. Would you approve of a "mini democracy" of employers who colluded and conspired together to cut wages and benefits? Police and Firefighters do not "need" to gang up on me, the taxpayer, for higher wages and benefits when I have nothing whatsoever to say about it. I pay their wages, yet I have no place at the bargaining table. Show me the community that tries to reduce or eliminate "safety standards" for first responders. That's not what unions are really about. That's just a typical union lie meant to obfuscate and blur the real intention.
The Greatest Generation did not bring us unions; the Communist Manifesto did that, in 1848. Many of the Greatest Generation were "organized" and schmoozed into becoming manipulated and controlled useful idiots of Marxism. Look, today, at the industries they unionized, particularly the auto industry, and see what they have done to them. Consider what they might now be, and what the middle class might now be, if not for unions.
John Paul the Great's foray into Communist Poland, and his stand with Lech Walesa, was a monumental move against, not Capitalism, not free enterprise, not big corporations, not free employers, but the exact opposite of all of those things: Communism. Lech Walesa's Solidarity movement was not against any company - there were no companies in the Soviet Union, or in Warsaw Pact nations, like Poland. It was a movement against the State. The all powerful government. That which your union ultimately seeks to create here, and everywhere.
Why else would your union be national, or international, and seeking to link up with every other union of every sort? The only answer is to acquire the ability to have national and even international strikes. Even against taxpayers.
The all powerful system John Paul the Great spoke of was the all powerful state, who solely dictated work conditions, pay and benefits. Capitalism is not a system; it is natural. It happens when citizens enjoy liberty and are free to save a penny = wealth = private property and thereby improve their own condition. That's called a free market. It is natural; Communism is a "system" of man, and must be created and maintained, because it is not natural.
Unions drive society toward what unions falsely claim to oppose. Unions move man toward the great collective.
Lech Walesa and John Paul the Great were the first to stand for the ability of Polish laborers to strike against the government, and not have the government employ its favorite labor negotiating instrument, which was, of course, the machine gun.
I invite you to read what Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn said to the AFL/CIO at the Solzhenitsyn Speaks page. They didn't expect him to say what he said, or they never would have invited him to speak. But you need to hear his words, too.
Date: Tue Jul 22 2014
From: Vic Biorseth
Changes pursuant to changing the website URL
and name from
Thinking Catholic Strategic Center to
Catholic American Thinker.
Pulled the trigger on the 301 MOVE IT option June 1, 2014. Working my way through all the webpages. .
If you want to build a website like this one, this is how you do it.
Never be lukewarm.
Life itself demands passion.
He who is indifferent to God has already forfeited his soul.
He who is indifferent to politics has already forfeited his liberty.
In America, religion is not mere window dressing and citizenship is not a spectator sport.
Do not allow our common destiny as a whole people to just happen without your input.
Catholic American Thinker
Free E-zine Subscription
You will receive immediate email newsletters with links to new articles as they are published here. Your email is perfectly secure here; we use it only to send you the
Catholic American Thinker
and absolutely nothing else.
The Purpose of this grouping of links is to highlight the Marxist birth and anti-American slant of the organized labor movement, regardless of what the rank and file members think they know about it.
The Unionism Pages.
Born of the "Workers of the World, Unite!" line of the Communist Manifesto, labor became the first successful effort of Marxist "Community Organizing" toward class warfare and eventual revolution. The whole purpose was and is to set employees against their own employers and displace economic cooperation with animosity and strife.
A Plan to Kill the Unions, especially in government. We need to kill the unions, or at least break their stranglehold on free enterprise.
The Anti-Union Sentiment: Where does it come from? The Communist Manifesto and the modern organized labor movement.
Our argument against unions and for a more open and free marketplace. Arguing against unions and other free market interventions is seeking greater excellence in market goods, services, employees and employers, through free and open competition.
Breaking Unions: Ending Marxism's intrusion into work place relationships. Breaking Unions means breaking the very reason Organized Labor was originally Organized: to provide a path to violent revolution.
The Insidious Hidden Evil behind Collective Bargaining. The sly "Fairness" mask on Collective Bargaining hides the original, ongoing and continually exploited evil Marxist anti-institution stratagem.
"We belong to the Church militant; and She is militant because on earth the powers of darkness are ever restless to encompass Her destruction. Not only in the far-off centuries of the early Church, but down through the ages and in this our day, the enemies of God and Christian civilization make bold to attack the Creator’s supreme dominion and sacrosanct human rights.”--Pope Pius XII
"It is not lawful to take the things of others to give to the poor. It is a sin worthy of punishment, not an act deserving a reward, to give away what belongs to others."--St. Francis of Assisi
If you can't find the page you're looking for, try the