Soon there will be no troublesome middle class

On May 2nd, 1933, the day after Labor day, Nazi groups occupied union halls and labor leaders were arrested. Trade Unions were outlawed by Adolf Hitler, while collective bargaining and the right to strike was abolished. This was the beginning of a consolidation of power by the fascist regime which systematically wiped out all opposition groups, starting with unions, liberals, socialists, and communists using Himmler’s state police.

Fast forward to America today, particularly Wisconsin. Governor Walker and the Republican/Tea Party members of the state legislature are attempting to pass a bill that would not only severely punish public unions (with exception for the police, fire, and state trooper unions that supported his campaign), but it would effectively end 50 years to the right of these workers to collectively bargain.


Filed under History, Income Inequality, Jobs, Progressive Ideals, Workers Rights

18 responses to “Soon there will be no troublesome middle class

  1. I posted this yesterday but want it to be here too.

    Eight charts that explain everything that’s wrong with America.

  2. The GOP not only don’t mind but actually encourage the
    re-distribution of wealth away from the workers of the world. They seem to be so blinded by their simplistic hate for all things of government they’re willing to literally cut off their nose to spite their face. Sure, when someone reminds them of the parts of government which benefit them their eyes glaze over for a second before they go back to chanting, “Keep government out of my Medicare.”

    The oligarchy (from Greek ὀλιγαρχία, oligarkhía[1]) is a form of power structure in which power effectively rests with a small number of people. These people could be distinguished by royalty, wealth, family ties, corporate, or military control. The word oligarchy is from the Greek words “ὀλίγος” (olígos), “a few”[2] and the verb “ἄρχω” (archo), “to rule, to govern, to command”.[3] Such states are often controlled by a few prominent families who pass their influence from one generation to the next.

    Throughout history, some oligarchies have been tyrannical, relying on public servitude to exist, although others have been relatively benign. Aristotle pioneered the use of the term as a synonym for rule by the rich, for which the exact term is plutocracy, but oligarchy is not always a rule by wealth, as oligarchs can simply be a privileged group, and do not have to be connected by bloodlines as in a monarchy.

  3. oligarchy



    What term will describe America’s new form of rule? Will it be one of the above or something totally different? Maybe after the Koch brothers have manifested their so-called “Libertarian” dream for the country we’ll be called America and the Kochocracy it represents?

  4. Plutocracy, as I see it. Bluntly, the only “-ocracy” with which I’m concerned starts with “merit”, which is antithetical to the Kochs’ dream.

  5. Wisconsin gov. pranked by caller posing as donor

    Walker spokesman Cullen Werwie confirms the governor is on audio of the call posted Wednesday on the website of the Buffalo Beast, a left-leaning New York newspaper.

    The governor believes the caller is conservative businessman David Koch. He talks about plans for layoff notices and what can be done to punish lawmakers who’ve left the state.

    Read an excerpt of the call or listen to the recorded call in its entirety here —

    • btw, the Buffalo Beast website seems to be down right down… Or is it overwhelmed?

    • When you’re caught on tape accepting potential bribes from a billionaire, messing with your opponents’ pay schedule, considering Nixon-style dirty tricks on Wisconsinites, threatening workers with layoffs, making sexist comments and hoping for the spread of union-busting to other states does it add credence to your ’cause’?

  6. Walker informed Wisconsin could lose $46 million in federal funds with anti-union bill

    Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has been playing an increasingly dangerous game of brinksmanship for his state. And a potentially very expensive one. His budget and transportation officials have informed him that he’d could be forfeiting millions in transportation funding from the federal government if his anti-union legislation is signed into law.$46-million-in-federal-funds-with-anti-union%20bill

    • Does this remind anyone else of the USD 259 BOE ten plus years ago? No, not anti-union legislation or whatever, but one (or more) member(s) wanting to “cure budget problems” in a way that threatened the federal funding for Special Ed. IIRC, this particular individual was so dogmatic in adhering to this, the issue came down to the wire before this dim bulb figured out that not only would the federal funding be lost, but the classes, reporting, etc., being otherwise required by both federal and state law would need to occur anyhow, but this time totally at the district’s sole expense (because state funding was tied to the federal funding). Seems Gov. Walker must share quite a bit of DNA with that individual. And, yes, it was rumored at the time this member was in the pocket of the two Koch brothers.

  7. Did everybody see this…

    Third Federal Judge Upholds Affordable Care Act

    It is pure semantics to argue that an individual who makes a choice to forgo health insurance is not “acting,” especially given the serious economic and health-related consequences to every individual of that choice. Making a choice is an affirmative action, whether one decides to do something or not do something. They are two sides of the same coin. To pretend otherwise is to ignore reality. […]

    The crux of Plaintiffs’ arguments is that § 1501 is an unprecedented attempt by Congress to regulate individual behavior, and therefore threatens individuals’ freedom of choice. Appealing as this emotionally charged argument may sound, the ACA is not as unprecedented as Plaintiffs claim: as already discussed, Congress’s broad power to regulate individual behavior under the Commerce Clause is well established.

    • Guess I should have just posted the whole article, because I REALLY like what the rest of it had to say…

      Kessler’s opinion also contrasts sharply with Judge Roger Vinson’s recent opinion striking down the same law. Vinson relies heavily on law review articles by right-wing scholars and discusses a number of older, discredited decisions at length. Kessler, however, takes the much more orthodox approach of actually following binding Supreme Court decisions that require her to uphold the law. Kessler’s opinion also differs from Vinson’s in that it is not riddled with easily disprovable factual and legal errors.

  8. Fox Reverses Poll Results To Falsely Claim Most Americans Favor Ending Collective Bargaining