Occupy Wall Street: UAW recently endorsed, but prepared for it ahead of time

Screen Snip from a video featured at The Blaze shows a labor union supporter attacking Charles Payne’s position on self-reliance. Labor supporters build their argument around the thesis no one really succeeds on his own. One example is the argument that for you to succeed, you had to drive on a road others built and paid for or use institutions built collectively. Where the argument fails: those who succeed fund most of the tax revenue in this country. Progressives want the majority of wealth controlled by government, a system that has never delivered the social justice they claim to seek. The International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America—commonly called the UAW—officially endorsed Occupy Wall Street on Wednesday.

However, the UAW had prepared for such protests far in advance.

In the March-April issue of the group’s magazine Solidarity, UAW said, “A global movement is mounting.”

In the article ‘Torchbearers of Labor,’ UAW expressed a self-centered interest:

 “In this global economy, the only way to maintain stability for our union will be through a network of global support.” The UAW also announced the addition of the Global Organizing Institute to its National Organizing Department."

The article said international student interns and “progressive youth in the United States” would be recruited to “carry out direct actions at car dealerships and corporate offices across the country.”

The goal, said UAW, is “a generation of social justice activists.”

That goal, for the labor group, may be essential to its survival. According to information at the UAW website, the organization is top heavy with retirees:

 “The UAW has more than 390,000 active members and more than 600,000 retired members in the United States, Canada and Puerto Rico.”

Because of generous pension benefits and perks like a $700 Christmas bonus retirees have traditionally received, UAW will be challenged to keep pension programs afloat.

The federal government, under social justice programs aggressively pushed by President Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats, provided a remarkable bailout to GM. UAW represents most GM workers.

Unfortunately there’s not a lot of that social justice for the taxpayers whose earnings were confiscated to prop up the ailing automaker. Taxpayers now own  millions of shares of low-valued stock. The Daily Caller said, “[T]he government still owns 500 million shares of General Motors which, if sold at today’s market price of $20 a share, would leave taxpayers on the hook for $16.5 billion in losses.”

In June the deal crafted by the Obama administration and GM blew up social justice for small union members and nonunion members via a side agreement with UAW workers. The New York Times published the story of how the little guys got fleeced and the UAW workers got a taxpayer funded bailout. The account is another illustration of social injustice at the hands of a government many conservatives believe is corrupt and in serious need of downsizing.

When liberals tout social justice, they are touting social justice for Democrats' preferred corporate cronies like Google, General Electric, various media companies and entertainment companies. Those not in the loop will fund the social justice rather than receive it.

UAW and other union groups have heavily influenced Obama’s decisions and those of his fellow Democrats. The liberal president’s administration has gone after companies like Boeing for increasing worker lines in non-forced unionism states and that is not likely to change.

It is somewhat ironic to watch the Occupy Wall Street protesters talk about poverty in the U.S. when the majority of the protesters appear to be well fed, well dressed and without fear about being away from jobs for indefinite periods of time.

Poverty figures are distorted because poverty is indexed to income. The US government, however, provides food stamps, school meal programs, medical care, Pell grants and even tax refunds to people (a set amount per child) whose known income falls below a certain standard. Under the table income is not counted although the government knows it exists.

Some pundits suggest the movement is part of a push for complete socialization of the US economy as a prelude to communism. If history is our judge, that theory is not as outlandish as it seems.

Although the rhetoric in union publications demands fairness for all, it’s likely unionized workers would recoil at the difference in wages between the worker and union officials who tend to double dip and end up with far more generous packages than the workers they represent.

UAW's official endorsement of Occupy Wall Street was nothing more than public relations. The labor group had such plans in the works for a long time.

Related Articles

Did Time poll set up tea party negatively while boosting support for OWS? (National Conservative Examiner)

Wall Street Protesters should march to Fannie, Freddie headquarters (National Conservative Examiner)

On NLRB vs. Boeing, the buck stops with Obama (The US Report)

Obama's White House visitor logs should now be made public (The US Report)

(Commentary by Kay B. Day/Oct. 17, 2011)