Freight Dog:
Capitalism doesn’t get much more Capitalist than 1960’s USA and unions don’t get much stronger than the Teamsters of that time in that place.Make no mistake weak downtrodden workers being exploited by the few at the top is a defining feature of Communism not Capitalism. 
No it is not. That is the reality of the capitist society that is today. Just because you have to adapt and understand the nature of what you’re dealing with doesn’t mean you live under communism.
[/quote]
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck and makes the Chinese Communist Party richer while the west gets poorer then it’s a duck.
Meanwhile you know something is wrong in that regard when the Socialists start complaining about a Capitalist Union that’s trying to keep America Capitalist.
wsws.org/en/articles/2001/08/mex-a02.html
Carryfast.
Quite what point are you trying to make? Are you trying to persuade me that:-
1/ despite a label of capitalism, we live under a form of communism in the UK
Or
2/ if I (Freight dog) don’t buy into the idea that unions WILL work within UK road haulage then I must believe the UK to be communist?
I hope this runs & runs, I’ve got 10 pages in the sweep. 
Freight Dog:
Carryfast.
Quite what point are you trying to make? Are you trying to persuade me that:-
1/ despite a label of capitalism, we live under a form of communism in the UK
I’d say since Nixon in the US and at least the Heath/Wilson/Callaghan administration that seems more or less the case or at least a corrupted unrecognisable form of Capitalist/Communist hybrid.
Unless you can think of a better reason as to why ‘the West’ would want to help the Chinese Communist Party get richer.Or why the Socialists would be complaining about the Teamsters blocking the Mexican haulage industry from operating in the States.Amongst other similar pointers that show a catastrophic shift from Fordist Capitalism to exploitative Chinese type Communism.
Carryfast
I’ll put it to you as one of the gianormous ex trawlermen aircrew would put it to you if you were having this chat in the diesel club in Almaty. Are you a doer or just a talker who likes people hearing your voice?
Forgive my directness. I like you as a poster, but! You so far have fielded this thread with wishy washy historical politics. What are we talking here? How to sort out the UK transport industry wages level? That sounds like turkey to me. Talk turkey.
Those that ramble on about historical politics are great for the bar room until they get boring but the union men you so revere don’t talk such. You need to live in the now. Crying communism, talking about teamsters in a 70s America et al seves nothing. Gets you no where. That’s in the past.
Those that truly cleave a way for the worker talk basic words. Instead of babbling on about the past- assess and critique what you have now, without emotion. Then project a future, where it’s going. Warts and all, no emotion. Then (warts and all) talk turkey and come up with plans. Basic language. Ditch the rambling long history lessons.
Freight Dog:
Carryfast
I’ll put it to you as one of the gianormous ex trawlermen aircrew would put it to you if you were having this chat in the diesel club in Almaty. Are you a doer or just a talker who likes people hearing your voice?
Forgive my directness. I like you as a poster, but! You so far have fielded this thread with wishy washy historical politics. What are we talking here? How to sort out the UK transport industry wages level? That sounds like turkey to me. Talk turkey.
Those that ramble on about historical politics are great for the bar room until they get boring but the union men you so revere don’t talk such. You need to live in the now. Crying communism, talking about teamsters in a 70s America et al seves nothing. Gets you no where. That’s in the past.
Those that truly cleave a way for the worker talk basic words. Instead of babbling on about the past- assess and critique what you have now, without emotion. Then project a future, where it’s going. Warts and all, no emotion. Then (warts and all) talk turkey and come up with plans. Basic language. Ditch the rambling long history lessons.
I don’t think that there is anything mutually exclusive between previous Union policies and tactics compared to what is needed now.IE the same Socialist v Capitalist arguments still apply in the case of idealistic workers of the world unite bs as opposed to isolationist protectionism in which Socialism just translates as the cheap labour agenda.
On that note feel free to explain the difference in’ existing’ TUC policy regarding EU membership and the resulting east Euro invasion as opposed to the US Teamsters position regards the Mexican situation for example.Bearing in mind that there is no way that the Union can maintain wage levels and terms and conditions at acceptable western expectations,when we’ve got an open door labour market allowing exposure to third world levels of wage expectations.Wether that be in the form of immigrant labour or outsourced or flagged out transport operations.
peoplesworld.org/teamsters-blast … ationwide/
Everything I say is fielded by a long winded rebuttal. It’s easy to find fault but not so easy to project a plan.
You don’t seem to want to stick your neck on the line. You come across like Russell brand. Lots of adjectives and verbs but not a lot of substance. You don’t need those fancy words. You clearly know your stuff in the history of unionism. The rub of it is, are you one of those who throws stones at the doers using fancy words and quotes or can you get down to basic language and talk about what is to be done in the now?
I do appreciate there is some use in reflecting on past union exploits. However, the main centre point is in the now. As I portrayed earlier, what we are dealing with, where it is going and what is to be done.
As I said earlier, my recent toe dipping indicated fragmentation on even the basic level of discussion.
Sorry CF, I’m in a mood tonight due work and being a bit of a mean son of a ■■■■■. No excuse, Don’t mean to tackle you down, just discussion 
Freight Dog:
Everything I say is fielded by a long winded rebuttal. It’s easy to find fault but not so easy to project a plan.
You don’t seem to want to stick your neck on the line. You come across like Russell brand. Lots of adjectives and verbs but not a lot of substance. You don’t need those fancy words. You clearly know your stuff in the history of unionism. The rub of it is, are you one of those who throws stones at the doers using fancy words and quotes or can you get down to basic language and talk about what is to be done in the now?
I do appreciate there is some use in reflecting on past union exploits. However, the main centre point is in the now. As I portrayed earlier, what we are dealing with, where it is going and what is to be done.
As I said earlier, my recent toe dipping indicated fragmentation on even the basic level of discussion.
I’ve said what ‘I’ would ‘do’.Which,contrary to the UNITE idea,would be ditch the Labour Party agenda including the pro EU,pro immigration,pro rail baggage which is all part of that.Then call for domestic hours regs for ‘domestic’ running operations but with a max 12 hour day 60 hour week limit,trucks to be allowed to run on red diesel,then negotiate a decent industry specific minimum wage .
Or just do as they are doing in supporting Labour Party policy in taxing as many trucks off the road as possible by way of punitive fuel taxation and ridiculous over regulation.Also EU membership thereby allowing exposure of the UK labour market to all the implications of cheap east Euro labour including inevitably lifting of cabotage regulations and EU hours regs which allow a lot more than just a 12 hour day/60 hour week.While at the same time calling for a 48 hour max week and a decent wage. 
Mmm, some food for thought there. I’ve switched onto what you’re saying now you’re talking straight 
. Opens up a lot of questions but one area we seem to agree on is that fundamental changes would only come through regulatory level changes. I’ll have a think on that.