An involuntary betrayal

A unionist should never work for employers, whether public or private.

Unionists, mostly, voters leftist parties. It is natural. Socialism and communism are ideologies of the left who defend the working class.

It is so important to the affinity between the ideologies of the left and the lower classes, without appeal to paranoia or mistrust radical, we could say that if they ever ended social injustice, these ideologies lose their reason for existence.

Therefore we must be aware that trade unionists, socialists and communists, while want to retain their right to exist by simple self-preservation, are ambivalent because they can not eradicate poverty without risking to lose their reason for existence.

In other words, those who defend the poor do not want these to stop being poor.

On the other hand, as the poor are the majority and if for some reason they decide to take their leftist union leaders to positions of national leadership (president, parliament, public company directors), they should know that they will stop being so allies workers as they were when faced with energy all the right rulers.

What does the expression "no better wedge than the same suit"?

When a person changes role, sides, sheet, it carries with it the best strategies to combat his former group membership.

For example, when a player changes teams basketball knows better than anyone how to compete against his former team. This makes a defender can become the worst attacker.

If all this were true we could conclude that a unionist should never work for employers, whether public or private, because it would be as destructive as a traitor.

Note: Original in Spanish (without translation by Google): Una traición involuntaria.

 

(Este es el Artículo Nº 1.964)

●●●