I put a diary at DailyKos on the idea of a blog union. I thought it was generate some interesting comments, since it didn’t sound like such a bad idea when I thought of it. But it had all the appeal of a turd in the punchbowl.
Naturally I wonder why. It’s led me to second-guess some of my other thoughts, like, should I really eat lunch today or could everything they say about the dangers of obesity be true? But I’m going to post it here — with great fear and trembling — and I’m going to trust that I don’t have to put the word “Pussy” somewhere in the title for people to actually read it.
Disagree if you want, but please don’t be like the first guy who commented, who simply said it was “shit.” Maybe he’s smart and I’m dumb, who knows.
What if someone with good organizational skills and dedication were to start a Blog Union?
Then those of us who think thousands of voices ought to carry some sway in blog issues could stick together and perhaps affect the way ‘management’ deals with us. If we actually have progressive goals together, it seems like speaking together would be more effective than 50,000 separate voices.
It could be democratic, with leaders, votes, strikes, union stewards, representatives, and the enforced shame of crossing picket lines until grievances are actually heard and dealt with.
With enough interest, I think it would not be something divisive but something that would give added strength to progressive politics. It takes what we believe about democratic values and applies them to this area of activism on the internet.
It’s kind of weird as it stands now that it’s basically a monarchy or dictatorship, based on what I think is the tenuous assertion of private ownership. There are thousands of voices here who are independent, for one thing, and without those voices there’s nothing worth owning. And I think there is an overriding goal in a site like this, affecting policy and society in a positive, progressive way. The goal is not to make one person prosperous at the expense of the masses.
So, if someone wants to do this, take the idea and make it yours.
If we ever went on strike, who would you stand with, the union or the scabs? And if there were an actual strike, do you think Conyers, Kennedy, et. al., would be posting till it was dealt with? I don’t.
I’m not suggesting this with any anger or any bad feelings toward anyone. But at some point a community ought to have a voice and be able to accomplish something of its values in the face of intransigence.
