The Perverted Individualism Behind GOP’s ‘Right To Work’ Union-Busting

Republicans at all levels of government continue to push “right to work” legislation to curb labor activities, and they’re cloaking their classist agenda in the most extreme, self-destructive brand of individualism around.

An estimated 60 percent of voters oppose GOP efforts to end collective bargaining, according to a ‘New York Times’ and CBS News poll. And Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s approval ratings have plunged since he began his anti-union assault: a majority of voters now say that they would vote for his midterm opponent if elections were held again.

Yet, for some counter-intuitive reason, Republican lawmakers are dead-set on passing “right to work” legislation that would effectively curtail union activity.

In Missouri, for example, state lawmakers are proposing right to work legislation, and on a national level, Tea Party king maker Jim DeMint and seven other GOP Senators last week introduced the National Right to Work Bill, which prohibits using union membership as a prerequisite for hiring.

In introducing the bill, DeMint attempted to frame the right wing crusade as a battle for individual choice in the face of “discrimination.” “No American should be forced to join a union and pay dues to get a job in this country,” he said. “Many Americans are already struggling just to put food on the table, and they shouldn’t have to fear losing their jobs or face discrimination if they don’t want to join a union.”

Another supporter, Sen. Rand Paul, used similar rhetoric in his statement, “Any hindrance to hard-working Americans seeking jobs is in opposition to the American spirit.”

He went on, “For too long, unions have played politics and discriminated against workers and businesses. Eliminating forced unionism is a victory for the American workforce and sends union bosses a strong message that their back-room dealing and bullying will no longer be tolerated.”

In other words, the narrative they’re concocting goes like this: unions are anathema to American individualism and all citizens should have freedom of association and enterprise. Such thinking remains popular among “merit shops,” organizations that eschew unions, and instead rely on the belief that self-determination and opportunity come ahead of any collective activity. From this perspective, any united labor front immediately becomes “socialist,” and a threat to each individual American’s “divine” rights. It’s an ancient tale, one to which the GOP’s indebted.

Though you may not personally be familiar with the term “merit shop,” the Republicans definitely know it well, because countless merit shops — also referred to as open shops or business associations — donate big money to GOP lawmakers. The Associated Builders and Contractors PAC, for example, donated over $1.1 million to Republican candidates during the last election cycle, while the National Federation of Independent Business’ PAC gave another $719,744. And there are many others to be found over at the Center for Responsive Politics.

These massive donations make perfect sense: the GOP’s pro-business, pro-capitalism ideology squares well with these groups’ respective bottom line. But none of them seem to realize that this bottom line hurts the nation in the long-run.

Right to work laws diminish people’s wages: people in the 22 states with such legislation, mostly in the West and the South, earn about 3.2 percent, or $5,333, less than laborers with union rights. And lower wages, in turn, impact not only people’s standard of living, but society’s health over all: people who are stressed about their economic status tend to have a higher rate of heart attacks, suicide and depression, all things that damage a nation’s overall constitution. And unions could be just the prescription for recovery.

“According to the Economic Policy Institute, union workers earn 14.1 percent more in wages than nonunion workers in the same occupations and with the same level of experience and education,” wrote Peter Dreier, director of the Urban and Environmental Policy program at Occidental College, in ‘The American Prospect.’

“The ‘union premium’ is considerably higher when total compensation is included, because unionized workers are much more likely to get health insurance and pension benefits,” he said. It comes down to this: “Decent wages are necessary for social stability and for the purchasing power that the economy needs to trigger and sustain a strong recovery.” Advocates of right to work laws, however, disagree. And, again, their objections rest on the over-sized individual.

The argument against collective bargaining, based largely on economist Milton Friedman’s theories, are based on the idea that higher wages for union members leads to unemployment because companies can no longer afford to hire more labor. But the problem here is the assumption that business men and women need to be far wealthier than their employees. Profit can’t be sacrificed, because, this being free market America, the innovative individual, like bank CEOs, need to be rewarded with riches and jewels, leaving laborers jumbled in a nameless, faceless mass. The lower class individual simply no longer exists, because he’s simply a cog in the larger machine.

While certainly the bosses or founders of an organization should be compensated for their work, that doesn’t mean the workers should be reduced to servitude and struggle. The merit shops take the idea of individual rights and run them off a cliff.

Contrary to the Church of the Individual, our economy does not need to be a zero-sum calculation. Person A doesn’t need to suffer so that Person B can succeed. If people would reduce the size and scope of their egos and aspirations — do you really need two vacation homes? — then everyone could benefit from a business, rather than just a select few. And that’s an idea that the GOP fails to grasp. They are so enraptured by a monolithic, omnipotent individualism that they’re willing to trample over the middle class masses in the name of their unsustainable “me” ideology.

Eventually all the individuals will become islands, fighting amongst themselves for the biggest stake or claim, and any unity this nation once promised will have been divvied up, leaving lamentable scraps of opportunity and freedom for those on the bottom rung. Though the individual should be protected, he or she should not be elevated to the point that they forget the rest of the nation.

Our founding fathers wanted us all to succeed, yes, but not at the cost of our nation’s greatest asset: solidarity with our fellow Americans.