Kirkland tour highlights tensions with Democrats
1985Nat Weinstein 1985-07Read it in the scan (PDF at ETOL), page 7 →
Read from the scan by machine and not corrected: expect misread words, and now and then a caption or a line from a neighbouring story. For anything you quote, read the scan.
Scan page 7
Lane Kirkland, who heads the AFL CIO, toured union halls in New England at the end of April. Speaking mostly to audiences of local and area union officials, he lashed ou t at both the Reagan administration and the Democratic Party.
Still smarting from the "defeat" dealt the labor bureaucracy in the 1984 elections, Kirkland focused on an attack on the labor movement made in March by the new national Democratic Party chairman, Paul G. Kirk Jr.
Kirk, urging the AFL-CIO to refrain from endorsing a presidential candidate in the 1988 primaries, had slyly blamed the labor movement for the defeat of Walter Mondale, who had been endorsed by the AFL-CIO before the presidential primaries in the last election. Kirk had characterized the labor movement as a group with "special AFL-CIO's Lane Kirkland interests" at odds with people.
The AFL-CIO's Kirkland, in response, noted that "labor is the chief representative force that keeps the real special interests from dominating American political life."
This statement is, of course, only half right.
The real special interests are the tiny minority of industrialists, bankers, landlords, and other profiteers who do dominate American political life. Both parties-and the government and state apparatus over which they have exclusive control-are owned lock, stock, and barrel by these special interests.
But to "keep the real special interests from dominating" requires independent action.
A dangerous game The purpose of Kirkland's tour appears to be to generate pressure on the Democratic Party, which is using the election results as an excuse for discarding more of its "pro-labor" window-dressing.
The New York Times (May 5, 1985) reports that labor officials reacting to Kirkland's speech noted that "it was the first time in their memory that disagreements with the party were voiced with such a sharp edge."
Kirkland is reported to have said that the labor movement should ignore those in the Democratic Party who say that it should "further distance itself from its natural constituency-that it turn a cold shoulder on labor, on the minorities, and on women's issues."
This belated concern for minorities and women points to how Kirkland hopes to pressure the Democratic Party. There is a growing awareness expressed