"Union sympathizers decry legislation"
NASHVILLE - About 200 union sympathizers waved signs and cheered Wednesday as speakers denounced Republican-sponsored legislation that would curb collective bargaining and political activities of public employee associations and unions.
Hmmm. I was really interested in the choice of words for this headline in a Knoxville, Tennessee newspaper. And check out this quote on the next line down:
"They have said that they introduced these bills because they believe that unions are an obstacle to progress," said Mary Mancini. "We're here today to state unequivocally that they are the obstacle to progress."
My interest in the use of "Union sympathizers" in Tennessee -- where citizens split within the state just as the South split with the North (Union) -- may need little explanation. The quote from Ms. Mancini is interesting because -- depending on where I as a reader hear the emphasis on "they" -- it's not clear if she is saying that it is unions or legislators that are an obstacle to progress.
I personally am a "union sympathizer" either way you look at it. I know some folks who participated in the rally, and, based on their politics, I would guess that Ms. Mancini thinks the legislators are the obstacle. If that's true, I agree with her wholeheartedly.
I got really curious about all this because it is through media of all kinds that we often get clues that in essence read the more subtle energies swirling just below our collective consciousness. So my next step -- because I was not sure where the author might stand personally -- was to check out his archive.
Tom Humphrey is the Nashville Bureau Chief for the News-Sentinel. The first article I found was posted just a few days ago and was entitled State's rights nothing new in Nashville. In it, Humphrey notes that:
Declaration of support for states' rights dominated the 33rd General Assembly, which was controlled by Democrats and which is now officially off the record.
He then comments on the current session of the Tennessee Legislature:
Maybe such declarations are not dominating the 107th General Assembly, which is controlled by Republicans. But there is a lot of on-the-record support for assertions of independence from the federal government.
So maybe it's worth a brief look back into state government history as the nation moves toward the sesquicentennial of the Civil War. Not to suggest that history is repeating itself, for there are dramatic differences of degree and basis of the assertions.
And then he further discloses his interest in the subject:
Still, if you'll indulge a Tennessee history buff who spent a bit of time in amateurish research recently, including a brief visit to the Legislative Library, those differences on the states rights theme are worth noting.
The rest of the article was very helpful to me as Yankee transplant, as well as a psychoanalyst who loves psychohistory, and I recommend this and other articles by Humphrey to anyone interested in Tennessee politics.
For the final word on the observations and questions noted in this post so far, we'll just have to stand by and see what unfolds. By the looks of legislation introduced so far in Tennessee and elsewhere, I'm sure I'll be posting more on them. I will also be interested to see what comes up around the Civil War this year. Ever since I moved to Tennessee, it has been painfully obvious that there are traumatic leftovers yet to be healed. And I suspect that in the "union" question in Tennessee we might find several historical threads connecting it to "states rights" "slavery" and other "Civil War" issues, at least here. (See in particular the article by Mike Papantonio linked below.)
For now, I'd like to throw out this idea out for further exploration:
Ideas and feelings that are unconscious or not-to-be-spoken nevertheless leave clues in everything we say and do -- individually or in the groups and ideologies with which we identify. From the point of view of psychoanalysis, history will repeat itself until we find and transform those core beliefs and identifications that keep us circling the drain instead of revitalizing our politics, our economy, our society, our Earth.
RELATED LINKS:
Mike Papantonio (23 September 2009) Why They Hate Their Emancipated President
Respected Civil War scholars have written mountains of books explaining that the driving force for that war was that an aristocracy wanted to perpetuate its slavery money machine. But it was different for the typical confederate soldier. Their war of "Northern Aggression" was ginned up more from a fear that their social status might fall to the point that there would be no class distinction between themselves and emancipated slaves.
Kirk Johnson (March 2010) States' Rights Rallying Cry for Lawmakers
Whether it’s correctly called a movement, a backlash or political theater, state declarations of their rights — or in some cases denunciations of federal authority, amounting to the same thing — are on a roll.
James Loewen (January 2011) Five myths about why the South seceded
One hundred and fifty years after the Civil War began, we're still fighting it -- or at least fighting over its history. I've polled thousands of high school history teachers and spoken about the war to audiences across the country, and there is little agreement even on why the South seceded. Was it over slavery? States' rights? Tariffs and taxes?
