Friday, January 21, 2005

Dr Clam asked:

"Do you think that exposure to a culture and people you have been raised to hate is more likely to dispose you favourably to them, or make you hate them more? Think of how many of the notable Islamofascists of recent times spent considerable time in Europe or the United States. I know I would have discounted much of the stories about the evils of the West as propaganda if I did not live here..."

Unionists are brought up to believe the employer is a greedy capitalist pig. Yes, the experience of employment normally entrenches what they believe about them. But it is a foolish employer that discounts the risks disgruntled employees pose to their business even after they're sacked. When a "war" breaks out and employers see it right to sack all union members regardless of their individual attitudes on the matter, the risks increase greatly. Even Chris Corrigan after winning his "war", acceptingly negotiated in good faith with the unions and reinstated a large number. "Giving in" to some of the the unions demands was good strategy and made his company safer with less unionists with an axe to grind.

I am arguing that not only was Israel's permanent prevention of Arab labour mobility self-defeating, it was a strategic blunder. Labour mobility should never be underestimated, and some even rate it as the number one reason for USA's stability and success:-). Another of their strategic blunders is planning talks with their democratically elected counterparts, then refusing to talk if there is a terrorist strike. It is Patently Obvious that the terrorists are striking then and there for the only purpose of scuttling the talks. Refusing to talk then is actually giving in to the terrorists demands.
The terrorists are (unofficially of course) demanding a stop to negotiations - the democratically elected leader of the PLO is at a disadvantage in the talks if there has just been a deadly terrorist strike. I have come to the conclusion that the Israeli prime minister is more interested in short term internal political gain than in long term solutions.

1 comment:

Dr. Clam said...

Unionists are the wrong metaphor; you can't just shut out all the Unionists and employ Sandor Kovatses cloned from skin scrapings, while Israel can just shut out all the Palestinians and employ Filipinos.

I was casting about for the right example of disengagement, and it was staring me in the face all the time: Korea. Sure, there is a long-term penalty incurred by the lack of labour mobility, but that is made up for by the fact that South Korea can get on with life without being shot at. North Korea is not a significant threat to day to day life in South Korea, even though it is ruled by a lunatic and has no economy, becuase there is a big fence down the middle with thousands of soldiers guarding it. South Korea can make up its shortages of unskilled labour from Southeast Asia, just like Israel, and wait for generational change to solve a problem that would only be inflamed if the borders were porous.