Dividing and Conquering the Working Class with Drug Testing

An Angry Teacher from Hawaii has written a great analysis of the recent vote in favor of drug testing. You simply must go and read the whole thing. This is my favorite part:

This contract should not have been put to the workers for a vote. Asking workers to choose between either a raise, or retaining basic rights is like asking them to choose between sawing off a limb or shooting themselves in the face, with a nice raise for the face shooters. This move by the Union leadership was dressed up as a “democratic” vote, but should be identified as what it is: union collaboration with the state to impose more control over workers’ lives. Presenting a dilemma, and calling it a choice is a devils’ bargain, bourgeois democracy at its worst, but far from an anomaly.
This contract is an effective tool to drive a wedge between more “socially conservative” and “socially liberal” employees. Sixty one percent of the teachers who voted chose to ratify the contract. For some teachers, while they did not like the idea of drug testing, they felt the raise itself made the contract acceptable. For other teachers, the idea of criminalizing any type of recreational drug use not sanctioned by the state creates a better society: "I'm all for it," said math teacher John Furukawa. "As an educator, we need to promote an example to which kids can follow."

I wish I had written this post. That is absolutely brilliant and it's true. The teachers were very divided by this contract, with the teachers that oppose drug testing being branded as having something to hide or not caring enough about the children. Divide and conquer works because only drug-using communists oppose drug testing.

Just go and read the whole thing. I am thinking of printing it out and hanging it on my wall.