Why were labor unions historically so racist and xenophobic?

Why were labor unions historically so racist and xenophobic?

they take our jerbs

Because poor people from other countries who will work for pennies on the dollar of what unions demand are bad for them.
If they're willing to work in the bad conditions, then there is no pressure on the employer to fulfill the workers' demands

Not only historically, they still are. There's a reason Bernie Sanders received a lot of money from unions; hint, it has to do with his anti-immigration and anti-grade policies. Anyway, it's because unions seek to get the maximum possible gain for themselves, and foreigners who work for less than what the union says people should work for undermines their whole point.

>anti-grade policies
*anti-trade

>be poor working class nigger
>someone even poorer works for less than you
>they replace you with them, all your bargaining power is gone
They really are irrelevant now except to line the pockets of union fatcats

It's more like they took our jerbs for less than we're willing to work for.

There's a line in the left that says something along the lines of, "If they took your job, they're probably better at it than you," but in reality, they're probably just willing to work for less, with an acceptable amount of quality drop.

Because by their very nature they are leeches, they care not about the workers but merely themselves. Just like a leech care not of you but only for the blood you will involuntary provide them.

Are you talking about labor unions or immigrant laborers?

Both, they both hurt workers

Because they feared the yellow warrior.

Because open borders and open trade with the third world is shite for Western workers.

Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?

Eleventh Post Best Post

California used to be at the vanguard of anti-Asian, anti-immigrant policies and legislation, like the Chinese Exclusion Act and the Alien Land Law. What the fuck happened?

Bullshit. The unions protect not only the workers, but also the imported labour who would face lesser conditions by working outside of the union.
They're not perfect, but they're pretty smart close.

Native poors wouldn't agree to work for miniscule pay anymore, thus the need for illegals from Central and South America to fill up the low pay menial worker niche.

What this nigga said, but it is not even blind hatred based on race and nationality, they are a threat to local labour regardless

...

Because foreigner are always willing to work for less and in worse conditions, undoing any work the union has achieved so far.

"They took our jobs" is a very legitimate concern, regardless of how the media try to ridicule that.

>immigrant policies allow x
>look this guy is responsible for the state's decisions!
Hmm...

You act as though most anti-immigrant Americans aren't eager to change the country's laws to make it harder to immigrate to this country.

...

Because they were part of societies that were racist and xenophobic.

Is that necessarily a bad thing?

It's inherently hypocritical and it ignores the issue. People's feelings can't trump simple economics.

EVERY
MAN
A
KING

>People who work the same job are the same people

Thank you based Long

More dudes means more people to to work, as we all know, increased supply leads to lower prices unless met with sufficient demand increases.

Because cause struggle is a simplistic joke and other workers are the worker's main rival and enemy. Allying with other workers when benefical is valid and optimal but once a rival band appears it must be integrated or crushed. There's not "defeat" of the "pig" rich boss if other workers actively sabotage you.

This is true, it's also the same reason Cesar Chavez opposed illegal immigrants when he was trying to organize California farm workers. That's something you'll never hear when they tell the story of the UFW.

>On a few occasions, concerns that illegal immigrant labor would undermine UFW strike campaigns led to a number of controversial events, which the UFW describes as anti-strikebreaking events, but which have also been interpreted as being anti-immigrant. In 1969, Chavez and members of the UFW marched through the Imperial and Coachella Valleys to the border of Mexico to protest growers' use of illegal immigrants as strikebreakers. In its early years, the UFW and Chavez went so far as to report illegal immigrants who served as strikebreaking replacement workers (as well as those who refused to unionize) to the Immigration and Naturalization Service.[20][21][22][23][24]

>In 1973, the United Farm Workers set up a "wet line" along the United States-Mexico border to prevent Mexican immigrants from entering the United States illegally and potentially undermining the UFW's unionization efforts.[25] During one such event, in which Chavez was not involved, some UFW members, under the guidance of Chavez's cousin Manuel, physically attacked the strikebreakers after peaceful attempts to persuade them not to cross the border failed.[26][27][28]

redpilled
dont want competing workers who are willing to work for less

You shouldn't talk about yourself like that.

The asians got replaced with brown people

It's not even redpilled because a lot of union workers are on the left. It's just self-interest.

Thinking the left can't be redpilled on certain topics.

From the viewpoint of a business, they are. Why would I hire John who wants $70k a year, health benefits, and union protection when I can just outsource the whole factory to Mexico, pay less in safety and environmental regulations, and just transport to markets tariff free (thank you NAFTA)? Americans are not competitive anymore in terms of labor. Unionized labor and the blue collar working class have suffered horribly in the face of automation and free trade agreements because you can't do things more accurately than a robot and you can't do things as cheaply as the Chinese. Who are, by the way, outsourcing THEIR labor to Vietnam and the Philippines and the like.

Cheap immigrant labor undermines union bargaining power.

We don't even need immigrant labor anymore because hosting immigrants incurs obligations like Social Security, healthcare bills for the indigent, workers comp, filings for permanent residency, and increased police presence to deal with crime and vice inherent to low income communities. Globalization means you can just build a factory in Mexico and keep all those domestic problems over there.
Ranting against immigration is impotent posturing by populist demagogues who want to appeal to a mass of economically disenfranchised voters. As we saw with Trump's handling of Carrier, it doesn't solve any of their problems.

>filings for permanent residency
Which is paid for by the immigrant.

Supply of labour goes up faster than demand, value of work drops in the ínterim, thus the unions lose bargaining power.

Cute.

Because with massive immigrations= more workers=more expendable workers=less pay and worse conditions and immigrants tend to not be from where your from

Not an argument.

It was a different time.

Because they didn't go to college.

You are right in the outsourcing, but some jobs can't be outsourced desu