Lincoln Had It Right: Labor is Prior
To Capital; But Where is Labor NOW?

We are reprinting an excerpt of a speech on the relationship between labor and capital, made by President Abraham Lincoln in his first message to Congress (Dec. 3, 1861). It is essential reading for every American who believes there is something profoundly wrong with our nation’s economy‹and wants to see it corrected. Here is the passage:

“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital; that, in fact, capital is the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital and deserves much the higher consideration.”

What is the situation today, 146 years after Lincoln, a U.S. war-time President, expressed his remarkable views to Congress? Capital is completely dominant in the economy and in the political arena. Its profit-groping tentacles reach out to all parts of the world as it preys on the labor of poor people wherever it can. It has the power to fire countless thousands of workers any time it chooses to, for whatever reason or no reason at all.

Corporations are able to pay their executives millions of dollars in salaries and bonuses, while they fight tenaciously to keep wages down to their lowest level. They can compel employees to work longer and harder to maintain their competitive edge‹or risk being laid off. They use various forms of intimidation, including firings, to deter their employees from joining a union. They exercise complete control in more than 90 percent of the nation’s workplaces, including unionized ones.

And what about labor? How has it taken advantage of its theoretical priority and superior status over capital? The sad truth is that organized labor has embraced the capitalist system, despite the latter’s contemptuous attitude toward workers and their unions. Labor has tolerated the growing gap between the rich and the poor in our society, where 12.7 percent of the population is living in poverty in the richest country of the world.

While workers create the economic wealth of the country, it is the corporate executives who decide how the wealth will be shared‹mostly among those already wealthy. If workers want even a tiny share of their created wealth, they have to fight for it at the bargaining table against a greedy employer class.

And what about our labor leaders? Far too many see their jobs as primarily selling their members’ skills and getting the best contract for them. (Even here, they haven’t done a great job, Wages are stagnant and unions are making concessions at the bargaining table.)

But a major weakness of labor is at the top level of leadership. The AFL-CI0 and the Change to Win have accepted the terms of the capitalist profit system, under which they have little or no voice in determining basic corporate policies and practices. They do nothing but complain when multinationals export hundreds of thousands of good-paying jobs overseas. They constantly whine about the employers’ aggressive actions, but have yet to mount a serious challenge to them They’re holding back on major organizing campaigns, counting on a big Democratic victory to bring them a lot of goodies in its wake. That can hardly be called a fighting plan. Working families are entitled to better leadership.

Are there still some labor leaders who want to recover labor’s original legacy by challenging the excesses of capitalism? Will they dare to say so publicly? And will they begin to do something about it? Or will they continue to sit back and take the little that capitalism offers?

Our weekly column, “The World of Labor,” reports the struggles and victories of unions in countries around the globe. Check our web site: www.LaborEducator.org.