Talk:Labour movement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Untitled[edit]

I found an inconsistancy between this article and another it links to. In this quote:

The idea met with great resistance. In the 18th century and early 19th century, groups such as the Tolpuddle Martyrs of Tolpuddle, Dorset were punished and deported for forming unions, which was against the laws of the time.

the article says they were deported for forming unions, which was against the law. But if you follow the link to the article about the Tolpuddle martyrs, it cleary says the laws making unions illegal were repealed several years before. It goes on to say that the Martyrs were in fact brought up on charges for breaking an obscure law from a hundred years ago.


As my edits have been reverted once, I will justify them here. (Indedented is text I removed.)

(like trade unions)

They are mentioned in the next sentence, no need to mention them here.

"in response to the employers

vs. "vis-a-vis employers". "In response to" means that the labor movement is only reactionary, and never stakes out positions of its own. This is incorrect.

"socialist"

Not all supporters of the labor movement are socialists.

"green revolution"

At least according to our Wikipedia article, the green revolution refers specifically to a period starting in 1944.

The continuing effort, throughout failures and successes, of the global labour movement, to support, through activism, a fair and equal workplace for everyone in the world community benefits society as a whole.

Without prejudice as to the accuracy of this, many people would disagree and it cannot be proven, so we can't include it as is.

DanKeshet


Labour and labor[edit]

Wondering if we cant just agree to Labour as a Wikipedia standard when referring to any Labour movement topics. Labor can perhaps still be an optional spelling for non-political usage. -Ste|vertigo 00:12, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Don't think it makes a difference. People can spell it however they like, since both are intelligible to both Commonwealth and American speakers. BTW, I added the American spelling in parentheses at the top, since it seemed silly to me to have it as a footnote. Most other articles put alternative spellings in the first paragraph. 208.61.5.123 01:15, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
  • I think this speaks to the larger issue of whether to use European English spellings or American spellings. While most sources have a bit easier job of it (being published on one side of the pond or the other) wikipedia recieves contributions from many countries and faces a bit of a challenge from that. I'd say someone higher up should probably make one dialect the standard for international issues at least. --72.93.180.55 23:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Last Sentence in History[edit]

Someone needs to finish the last sentence in the History section. Right now it reads: "An active and free labour movement is considered by many to be an important element in maintaining democracy and for economic." Economic what? I would edit it myself but i don't know what word the original author had in mind. MAH! (talk) 21:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

The Lincoln Quote[edit]

I consider the Lincoln quote to be taken out of context. Lincoln goes on to elaborate on the quote and it is clear that he is not referring to "Labor" in the sense of a class, which is the subject of the labor movement, but labor as a physical activity. Lincoln values labor as a stepping stone to independence and then capitalism, not as a permanent class. His essay continues after a few paragraphs:

"The prudent penniless beginner in the world labors for wages a while saves a surplus with which to buy tools or land for himself then labors on his own account another while and at length hires another new beginner to help him This is the just and generous and prosperous system which opens the way to all gives hope to all and consequent energy and progress and improvement of condition to all No men living are more worthy to be trusted than those who toil up from poverty none less inclined to take or touch that which they have not honestly earned." 64.81.229.96 (talk) 21:33, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Labour and capitalism[edit]

The lead says, "while the goal of labourism was to protect and strengthen the interests of labour within capitalism ...". I wonder if this shows an Anglosaxon point of view. In much of Europe, large parts of the labour movement have been very critical of capitalism. Note that socialism includes social-democracy, which in its pure form aims at reforming the capitalist system by transferring part of the power in the economy from the capitalists (owners of the means of production and there shareholders) to the workers. There has been a considerable entanglement between the labour and socialist movements; many members of those movements will even have regarded the two terms as synonyms. Of course it is necessary to realize that there were (and are) also non-socialist labour organizations, like the catholic trade unions, which means that in many countries there was/is not a single, unified labour movement (making the labour movement a dubious term). Anyway, I think the quoted phrase is a little too articulate about the goal of 'labourism'. Bever (talk) 19:17, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Labourism[edit]

Is 'labourism' a normal term or a neologism? Never heard of it. I am not a native speaker, but still I would like to see some source. Bever (talk) 19:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

There are two articles about labourism referenced in a recent request to restore "labourism" to its own page. Janosabel (talk) 22:30, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Labourism

"Anti-labor" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Anti-labor. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  02:50, 23 February 2020 (UTC)