<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>208Gi</author><text>&amp;quot;But as soon as one starts to organize one creates a division within the movement between the organized and the organizers, between ordinary members and officials. The officials begin to derive personal satisfaction from their place in the organization and seek ways of consolidating it.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;There have always been unions that organized in a manner that avoids this situation. (The CNT, the IWW, the Zapatistas (1990s) and, more.) In fact, this act of holding on to power has always been one of the major Anarchist critiques of Marxism. And, Anarchists were very present in the unions of the early 1900s.&lt;p&gt;One of Capitalism&amp;#x27;s and Authoritative Communism&amp;#x27;s finest achievements has been burying the history of unions. They&amp;#x27;ve done it so well that many current unions are unaware of alternative power structures.</text><parent_chain><item><author>jasim</author><text>Here&amp;#x27;s another reason for unions to become defunct over time, as explained by Steve Bruce in his book Sociology: A Very Short Introduction.&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Any kind of group activity requires organization. But as soon as one starts to organize one creates a division within the movement between the organized and the organizers, between ordinary members and officials. The latter quickly acquire knowledge and expertise that set them apart and give them power over ordinary members. The officials begin to derive personal satisfaction from their place in the organization and seek ways of consolidating it. They acquire an interest in the continued prosperity of the organization. For ordinary trade unionists, their union is just one interest in which they have a small stake. But for the paid officials the union is their employer. Preserving the organization becomes more important than helping it achieve its goals. As radical action may bring government repression, the apparatchiks moderate.&amp;quot;</text></item><item><author>perrick</author><text>Louis Chauvel, a french sociology professor, made a similar argument using a Prey-Predatory model with trade union membership and income inequality over the last 100 years :&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;This article shows empirically how trade union membership and income inequality are mutually related in twelve countries over more than 100 years. While past research has shown that high income inequality occurs alongside low trade union membership, we show that past income inequality actually increases trade union membership with a time lag, as trade unions recruit more members after inequality has been high. But we also show that strengthened trade unions then fight inequality, thereby destroying what helped them to recruit new members in the past. As trade union density decreases, inequality increases and eventually re-incentivises workers to join unions again. By showing this empirically, we reconceptualise the relationship between inequality and union density as a prey and predator model, where predators eat prey – unions destroy inequality, but thereby also destroy their own basis for survival. By empirically showing that trade union density and social inequality influence each other in this way over long periods, this article contributes to a dynamic approach on how social problems and social movements interact.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;onlinelibrary.wiley.com&amp;#x2F;doi&amp;#x2F;10.1111&amp;#x2F;kykl.12128&amp;#x2F;full&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;onlinelibrary.wiley.com&amp;#x2F;doi&amp;#x2F;10.1111&amp;#x2F;kykl.12128&amp;#x2F;full&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality</title><url>http://news.stanford.edu/2017/01/24/stanford-historian-uncovers-grim-correlation-violence-inequality-millennia/</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>germinalphrase</author><text>Of course, many small - and still influential - unions are actively made up of their members. For instance, teachers unions (outside of large metropolitan areas) commonly vote their presidents and other officials directly from the teaching ranks. These leaders often receive little&amp;#x2F;no compensation for their additional duties.</text><parent_chain><item><author>jasim</author><text>Here&amp;#x27;s another reason for unions to become defunct over time, as explained by Steve Bruce in his book Sociology: A Very Short Introduction.&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Any kind of group activity requires organization. But as soon as one starts to organize one creates a division within the movement between the organized and the organizers, between ordinary members and officials. The latter quickly acquire knowledge and expertise that set them apart and give them power over ordinary members. The officials begin to derive personal satisfaction from their place in the organization and seek ways of consolidating it. They acquire an interest in the continued prosperity of the organization. For ordinary trade unionists, their union is just one interest in which they have a small stake. But for the paid officials the union is their employer. Preserving the organization becomes more important than helping it achieve its goals. As radical action may bring government repression, the apparatchiks moderate.&amp;quot;</text></item><item><author>perrick</author><text>Louis Chauvel, a french sociology professor, made a similar argument using a Prey-Predatory model with trade union membership and income inequality over the last 100 years :&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;This article shows empirically how trade union membership and income inequality are mutually related in twelve countries over more than 100 years. While past research has shown that high income inequality occurs alongside low trade union membership, we show that past income inequality actually increases trade union membership with a time lag, as trade unions recruit more members after inequality has been high. But we also show that strengthened trade unions then fight inequality, thereby destroying what helped them to recruit new members in the past. As trade union density decreases, inequality increases and eventually re-incentivises workers to join unions again. By showing this empirically, we reconceptualise the relationship between inequality and union density as a prey and predator model, where predators eat prey – unions destroy inequality, but thereby also destroy their own basis for survival. By empirically showing that trade union density and social inequality influence each other in this way over long periods, this article contributes to a dynamic approach on how social problems and social movements interact.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;onlinelibrary.wiley.com&amp;#x2F;doi&amp;#x2F;10.1111&amp;#x2F;kykl.12128&amp;#x2F;full&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;onlinelibrary.wiley.com&amp;#x2F;doi&amp;#x2F;10.1111&amp;#x2F;kykl.12128&amp;#x2F;full&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Stanford historian uncovers a grim correlation between violence and inequality</title><url>http://news.stanford.edu/2017/01/24/stanford-historian-uncovers-grim-correlation-violence-inequality-millennia/</url></story>