I like the provocative, open-ended Brandeis quote.
I like the proposed centrality of labor - the idea that the "labor question" is central to national economies and politics - whether declared or implicit in other issues.
I like the integrative, overarching idea that a great, inter-related question in the US today is how workers can get a fair share of national wealth and exercise power - not only in politics, but in society and culture.
I like the inclusion of journalistically responsible and educative links.
And I like the policy wonky, attempted populism of the piece...
...though that policy wonky-ness and the fact that it appears on commondreams vs. a union hall is also deeply - perhaps fatally - problematic.
I do not agree that, "[n]ow defenders of the status quo of runaway inequality have shifted from saying there isn’t a problem to saying that, while there is a problem, NOTHING CAN BE DONE." As I see it, the main liberal view is that there is a "skills gap" and the solution is "college for all" and "career and college readiness" in the sphere of education - when, in fact, the purported "skills gap" has more to do with the economic and political power of private business than education.
And I think Silvers botches the paragraph that starts, "The 20th century was called the “American Century” fundamentally because we addressed the labor question democratically and we did it first — propelling the US out of the Great Depression and enabling us to be the Arsenal of Democracy." Those with a background in US history will get what Silvers gets backwards here...
Last, I agree that unions are an ideal answer - in terms of political awareness and economic and political bargaining power - but, given the 'roboticization' and offshoring of labor - such progressives as exist in a post-unionized-labor-US economy must not be anachronistic: we must think within the framework of those options available to us...
...sorry not to end w/a great solution here, but...let's think.