"We have seen a central government promote the power of labor-union bosses, and in turn be supported by that power, until it has become entirely too much a government of and for one class, which is exactly what our Founding Fathers wanted most to prevent"
About this Quote
Robert Welch, the founder of the staunchly anti-communist John Birch Society, fires at what he saw as a dangerous alliance: a central government empowering union bosses who, in turn, deliver political muscle to keep that government in power. The phrasing deliberately twists Lincoln’s ideal of a government “of the people, by the people, for the people” into one “of and for one class,” a pointed claim that policy has been captured by a narrow constituency. Beneath the rhetoric lies a classic American anxiety about faction. James Madison warned in Federalist No. 10 that free societies produce competing interests that must be managed so no single group dominates.
The historical backdrop is mid-20th-century America, when union density peaked and the New Deal order had encoded labor rights through the Wagner Act. Unions became central players in Democratic coalitions, helping shape social policy and providing turnout and funding. At the same time, headlines about corruption in the Teamsters and fears of communist infiltration gave ammunition to critics. Laws like Taft-Hartley in 1947 and Landrum-Griffin in 1959 reflected a public and congressional push to check union power and police internal abuses. Welch went further, casting the relationship as collectivism edging toward tyranny, and treating union leadership as a separate, self-interested stratum binding government to a class agenda.
Yet the Founders’ remedy for faction was not to suppress organized groups but to diffuse power so competing interests constrain each other. Labor’s clout existed alongside business lobbies, agricultural blocs, and regional machines. The more enduring insight here is less about unions per se and more about the hazard of any symbiosis between government and a mobilized interest that can entrench its privileges. The question of capture did not end with labor; it runs through debates about corporate lobbying, campaign finance, and public-sector unions today. The task remains to preserve pluralism and accountability so that organized power serves the public rather than narrowing it.
The historical backdrop is mid-20th-century America, when union density peaked and the New Deal order had encoded labor rights through the Wagner Act. Unions became central players in Democratic coalitions, helping shape social policy and providing turnout and funding. At the same time, headlines about corruption in the Teamsters and fears of communist infiltration gave ammunition to critics. Laws like Taft-Hartley in 1947 and Landrum-Griffin in 1959 reflected a public and congressional push to check union power and police internal abuses. Welch went further, casting the relationship as collectivism edging toward tyranny, and treating union leadership as a separate, self-interested stratum binding government to a class agenda.
Yet the Founders’ remedy for faction was not to suppress organized groups but to diffuse power so competing interests constrain each other. Labor’s clout existed alongside business lobbies, agricultural blocs, and regional machines. The more enduring insight here is less about unions per se and more about the hazard of any symbiosis between government and a mobilized interest that can entrench its privileges. The question of capture did not end with labor; it runs through debates about corporate lobbying, campaign finance, and public-sector unions today. The task remains to preserve pluralism and accountability so that organized power serves the public rather than narrowing it.
Quote Details
| Topic | Equality |
|---|
More Quotes by Robert
Add to List
