Worker's Unions and Activism in Foreign Policy

[Argus]

Who says I am thinking of leaving any community or breaking any law? I am simply arguing in favor of allowing people to attain certain positions without being required to join a union. Employers should be able to make a contract with anyone. And anyone should be able to accept. So for instance I am not talking about leaving a union. I am talking about being a member of the political community who advocates for this freedom, all the meanwhile lawfully going about my business.

My point is that you cannot have a successful union representing workers rights at a given organization when people have the ability to opt out yet still retain those benefits. In the same way as allowing people to opt out of a local government and still get benefits, it would lead to anarchy and collapse.

[ToadBrother]

My point is that you cannot have a successful union representing workers rights at a given organization when people have the ability to opt out yet still retain those benefits. In the same way as allowing people to opt out of a local government and still get benefits, it would lead to anarchy and collapse.

I look at mandatory union membership as an excellent example of balancing rights. If we are to accept that a majority of workers in any shop have the right to form such an organization, then for that organization in any way to hope to have any influence on those workers' rights and benefits, there has to be a limitation on the rights of the individual. It's no different than allowing freedom of speech, but having libel and slander laws or banning shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater. No right is absolute, and balancing always means that one side is going to lose a little to the other. But as you say, any application of absolute rights would lead to anarchy.