Home > Election 2010 > Two Sides to Every Issue

Two Sides to Every Issue

April 28, 2010

Well, people are listening. In the past few weeks, the writers here on Viewfinder Redux have talked about the problems with top-down leadership and the need to hear alternative viewpoints. We have made well-considered voting recommendations that have even included members of the Poster slate.

At the same time, members’ email inboxes have been stuffed time and again with diatribes from “elect steven poster” addressing and then dismissing our arguments. While we may not be convinced by their logic, we are certainly glad to be engaged in a stimulating, if contentious, dialogue.

What we are not pleased about are the (pardon my Latin) ad hominem attacks against some of our writers and candidates. Why attack the messenger? On sets across the regions we’ve heard our members express fear for their families in a future with a 400 hour health care qualifying requirement. We’ve heard members question the wisdom of discarding corporate law protections. We’ve heard members complain that, in this economy, it is difficult to come up with $200 for training seminars. We don’t just pull these ideas out of thin air.

Those of us who sit on the board as well as those of us who simply care about the direction of our organization have a duty to give voice to these members’ questions.   

In most cases we are in the minority. The board vote on corporate dissolution, as Poster so often reminds us, was 45-6. Though we asked to have both views accompany the ballot, the majority preferred to only show members one side, one argument.

In our view, and the view of centuries of history since the ideal of Democracy was born, vigorous debate makes the institutions of governance stronger.

In our Union we are brothers and sisters. We are family. We squabble. We tussle. We argue. It’s all part of life.

What we can neither encourage nor condone, however, are leaders who, threatened by minority viewpoints, squelch dissent and attack dissenters. This intolerance and information control as practiced by our current leaders — and their lockstep board majority — benefits no one.

It had to be said.

— The Management —

Categories: Election 2010