The War of the Flea

[Geee]

American Spectator:

By any standard, unions are a behemoth in American politics. The Center for Responsive Politics reports that between 1990 and 2010, the 24 largest unions gave more than $500 million in campaign contributions, 95 percent of it to Democrats. Most of the biggest contributors were public sector unions, the largest being the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), which over that 20-year span gave $40,281,900 to Democrats and $547,700 to Republicans. Outside the two major parties, no entity is so heavily invested and wields so much power in American politics.

In a vicious cycle, the public sector unions take dues from their members, who are paid in tax dollars, and then use those dues to work for more influence and more tax dollars from the American taxpayer. With each cycle, more and more money flows from the taxpayer to the public sector unions.

This process has made the public sector unions in particular a significant force in American politics, but American taxpayers increasingly understand that much of that influence and power has been gained off their backs. Thanks to the tea partiers, these unions are starting to encounter a counter-insurgent "war of the flea." When massively superior forces confront a much smaller force, one would expect that, at least on paper, the massive force would easily prevail. But history shows it doesn't always work out that way. In his book Violent Politics, William Polk describes a war of independence from the early 20th century:

The elephantine British army in Ireland was harassed constantly, from dozens, if not hundreds of points, a war of attrition that attacked financial interests, making Ireland ungovernable while gaining support from the world community. Against a flea, massive force appears attractive, but the elephant typically uses violent methods, repugnant to the public and actually seem to prove the militant's propaganda.