Stockholm syndrome and the white paper

As we are all aware, is an emotional attachment to one's captors in a hostage situation. It exists here at United. Our past managements and their culture of prioritizing asset trading over operations has led to a desperate air of gloom when we try to see a future. Our reponse, understandably, has been to react with ferocity and acrimony when dealing with our management.
We are faced with a paradigm shift we fail to recognize, and that is that the new management actually wants to run an airline. Our response to this is to continue what we know how to do, what we are comfortable with, which is fight, deny, obstruct and generally anything we can effect to maintain the status quo. It's the "devil-you-know-is-better-than-the-devil-you-don't-know" syndrome. We are comfortable with this state of affairs. We do not believe anything else is possible due to years of conditioning.
Your ALPA repesentatives are conditioned to respond to this mindset, and indeed thrive on it, as a proletariat that is angry is controllable, and so their power over you is assured.
In terms of reasonableness, our behaviour, in my view, has been shocking. We have discounted an offer out of hand that had merits worth discussing, refused an offer of binding arbitration which we could have positively influenced,  aligned ourselves with the whining fringe occupying Wall Street, demonstrated simply to hear our own voices and now we obstruct progress in the hope that we can "bring management to heel" by denying that our integration process is acceptable.
To wit: The white paper. Now I confess that as an Airbus pilot my view is substantially different, and the process for me easier, than say, a 757-767 pilot. Our changes have been minimal. So I wanted to see what was the difficulties arising from the presentaion of changes. I went to the white paper. This is, after all, what we were presenting to Congress in order to make our case. Surprise, surprise, there was no detailed information contained!  Long on the rhetoric, politics, philosophy and anger...short on facts. I saw as one of the contents, letters of resignation signed by two LCAs. Hah! Must be facts here I thought. But in reading the letters of the anonymous resignees I found that their main objection was to a performance procedure designed to reduce the V1 speeds. Now this happens to be something I have ardently advocated ever since being at United and being subjected to its stupid policy of delaying the V1 call as long as possible, thereby setting oneself up for an RTO overrun. Statistically airplanes do a whole lot better when they take off with an engine out than they do trying to stop after blowing one at high speed. Just check the facts. Don't take my word for it.
Their case it at best, debatable, and at worst, a political manouever designed to reflect their anger.
This is what it will appear to the objective eye. And yet here we are, still believing that this policy of obfuscation will give us what we want.
The treatment for the Stockholm syndrome is to remove the injured party from the environment and then allow them to develop individual, logical conclusions to the effects of the conditions at hand, without the pervasive threat of the controlling party. Obviously we cannot physically do this, but we CAN and MUST mentally detatch ourselves from the failing mindset that is creating an enemy out of an adversary.
Or we can stay on the insane party train which leads to striketown. We ARE pushing and management IS digging in their heels.