Otherwise, by using GNU Emacs, you're depriving a union worker of their wages, and, since GNU Emacs gets updated even when there's a General Strike on, contributors are scabs, and union supporters have, historically, killed scabs.
I have never heard of, read, talked to, or even imagined that any living person would consider contributing to open source to be "depriving a union worker of their wages" or "scabbing". Have you ever even heard of an actual existing union before? Have you ever known someone who has participated in (well, let's be generous: imagined) a strike? Has any union ever banned its members from donating their free time to charity? Are you listening to yourself?
The union propaganda campaign must be working.
This is true insofar as setting a floor on any of wages or working conditions is, strictly speaking, a supply restriction.
> which would destroy Open Source
No, it wouldn't.
> Otherwise, by using GNU Emacs, you're depriving a union worker of their wages
I'm a member of a union that represents programmers. None of our contracts restrict the use of open source (or even paid off-the-shelf) products by the employer.
Contracting out custom programming work isn't even prohibited, though it is redtricted.