In this political climate a 10 day general strike would be dealt with by deploying the army.
There’s also the chance that they’d just hunker down and outlast it. Giving them a definite timeline gives them a light at the end of the tunnel. After 10 days, it’s just business as usual again. A general strike without a posted timeline would lead to capitulation within only a few days. It wouldn’t even take all 10 days.
Kidney stones don’t suck just because they hurt. They suck because you don’t know how long they’re going to hurt for. They hurt until you have passed the stone, and you have no idea how long that will take. The pain is analogous to a muscle cramp. People can grit their teeth and bear it if they know it’s just a muscle cramp and will end soon. But when it has been six days and you don’t have any idea how much longer it will last, it makes you desperate.
So what, they gonna come to my house and make me go to work?
Or do they show up at my work and do my job?
No, they declare your not working illegal, and imprison you into a forced labor camp. Where if you don’t work you are tortured. And probably where you work until the terrible conditions kill you.
Take a look at Musk’s Twitter feed to see exactly where this is going.
“This is the way” on a post about how labor for prisoners is a good thing.
“You committed a crime” for people opposing DOGE.
So what, they gonna come to my house and make me go to work?
Arrest you and toss you in a cell, more likely.
Ok, so they do that to everybody, and now the strike can’t end. This helps them how?
Ok, so they do that to everybody, and now the strike can’t end. This helps them how?
-
They likely won’t have to do it to everyone. Just enough people to make examples and frighten people into going back to work. Solidarity is not a magic word, but a state of enthusiasm that must be maintained.
-
If they do have to do it to entire workforce-sized populations, we get a cozy GULAG style labor system.
“They can’t arrest all of us” only works if there’s means of resistance other than passive. In liberal democracies, that’s typically protests, elections, and legal avenues; in less charming regimes, it comes down to internal dissent in the security apparatus or outright force from the oppressed. If you lack those means of negotiation, or the credible threat thereof, then they literally can arrest all of you, and will, given half a chance.
-
Neither. The army joins the strike.
You can not put an end date on it. That defeats the purpose
The purpose is to discourage voting. Messages like this serve that purpose well.
Having conversations around how ineffective voting is, is not equivalent to discouraging voting.
in the minds of many readers, it is.
I’ll do you all a favor and tag the people and voices you should not listen to. They want you to live in subjugation.
Edit: there are 350 million people in the USA. We do not need concensus.
Edit2: do not ask for your rights. Do not argue for your rights. Fight for your rights.
I’m blocking you, per your request.
Please!!!
Don’t interact with me. Don’t respond to me. I get to talk to maybe 40 or 50 people at a time and it is wasted on you.
A strike that has a scheduled end date is a strike that’s has scheduled its own failure. A ten day strike would achieve nothing except the suffering of it’s participants.
Yes, the economy would grind to a halt, yes people would likely die, yes it would financially hurt the powerful people in charge.
But do you really think those powerful people will give a shit? They know after ten days the gravy train will resume, but only for them and not the people who lost their jobs, got arrested, were injured, etc. The rich and powerful can afford to be patient, meanwhile everyone who sacrificed for ten days is going to have to question whether they can survive doing it again.
No, we’re way past the point where our society can afford another failed effort to affect change. We need a general strike that doesn’t end until the government capitulates to the needs of the people. It’s all or nothing, now. ☹️
Booooooo
Block
That’s not always accurate. A strike where people sit at home and watch TV might have this result, but a 10 days of people on the streets talking and hyping each other up, can easily grow revolutionary, especially if during those 10-days people use direct action for their mutual aid to cover their needs
1-day strikes and random marches on the other hand are practically useless
Reddit protest be like. Huffman literally said ‘You only protest for 2 days? Sure, we’ll wait’.
We need a general strike that doesn’t end until the government capitulates to the needs of the people
Many cannot afford to strike but that is the way the system was set however we only need 10% participation to send a powerful message - any more is icing on the cake. Those who cannot fully can participate by cutting back 10% or more. Everyone should be able to cut back to some extent. Yet, expect the corporate controlled MSM to NOT report on the effects or participation of a general strike. Look for your news on independent sites, some reliable foreign sources and the Fediverse only.
The strike is not the end of the exercise, oh, no! To pull off a huge action like this will take coordination, spreading awareness, cultivating relationships of trust, establishing lines of communication, laying the foundations by organizing, and getting people primed for action. That’s what we lack now.
Right now, we could all just choose to disobey together, and there are so many of us that they couldn’t stop us. But it would take a lot of people; only a few here and there taking action would simply leave those few destitute or in jail.
A general strike is not the goal, it’s the announcement that we’re organized. That awareness, those relationships, that trust, doesn’t just have to go away…
A strike that has a scheduled end date is a strike that’s has scheduled its own failure.
A flex of power is a great way of demonstrating to both your own union members and your bosses/administrators. Proving that coworkers can and will dictate the terms of economic activity is an incredibly powerful statement that illustrates exactly who is in charge of the workfloor.
No, we’re way past the point where our society can afford another failed effort to affect change.
People are going to try things and those things are going to continue to have a mixed chance at success. The idea that an ill-defined indefinite general strike will work better than a highly coordinated short-term shutdown is predicated on a number of your own personal theories about how oligarchs will respond and how long union organizers can effectively maintain a work outage.
You’re rolling dice just like the rest of us. Nothing you’re suggesting guarantees a particular outcome.
Once you have built the list of demands and the political alliance for a one day strike, the infrastructure stays around. So the next one day or longer strike is easier to execute.
What about canceling a specific day of work every week? That would spread out the pain on both sides, but in a way that makes it less painful for workers because some may have sick days they can use. If literally nobody shows up on every Friday it sucks pretty bad for the bosses, even if they show up all the other days.
It is both.
Voting is a good system. The alternative is “let’s just have a fight with guns, or with money, or connections to powerful people, every time there’s a disagreement.”
The problem is that we delegated the process of informing people what to vote for, to absolutely rotten media. And we delegated the process of figuring out the details of putting some candidates forward, to an absolutely craven, useless, and corrupt class of full-time political operatives who generally don’t give a shit about the people.
We need to fix those things. And yes, getting organized labor to fight back whenever they are fucking us, which is pretty much every day, to add some bite to all those polite ballots we’re sending in, sounds great.
But voting, as a concept, is good. It doesn’t have to be either or. It can be a 10-day general strike, and also voting to get rid of the guy who wants to nuke Iceland, and also organizing our politics better, for some candidates that aren’t so shit as these ones generally are. Each one will help the others get done.
The media will always exist and people will always base their decisions on the information they receive in the media. This is inevitable in any society with the degree of complexity we have today. It is just not possible to gather all the information ourselves about any but the most personal of topics. That is why free, unbiased, and independent media is an extremely important part of liberal electoral democracy. And for the greater part of the past two centuries, this is what we more or less had. Yes, major media outlets have always been somewhat controlled by the upper class (whether in the form of media companies or local media magnates), but until quite recently, most of them didn’t care about using those outlets as propaganda pieces; they just cared about continuing to collect their subscription money, which is likely the best-case scenario for privately owned for-profit media. It is astonishing that this system lasted as long as it did.
There used to be a requirement of giving equal air time to opposing opinions - that was one of the earlier things Republicans successfully targeted. I’ve no idea how to make that work with the virtually unlimited possible sources available today.
That just opens you up to false balancing. See: the media landscape on climate change for the last 70 years.
And also only works when there are only two sides to represent to begin with, so it would reinforce the two party system
Also doesn’t work when one side is supported by evidence and the others are “opinions” but given equal consideration.
I think you’re opening up a false dichotomy here: it’s not about voting vs. the law of the fist. It’s about how the democratic systems are set up to keep the powerful in power.
The system is set up to promote those “absolutely craven, useless, and corrupt class of full-time political operatives who generally don’t give a shit about the people”. And “fixing” the media to not promote those things is like trying to teach a cat not to hunt mice.
There are more ways to have a democratic stucture of politics than “we decide onsour ruler every four years”.
“We need both” “It doesn’t have to be either or”
“I think you’re opening up a false dichotomy here”
Voting is a good system. The alternative is “let’s just have a fight with guns, or with money, or connections to powerful people, every time there’s a disagreement.”
Show me how this is not a dichotomy. Why are these the only options?
Discussing why not having voting invites other methods of deciding power struggles that are even less democratic, does not mean a false dichotomy. I am very clearly discussing why both voting and also using other means of people power, together, is the way.
What do you think is my main argument? If not that both together are the way?
Discussing why not having voting invites other methods of deciding power struggles that are even less democratic, does not mean a false dichotomy
Yes it is. It presupposes that parliamentary democracy is the only way of democratic governance.
You are literally demonstrating the effect of the media landscape that you’re criticizing: you’re acting like there’s no other democratic alternative than a parliamentary democracy.
Tell you what: Tell me more about the other democratic alternatives you say I am missing. I didn’t think that my examples at all presupposed the existence of a parliamentary democracy, but if I know more about your counterexamples, I can better make sense of whether or not I overlooked them.
A successful form of democracy is Swiss style direct democracy. They also have a parliament and political parties, but public votes on all kinds of things happen very regular and are binding.
While I don’t have a perfect plan on democratic governance (sorry, I’m just a small, little boi), these examples came to mind right away:
What I also want to adress is that the things you’re criticizing in your first comment are structural problems of a liberal democracy. That means that they don’t stem from bad actors inside the system, but rather from the way the system is set up. Members of parliament have a free mandate and are under no direct obligation to enact policies on which they ran in elections. Yes, they can not get elected the next term, but this can also be an incentive to “get away with it” by e.g. manipulating the media landscape, lying, covering your tracks, searching for excuses, etc.
Also: you canwt vote the system away. When you’re voting, the only available opitions are ones that stabilize the parliamentary system. That’s why I don’t (or at least not completely) agree with “it needs both”. A general strike could lead to a more democratic system, while electoralism will always try to strengthen the current system.
There is also the issue of massive-scale gerrymandering, party politics preventing candidates we want from being given a chance to run in general elections, the electoral college, and widespread voter suppression and disenfranchisement as well-documented by Greg Palast and others. If they actually counted our votes we might get a more representative democracy, but what we have now is not that.
Yeah. That’s why I agree with the general strike. Like I say, we’ve delegated the details of wielding political details to a whole class of exclusively-political people, and they’ve been rigging the game and keeping all the power for themselves. Fuck that.
4 Boxes of liberty, use in order.
Maybe some amendment after the first ome need to be considered 👀
UAW is calling for all unions to align their contracts to end on May 1st 2028 and calling for a general strike to start that day. That gives us 3 years to get organized, set up local strike funds for our communities, and make sure we have representation at the negotiating table whether we’re in unions or not.
https://www.thenation.com/article/activism/general-strike-2028-unions-labor-movement/
How can we help?
Get organized with a progressive or socialist organization. DSA, PSL, or just you and some homes. If you’re completely isolated, an org like DSA is good because they have a lot of “at large” members that aren’t in formal chapters, but at large members have access to national resources too (not in day 1, its a political org, but DSA is good for at large membership). But the people who seem “the most organized” in your area, who have good politics and active membership, is the best org for you to join since these things can vary drastically from place to place.
From there, get involved in local labor organizing, your group might even have like a labor group that focuses on it.
If you live in a place where you can get a job that is a part of UAW Union, you can try to get it and “salt”, which means adding radical militant labor organizers to existing stagnant or bureaucratic unions, and start mobilization campaigns.
A pretty easy thing that would be super helpful, would be to fundraise for materials to create “strike-ready” kits, basically 5 gal bucket and lid full of supplies for an extended period, since strikes are long, difficult, protracted affairs. People get hungry, they get cold and wet, etc., mutual aid has a very low barrier to entry. I’m not a mutual aidist, but its something you could start basically today and have a bunch ready by that time.
If you can, don’t go alone, bring like minded people in or find like minded people. The best individual thing you can do is to educate yourself so when the time comes you can educate others. Read! Class Struggle Unionism is a classic, but there are probably books about UAW specifically. Another favorite of mine is “Teamster’s Rebellion” if you can find it
In three years?
This has to be bait from the fascists. In three years you won’t be able to strike. What a stupid idea.
I am a member of a union that predates the NLRB. And it will continue even if its gone. Unions did strikes when they were illegal. The law just makes strikes more peaceful, which is generally better for everyone involved, but it’s not essential.
Yep! Peaceful legal strikes are a privilege that our ruling class currently benefits from. Everyone is better off if the ruling class remembers that.
Civil unrest needs outlets. Legal ones are a great tool.
It might seem out there, maybe a little too late.
But, organizing these things, attracting people to it, raising funds, building up oversight; those things take time. A lot of time.
Just the ‘attracting people to it’ part is an almost impossible task. 40% of the American population can’t even be bothered to vote. They aren’t going to get up and protect their labor without a MASSIVE push.
It might seem way out there, but getting it at all would be triumphant and victorious.
Organizing a general strike is very difficult. You need to find a political position to rally behind and then build and maintain a huge network.
People will strike, if they feel if they feel it’s the only way.
Presuming there are still elections, this is basically calling for a general strike when it will have the most electoral weight. So, basically it comes down to whether or not you believe there will be another presidential election or if we’ll already be a fascist dictatorship by then.
Electoral politics doesn’t get the job done, but failing to attend to electoral politics can sure as shit make the job harder.
The question of “Who are we negotiating with” is all-important in every scenario except “Complete and total unconditional victory”.
Failing to attend to electoral politics is also a great way to ensure that blood has to be spilled again to re-win battles that were already fought, as has been seen with many of those left of center sitting out elections for half a century, which just so happens to coincidence with decoupling of wages from productivity, increasing wealth inequality, and erosion of workers’ rights.
If I thought people were consistent enough, I’d say that the founding of anti-electoralism was a right-wing, authoritarian conspiracy, but I don’t think that’s super likely.
If I missed 10 days of work it would take me a year to recover. The oligarchs are sitting pretty and they know it. It would take an army of Luigis to change anything.
With unions we can change things little by little. A 10 day strike isn’t long enough to be effective though…
The goal of the strikes is to stop 10 days from ruining a person, because it never should take a year to recover that
We can’t just say “General Strike” on the internet and expect anything to happen.
This is why unions collect dues: so they can pay part of workers’ wages and people won’t lose their homes. We need to organize enough people in your workplace that your boss can’t just fire you and hire someone else.
I am pro strike, but these pictures on the internet are just silly.
In the UK we missed the gernal strike because there are too many people making decisions for unions with egos. :(
Yeah, with all those general strikes we’ve had they must be really easy to organize!
This is what bothers me so much about the constant calls for general strikes on social media. They’re almost never paired with serious organization (ex: where are the strike funds to support people who otherwise can’t afford to miss paychecks?)
Not to mention a large chunk of the public won’t agree with the idea to begin with. Especially the top 20-30% of income earners.
Additionally, emergency/medical personnel not working would mean people are directly dying as a result of it, creating easy negative PR against the movement.
Asking 180+ million people to coordinate on anything is a farce, and for something like a general strike it is an absolute fantasy.
Have you noticed they’re always paired with messages encouraging voter apathy and disparticipation ?
I mean, I have 5 kids who need to eat. I would absolutely participate, but I just can’t afford it.
It’s OK, no one is asking you to. Just support the cause the best you can. Support the people participating. Support messaging. And lend a hand to people before and after.
Always.
Block
We’re in a country with very little organized labor compared to other countries in Europe or Latin America where strikes are common. Also cops here are highly militarized. Plus we are a massive country. Still, I think Americans need to consider a general strike and organize if need be. Is it easy? Obviously not. But I’ll happily take some optimism in these dark times.
Block
Would it though?
Firstly, the general population is stretched so financially thin that a 10 day strike is unaffordable for most
Now, ten days to bring everything to a halt sounds great. But unless it’s coordinated in certain areas, then there’s just a freeze on everything. Remember the COVID pandemic? Even if only certain areas strike, the situation is so bad that alot of jobs would be covered.
Secondly, do you honestly believe that the general population is selfless enough to not place any e-commerce, online services or any sort of digital product purchases within that 10 days? No.
Lastly, what happens after those 10 days? The whip comes out, there’s catching up to do.
Block
One way to escalate such a strike is to have a limited, general, recurring and escalating strike.
So it’s a day in January; two days in February; three in March, etc.
Its complicated, possibly too complicated for the typical worker, but it would give ramping escalation and allow for negotiation in process.
the problem remains the same: getting the general public to heed a strike. Short of people dying by hundreds of thousands, they don’t seem motivated.
When a million Americans died of Covid people demanded to end Covid restrictions.
Sad but true.
Not all Americans called for it, just very vocal ones. The people that were fine with the lockdowns and restrictions were not represented in the debate because they were sheltering in place at home trying to keep more people from dying to the virus.
America’s national identity is based around individualism. Other people dying is less important than individual success.
That’s why it’s the economy that matters. a quarter of a percent of extra deaths isn’t something people care about as long as they aren’t the ones dying. But economic turmoil hits everyone individually.
Who the hell can afford to go one day without pay, let alone 10?
Removed by mod
Get a couple guns (a long one and a short one) and learn how to use them.
This is a pretty intense topic to get involved with.
I dithered a little bit about getting a firearm. I still do not have one. I know how to use them, in a cursory kind of way.
Part of why I’ve held back on getting one is this: Imagine playing a board game for the first time, and if you lose, you’re going to die. Or sitting down at a poker table to play for the first time in your life. How well are you going to play? Are you probably going to win? Also, the game only lasts for fifteen seconds.
Having a gun sounds like not a bad idea for what’s coming up in this country. Having a gun and no experience at all in the types of situations you might get yourself into, if you have a gun, sounds almost worse than just not having one. People freak out, they fuck up, they take the wrong decisions. It’s what naturally happens when you’re playing an adversarial game for the first time in your life. After a while, you learn the game, and you start making generally good decisions a lot more of the time. But the first time…
I’m not saying having a gun is a bad idea. There are days when I think I’m being stupid for not having one. But also, you need to know what you’re doing, and if you don’t have some kind of military or other professional training, you’re not going to know what you’re doing, and you can walk yourself into situations there’s no good way out of if you don’t know what you’re doing.
Start saving now
Saving what?
grow food
How do you do that in a small apartment?
make do with less.
You sound like you’ve never lived in poverty. Unfortunately, millions of Americans do.
Removed by mod
I didn’t lecture you about anything, but if you grew up “dirt poor,” like you claim you did, then I would think that you would understand that people in poverty do not have anything to save.
Also, the idea that you could feed yourself and your kids with what you grow in small planters in an apartment (before they kick you out for not paying rent because you lost your job due to being out protesting) is not how the universe works.
I assume you are now going to make the suggestion I saw someone make the other day and let their kids eat out of dumpsters.
Also, I am sorry, but this is fucking stupid:
Or you can listen to the… idk, are they supposed solutions? And ignore what’s happening in our country and get some protection before they decide you have a mental illness and aren’t allowed to have one.
You do not automatically come up with good solutions which are beyond criticism and people who criticize them aren’t people who are just ignoring things.
Sorry, you’re not a god.
Removed by mod
from someone who’s already ensured his safety
And there it is- “you ran away like a coward.”
Removed by mod
A gun is going to be at least what - $500?
If I had $500 lying around, that’d be a down payment on an apartment in a place where they can’t fire you for being a tranny.
A well organized Union will have strike funds stashed away. Saving up is part of organizing a strike.
Block
You’ve had eight years to save up some money.
You need to go vote too. Probably for Democrats, if you’re reading this here.
It’s the best way to let them know what issues concern us most and what policies we like.
The rich can wait it out longer than you
Not if their plumbing needs fixing
Scabs exist. And fascism, the original one in Italy, rose as an answer to the left wing.
You can draw your own conclusions from this.
Ok, let me rephrase, not if their plumbing needs fixing and a specific green-hatted plumber is taking the job.
Fascism is a tool for autocrats to keep public discontent and unrest down for a while, but it is temporary, and invariably results in purge after purge after purge. Eventually the state has to resort to war against outward enemies, and if it’s not put down by assassination and revolution, it’s put down when the Allies are bombing the capitol.
The people lose a lot harder if the Allies reach Berlin, which is why there are thirty-nine known attempts to kill Hitler, culminating in the July 20 Plot.|
Scabs exist, but they’re expensive and universally hated by both sides.
Block
