Albert "Ginger" Goodwin, born on this day in 1887 and nicknamed for his bright red hair, was a Canadian socialist and labor activist whose murder by police while protesting conscription led to the first general strike in Canada.
Born in Yorkshire, England on May 10th, 1887, Goodwin immigrated to Canada in 1909, at the age of 19, working as a coal miner in Nova Scotia.
In Canada, he organized with the Socialist Party of Canada and became a notable labor leade during the 1912–1914 Coal Miner's Strike against Canadian Collieries. Following the strike, he was blacklisted and was forced to move away from Cumberland to find work.
In 1916, he joined the Mining and Smelter workers Union and was elected as Secretary for the Trail chapter. Following his involvement with trade unions, Goodwin entered politics running as a candidate for the Socialist Party of Canada in the 1916 British Columbian election, although he did not win.
As World War I broke out, Goodwin became an outspoken advocate against the draft, initially refusing to sign up. Eventually, he was compelled to be drafted, and, after exhausting multiple appeals against his conscription, he fled into the hills of Cumberland, British Columbia.
On July 27th (some sources say July 26th), Goodwin was shot and killed by a member of the Dominion Police, who had ventured into the hills surrounding Comox Lake to locate men evading the draft and arrest them for their evasion. The officer who killed Goodwin successfully claimed self-defense in court, although it is unknown how the two actually encountered each other.
In protest to his murder, the first general strike in Canada, the Vancouver General Strike, took place on August 2nd, 1918. In 2015, a film about his life titled "Goodwin's Way" was released.
"War is simply part of the process of Capitalism. Big financial interests are playing the game. They'll reap the victory, no matter how the war ends."
- Albert Goodwin
Megathreads and spaces to hang out:
- ❤️ Come listen to music and Watch movies with your fellow Hexbears nerd, in Cy.tube
- 💖 Come talk in the New Weekly Queer thread
- 💛 Read and talk about a current topics in the News Megathread
- ⭐️ October Movie Nominations ⭐️
reminders:
- 💚 You nerds can join specific comms to see posts about all sorts of topics
- 💙 Hexbear’s algorithm prioritizes comments over upbears
- 💜 Sorting by new you nerd
- 🌈 If you ever want to make your own megathread, you can go here nerd
- 🐶 Join the unofficial Hexbear-adjacent Mastodon instance toots.matapacos.dog
Links To Resources (Aid and Theory):
Aid:
Theory:
Quick q for the Americans: why is there a guy talking to your congress about aliens? By that I mean, who is he, and how did he end up in the position to talk to government and answer questions?
I don't fucking care about what you think of aliens, I want to know the legal process as context.
I’ll be honest: i have no idea. I cannot begin to care about aliens rn
American comes in with
They have congressional hearings about all sorts of things. I know neither the legality not the precedence of it.
As for why this dudes here talking about aliens, as far as it matters to me he just showed up. No ones ever alluded to me the process of getting a hearing.
"I don't care about aliens" is not taking a position on whether they exist or what has or hasn't happened with them, which is what you implied with "what you think of aliens".
It's just a statement that Grownbravy doesn't know what is going on with the hearing because they have more important things to pay attention to rn, no reason to call someone illiterate jfc. There are a thousand legitimate reasons to shit on americans, why call out a comrade for a slight miscommunication instead?
Actual reason: no idea. But ostensibly, the house oversight committee convened the hearings to evaluate the " Implications on National Security, Public Safety, and Government Transparency" of the military's supposed secret interaction with and investigations into UAPs (politically correct term for UFOs). They are, again heavy grain of salt here, determining what's been going on in the military regarding these, evaluating the claims of these whistleblowers, and will presumably produce a report with both their findings, and thoughts on what they might do as elected officials to change US policy on UAPs, or at least to force the military to be more transparent .