dems: donald trump wants to destroy american and democracy and install himself as dictator
also dems: not only will we congratulate trump on winning the election, we will also do nothing to prevent him from doing whatever he wants once he's president
libs:
vote blue!Death to America
instead of blood my heart pumps dialectical materialism, sorry buddy
Death to America
to one of our great posters.If you are not communist tendency, insert the gold star you want here comrade:
thank you, this means a lot
i sometimes get anxious that im super annoying on here so it's nice to have someone say the oppositeDeath to America
Even before I made an account here from my old instance I would notice the user that always said 'Death to America' and saw your comments as exemplary posts of proper Hex Thought
I don't know how radical you are, or how radical I am. I am certainly not radical enough. One can never be radical enough; that is, one must always try to be as radical as reality itself
-The kind Vladimir Ilyich
Also yes we lost by an incredible margin, so please sign this thank you card to our perfect candidate saying how much you loved her joy
Biden also dragged his feet on initial nominations and his NLRB has maintained a ton of the worst Trump-era decisions.
Most pro-union president btw
Can’t wait until after all this. They try to take credit for the growing global enshittification by telling the GOP in a smug tone: “you do realize we let you win, right?”
Democrats will be happy that they can just retire and do absolutely nothing for the rest of their lives. I’m willing to bet Sotomayor and Kagan will retire under Trump too just to make it official.
I can't imagine that that'd happen, they need to maintain some level of "we're trying here" in order to effectively rile up their base to vote. Not appointing someone to the NLRB is much less noticable than Supreme Court justices stepping down. I think that the optics are best for both parties if the Supreme Court is basically always a 5-4 split one way or the other, or it is always 5-4 (R). That way the line is that it's always this close to {getting the Supreme Court back,the other team getting the Supreme Court} to mobilize voters.
https://xcancel.com/CMRusso1/status/1856359169189720503#m
You know.. when they came for the Unions, I stayed silent, because the Unions supported Trump and I was in a camp, forced to give birth and had no rights... Too bad, so sad. I am down for this part.
Liberals don't be demons for 5 minutes challenge: any difficulty any map cheats enabled
Evoking 'first they came for' while completely missing the point is becoming a new lib sport at this point
First they came for the socialists, and I laughed because those fuckers voted for Jill Stein
"First they came for the Latinos, and I reported them to ICE.
Then they came for the Muslim-Americans, and I laughed when they got deported because they voted for Jill Stein.
Then they came for the Black Men, and I called the police on them for driving near my house, as payback because a minority of them voted for Trump, but I see ethnic groups as a monolith (except my own because I am an individual.
Then they came for the Women, and I cheered at them bleeding out in parking lots because they live in red states so fuck those racists!
Then they came for me, I'm a white male, so they didn't really do anything to me but I can be really smug about it!"
If some people want to vote for Trump, I shouldn't have labour rights under Trump.
Did any union support Trump? I know Teamsters didn't endorse, but that's not the same as supporting Trump.
Obviously cop unions are always supporting Republicans, but nobody serious considers that union support.
Cop unions are "fake" because cops are class traitors. My opinion anyway. But yes no one considers their endorsement because obviously they always support the most right wing candidate, usually the republican... although now days they're literally both full pro-cop parties
And i assume the person isn't talking about the union as an entity or its leadership but rather the unionized workers who belong to the union. Many voted for Trump. Not that surprising considering Biden offered very little to them and fully failed to communicate what he did offer (and Harris too later on). When the entire election is social issues vs social issues and class issues are effectively off the table (in any meaningful way) then people who don't pay much attention of course vote for the hog taking a better social issues story for them to believe in.
Literally the meme of Eric shooting Hannibal then asking "Why would Donald Trump do this?" Eric is the DNC/libs and Hannibal is "the working class" which includes people who actually work for a living. They blame Trump for their own failure to reject neoliberal capitalism that has been failing 90% of the population for 40-50 years.
I know Teamsters didn’t endorse, but that’s not the same as supporting Trump.
What do you mean? Of course not endorsing is the same as supporting Trump. Also not voting is supporting Trump. Not giving money to Democrats is supporting Trump. Not having enough money to give enough of it to the right Democrats is supporting Trump.
Dems: A vote for 3rd party is a vote for Trump
GOP: A vote for 3rd party is a vote for Kamabla
Synthesis: Voting 3rd party is the true unity option because it's the only way of voting twice without committing voter fraud
Semi-related reminder that DeJoy is still head of the post office. A majority of the board that appoints (and can fire) him is now Biden appointees and they've done nothing.
They practically claimed DeJoy was going to help Trump steal the 2020 election by destroying the USPS capacity to deliver mail-in ballots, and as SOON as the election was called it's been radio silence about him ever since. That struck me out of the blue one day in like 2022 and I felt insane
NLRB is on the chopping block for the Supreme Court too, which will have effects long after Trump. They basically want to make it impossible to issue injunctions and judgements, so the NLRB would only be able to make recommendations while unfair labor practices go through regular courts.
The owning class would be wise to remember the NLRB and other labor laws are compromises to keep workers from literally dragging the bosses out of their homes...
Regular courts that they also control are far more expensive and will never rule in their favor so no union would waste resources doing it
NLRB was an essential part of the destruction of the working class movements that preceded it. If unions are no longer regulated by the US government, they can exert more pressure in more effective ways.
Or they will just cease to exist. They will be deemed illegal and everything will become a wildcat strike. This take feels like accelerationist but for labor unions
Okay so the neoliberal union machine run by the US government that represents 10% of workers will be disbanded, and then workers will have to break the law to get what they want? This is bad because we respect the law and think that unions should be yoked by the US government? This is bad because the workers with the largest concessions afforded by the US government will lose those concessions and no longer have an economic incentive to maintain the status quo? Do we not like wildcat strikes? What is your critique here?
Things are accelerating, contradictions are sharpening, the economy is crumbling and fascism is on the rise. Are we not allowed to have an honest analysis of the situation? Is that accelerationism? The treat factory is ending, inshallah, and the treat addled mind along with it. When people awaken from this haze and realize they are gonna have to break the law to survive, maybe they will actually join with the rest of us who have been living this way the whole time. Maybe instead of wishing to protect the institutional systems designed to destroy the labor movement, we should celebrate their downfall and the downfall of all of the institutions that keep the neoliberal fantasy alive. We are entering the best period for revolutionary organizing since the 60's and, as always, it is because the conditions have gotten bad enough that people will do something that would have been previously too uncomfortable. I did not organize for this to happen, nothing I did or thought accelerated this situation into being, but this has obviously been where we are going for a long time and now we are here.
Rooting on the failure of the NLRB in hopes that it creates the contradictions needed for an uprising of the labor movement is naive. As we currently see in the labor movement when the ruling class threatens workers ability to eat and have a shelter they cave and I don't think this is simply because institutional powers tell them to. I think there's plenty of critique for these institutions, but what organizational power do leftists have in the labor movement to move people once there is no NLRB or its power removed so much it becomes meaningless?
Again, the NLRB affects 10% of workers, it is already meaningless to the most marginalized and oppressed workers; to nearly every worker. The union itself should be the organizational power, but the NLRB means they the power rests in a government body instead of the workers themself. What power did workers have before the NLRB? Considering it was their power that forced the government to create the NLRB in response, obviously it was a lot. The idea that anyone is rooting for this in hopes of it helping is naive and misguided, the point is that it is happening anyway and contradictions are getting sharper for many reasons, this being one of them. That is happening and we need to incorporate that into our analysis and be prepared to organize with that reality in mind
The power does exist within the workers. The NLRB if it were to truly be pro labor would be a full extension arm of labor. I find no contradiction in having a federal labor bureaucratic agency that protects the rights of labor. The fact that agency could be used to destroy labor unions should be fought and a fight leftist should show up to.
Yes and the senate and house and presidency, if only the were truly pro worker, would be great for labor. It's almost if we live in a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and the state is a tool of the ruling class to oppress the working class or something
Unions and all the money and infrastructure don’t “cease to exist,” if nlrb goes away. Everything becoming a wildcat strike was how it was when American labor power was greatest
IMO you're wrong to assume that forcing all labor actions to be illegal will unshackle a very powerful labor movement in the US. Surveillance is a hundred times what it was in the apogee of the labor movement. The thing that made the labor movement strong at that time was the material conditions of the time: America was rapidly industrializing and conditions were very poor for workers. Now, while conditions are obviously far from good, the neoliberals seem to have found a compromise for labor aristocracy to get enough shallow pleasures on borrowed money that US labor is nowhere near as radical as before, and offshoring industry has globalized the reserve army of labor (making the entire periphery scabs).
I expect that Teamsters and unions involved in logistics will continue to go hard because they have uniquely loadbearing functions.
I never said it would, merely that changing this law would not kill the organized labor in America
There is no such thing as accelerationism. Things will get to the point that they will have to be changed or they will not.
Probably one reason they're so excited at the ruling saying unions can get fined/charged for losses during strikes
This. Reading about its creation in my US labor course was heartbreaking and even the pretty radical textbook didn't seem to care about the obvious problem the NLRB serves for workers power
Labor's Untold Story does a decent job covering it and the later Taft-Hartley act within the scope of the US labor movement
Unions will continue to be regulated by the US government but would hopefully figure out that without the NLRB pressuring companies to negotiate the workers would have to do it themselves.
Most likely though the courts will say it's up to the states and then each blue state will have a labor relations board like many already do for workers not covered under the NLRA and zero new organizing will happen or be supported in red and purple states as industries are slowly shipped out of areas with union presence and the unions reach their eventual demise.
At this rate it has to be intentional - controlled opposition.
It's not "controlled" so much as both parties represent different factions of the same class interests
It's controlled in the sense that Democrats tout themselves as being against ruling class interests in various ways but then, of course, do not actually taje action to do so once elected. A perfect example is Obamacare. Obama ran on a single-payer healthcare promise but did the Dem thing of saying it required winning Congress as well (they assume they won't get the votes and will therefore have that excuse). Only, they did win Congress and with enough votes to shove the whole thing through withiut changing the precious Senate rules, so they had no excuse whatsoever. So what did they do? They found a whipping boy in Joe Lieberman, pretended discipline was impossible, and gladly allowed the ACA to become a slightly subsidized insurance mandate, guaranteeing subscribers for private insurance.
Feel like one single strike of logistics industry (especially if they get some truckers, so pipe dream) will get republicans onboard with nlrb
The funny thing is McFerran was a trump nominee a few years back. I hate the NLRB so much bring back real unions
I have (had?) a complaint filed with the nlrb. Gave an affidavit, went through all the steps. The attorney assigned to my case stopped returning my calls eventually. No communication, no explanation. Maybe I can check the website for the status of the case but whatever. I thought I had a valid grievance and they brushed me off. Fuck the nlrb. They are completely unnecessary at best and more likely a hindrance to a true labor movement in america.
