Yeah, absolutely. Capital has become increasingly less reliant on labor in the Global North. That's why Walmart can shut down any shop that unionizes. That's why the UK ended its mining operations to break the power of the miners' union.
The struggle against automation is really important. Especially in regards to trucking. The US is a consumer economy, where commodities for the Global South are sold for profit. Trucking is one of the few places where labor has power. Trucks are needed to distribute commodities across the country. Labor in the US is even weaker once that is automated.
That’s why Walmart can shut down any shop that unionizes.
That's not why. The shitty political climate and lack of participation is why.
Struggle against automation is a ridiculous concept that people have been trying since the 19th century and it's never ever worked nor is it ever going to.
Struggle against automation is a ridiculous concept that people have been trying since the 19th century
The ATU in my city successfully delayed the deployment of automated buses another two years. The transit company has been pushing for limited deployment of automated buses, and the union has been fighting it. The struggle against automation is the struggle for workers.
"Struggle against capitalism is a ridiculous concept that people have been trying since the 19th century and it’s never ever worked nor is it ever going to."
Just admit this is what you meant. Admit you are anti-labor, and fuck off.
Well under the current system it's just capitalism advancing and horrible, I don't disagree. I'm saying we should push for changing the system. Increasing automation should mean we demand lowered expectations of work and distribute the remaining work more evenly without cratering wages.
and it's also progress in the sense that it's inevitable under capitalism.
Increasing automation should mean we demand lowered expectations of work and distribute the remaining work more evenly without cratering wages.
Sure. That is not what it means under capitalism. It means unemployment. Unless you are offering a concrete plan to overthrow capitalism, you should support workers' struggles against automation.
it’s also progress in the sense that it’s inevitable under capitalism
So is poverty, climate change, war, etc. I would not call those things "progress."
Is that what you think I said? Why is this about your mom suddenly? It absolutely does suck that people will lose their jobs. But in the grand scheme of things, it is the most inevitable thing in the history of inevitable things. Any victory made is a temporary, short term one. AND IT'S GOOD THAT PEOPLE MAKE TEMPORARY VICTORIES, but it isn't something you can strive for on a large scale.
There is no contradiction. Something can be good on a small scale level while being completely pointless on a grand scheme of things. It's almost always much more helpful to push for better wages and compensation etc rather than trying to block something impossible to block.
Something can be good on a small scale level while being completely pointless on a grand scheme of things
What the hell does this mean?
You can say the same about any reform workers win: better wages, reduced hours, better working conditions. All of this is "completely pointless" if you consider that the logic of Capital necessitates the exploitation of labor and the expansion of profit.
The whole fucking point is to fight for workers - be that through opposing automation, securing better wages, better working conditions - and work to overthrow the logic of Capital.
If you are going to be like "from my theoretical understanding of the world, this all pointless" fuck off. You don't actually understand labor organizing or socialism.
It means that a strategy that is wrong can still provide some temporary benefit to people, even if it's wrong in a grand scale. Securing better working conditions, wages, benefits etc can be much more permanent than something that's just running at a wall after a little while.
You sound like someone who has never been involved in a labor struggle. Securing better working conditions, wages, benefits are no more or less permanent than delaying automation.
You sound like someone who has never been involved in a labor struggle.
Piss off dude, you know nothing about me.
Securing better working conditions, wages, benefits are no more or less permanent than delaying automation.
They are though. Because when you secure a raise, then next time they try to bring it down, you're already starting from a better point, whereas with automation it's just complete defeat when it inevitably turns around.
Overall my issue isn't with certain unions trying to fight against it temporarily, as I explained that can be good. My issue is with presenting it as an overall direction that people should follow rather than just something unions in particular industries can temporarily use to gain some benefits for their workers.
when you secure a raise, then next time they try to bring it down, you’re already starting from a better point
When you secure a wage, inflation erases those gains by the time the next contract is being negotiated.
Overall my issue isn’t with certain unions trying to fight against it temporarily, as I explained that can be good. My issue is with presenting it as an overall direction that people should follow
Why should people who consider themselves friends of labor stay silent on the primary issue majors unions (ATU, Teamsters, etc.) are fighting for? That makes absolutely zero sense.
I'm going to support teachers unions demanding smaller class sizes. I'm going to support truckers unions fighting against automation.
Why should people who consider themselves friends of labor stay silent on the primary issue majors unions (ATU, Teamsters, etc.) are fighting for? That makes absolutely zero sense.
That's the primary issue US unions are fighting for???
Department of Transportation and industry leaders are projecting that the busing & trucking industries can be fully automated by the early 2030's.
The struggle against automation is existential to unions in these industries.
Local contract negotiations only bring up automation when it is forced onto them. Negotiations are still mostly bread and butter. The national unions are focusing primarily on automation right now as a political project, since it is their biggest threat.
deleted by creator
Yeah, absolutely. Capital has become increasingly less reliant on labor in the Global North. That's why Walmart can shut down any shop that unionizes. That's why the UK ended its mining operations to break the power of the miners' union.
The struggle against automation is really important. Especially in regards to trucking. The US is a consumer economy, where commodities for the Global South are sold for profit. Trucking is one of the few places where labor has power. Trucks are needed to distribute commodities across the country. Labor in the US is even weaker once that is automated.
That's not why. The shitty political climate and lack of participation is why.
Struggle against automation is a ridiculous concept that people have been trying since the 19th century and it's never ever worked nor is it ever going to.
God, you are incredibly fucking stupid lol
The ATU in my city successfully delayed the deployment of automated buses another two years. The transit company has been pushing for limited deployment of automated buses, and the union has been fighting it. The struggle against automation is the struggle for workers.
"Struggle against capitalism is a ridiculous concept that people have been trying since the 19th century and it’s never ever worked nor is it ever going to."
Just admit this is what you meant. Admit you are anti-labor, and fuck off.
It's a losing struggle. automation is progress and you can't fight it for forever.
I'm not saying you're wrong to try I'm saying that strategically we should acknowledge automation will come and we should act accordingly.
What do you mean by this? How is it progressive to throw millions of people out of work?
Well under the current system it's just capitalism advancing and horrible, I don't disagree. I'm saying we should push for changing the system. Increasing automation should mean we demand lowered expectations of work and distribute the remaining work more evenly without cratering wages.
and it's also progress in the sense that it's inevitable under capitalism.
Sure. That is not what it means under capitalism. It means unemployment. Unless you are offering a concrete plan to overthrow capitalism, you should support workers' struggles against automation.
So is poverty, climate change, war, etc. I would not call those things "progress."
deleted by creator
invented technology is going to be used though.
Oh really? Wow. You pushed back labor armageddon two years lmao. Good job.
Yeah, anti-labor just like, you know, Marx, famously anti labor idiot.
Removed by mod
Is that what you think I said? Why is this about your mom suddenly? It absolutely does suck that people will lose their jobs. But in the grand scheme of things, it is the most inevitable thing in the history of inevitable things. Any victory made is a temporary, short term one. AND IT'S GOOD THAT PEOPLE MAKE TEMPORARY VICTORIES, but it isn't something you can strive for on a large scale.
Removed by mod
There is no contradiction. Something can be good on a small scale level while being completely pointless on a grand scheme of things. It's almost always much more helpful to push for better wages and compensation etc rather than trying to block something impossible to block.
What the hell does this mean?
You can say the same about any reform workers win: better wages, reduced hours, better working conditions. All of this is "completely pointless" if you consider that the logic of Capital necessitates the exploitation of labor and the expansion of profit.
The whole fucking point is to fight for workers - be that through opposing automation, securing better wages, better working conditions - and work to overthrow the logic of Capital.
If you are going to be like "from my theoretical understanding of the world, this all pointless" fuck off. You don't actually understand labor organizing or socialism.
It means that a strategy that is wrong can still provide some temporary benefit to people, even if it's wrong in a grand scale. Securing better working conditions, wages, benefits etc can be much more permanent than something that's just running at a wall after a little while.
You sound like someone who has never been involved in a labor struggle. Securing better working conditions, wages, benefits are no more or less permanent than delaying automation.
Piss off dude, you know nothing about me.
They are though. Because when you secure a raise, then next time they try to bring it down, you're already starting from a better point, whereas with automation it's just complete defeat when it inevitably turns around.
Overall my issue isn't with certain unions trying to fight against it temporarily, as I explained that can be good. My issue is with presenting it as an overall direction that people should follow rather than just something unions in particular industries can temporarily use to gain some benefits for their workers.
When you secure a wage, inflation erases those gains by the time the next contract is being negotiated.
Why should people who consider themselves friends of labor stay silent on the primary issue majors unions (ATU, Teamsters, etc.) are fighting for? That makes absolutely zero sense.
I'm going to support teachers unions demanding smaller class sizes. I'm going to support truckers unions fighting against automation.
That's the primary issue US unions are fighting for???
Department of Transportation and industry leaders are projecting that the busing & trucking industries can be fully automated by the early 2030's.
The struggle against automation is existential to unions in these industries.
Local contract negotiations only bring up automation when it is forced onto them. Negotiations are still mostly bread and butter. The national unions are focusing primarily on automation right now as a political project, since it is their biggest threat.