Money Talks Too Much
There is no such thing as a pacifist labor strike. There has never been one in history. The success of a strike comes with the bosses’ knowledge that strikers will physically keep/push out scabs.
Labor historians and union folk need to publicly speak up about this when this debate is raised.
Even strikes in which no scabs are brought in and the strike is successful without violence only happen because the boss knows that the union has and will physically force their issue. It’s kind of like Mike Tyson calmly telling you to move out of the way at a nightclub. He doesn’t have to actually lay hands on you, but you know what will happen if you don’t, and the interaction can not be classified as non-violent.
There would be no unions right now if the union movement had been a non-violent movement. We would all be working 18-hour days from the time we were 8 years old."
Boots Riley (via fuckyeahmarxismleninism)
"When I think back to the anti-globalization movement, and the 2001 FTAA protests in Quebec City, I am only appreciative of the fact that I was further radicalized. Thankfully my experiences in this movement eventually led me to ask why it produced nothing significant in a revolutionary sense, despite historically revisionist claims to the latter, and why a mass movement was incapable of doing anything except having multiple massive demonstrations and then falling apart on September 11, 2001. Here was a movement that had its leaders, though it pretended otherwise, an in-group of cliquish activists who imagined that they were revolutionary but who mistook revolution for running around in tear-gas and screaming that “the whole world is watching.” If they were proper revolutionaries they would have tried to have some foresight, tried to turn this movement into something sustainable that could actually try and produce revolution––but if you aren’t interested in the practical and concrete questions surrounding revolutionary struggle, the questions every significant revolutionary movement has had to ask and try to answer, and imagine it’s just going to happen like a beautiful flood composed of unique raindrops, then you’re not performing revolution. You’re performing protest and activism, and maybe you should be blamed for having allowed a movement die because you wouldn’t allow it to be properly structured."
“Down with Activism, Up with Revolution- JMP at http://moufawad-paul.blogspot.com/2012/02/down-with-activism-up-with-revolution.html (via malheureuxmarxist)
Reuters Campaign Finance Correspondent Alina Selyukh sent in this photo from CPAC where Occupy protesters and unions are demonstrating.
Crowds of people were chanting “We got sold out” and “We are the 99 percent” in a demonstration dubbed the “War on workers.”
Another protest is planned for later this evening, Selyukh reports. [REUTERS/Alina Selyukh]
where pointing out racism is considered more divisive than the actual racism.
The Occupy movement is known internationally for protesting the inequalities of the global financial system, so much so that in four short months, “Occupy” has essentially become a brand known the world over.
But now there’s an effort by Native American activists in Oakland to get rid of “Occupy” and replace it with “Decolonize” - as in “Decolonize Oakland.” They say the term “occupy” is offensive in light of the brutal history of occupation by early colonizers and the United States government. Native Americans in Seattle, Albuquerque, Portland and Sedona have launched similar campaigns.
The name change is proving contentious at Occupy Oakland, with some protesters accusing Native Americans of guilt tripping in the name of supporting the oppressed. But cut through the chatter, and the basic point seems to be this: Occupy doesn’t want to give up the brand.
“That name change could … alienate Oakland from the wider movement,” wrote John C Osborne, who has been reporting on the Occupy movement on his blog the Classist. “The brand recognition if you will.”
The irony of Occupy Oakland being captivated by “branding” isn’t lost on Morning Star Gali, a Native American activist from Oakland who’s helping lead the name change effort. The Occupy movement, in general, shuns thecorporatization of society.
More to the point, Gali says that for many Native Americans, especially those who came up in the “Red Power” movement in the 1960s, the term “Occupy” has a lot of baggage.
Native Americans tribes were brutally “occupied” by Spanish and English colonizers. Later, the United States government waged war on the Native American tribes and forced them into camps or reservations. More than 90 percent of North America’s indigenous population was wiped out by “occupiers,” either through war or the spread of disease.
And Bay Area Native American activists believe the occupation continues. In California, many Bay Area tribes are still struggling to gain federal recognition as sovereign nations. In the absence of a treaty, or compensation for their land, Native American activists in the Bay Area say they continue to live under outside rule.
As a Native American, “it’s nauseating to hear the word ‘occupy’ over and over again.’” Gali said. ”We need to occupy this, we need to occupy that. It’s the modern day colonial language.”
Occupy protesters set up a picket line at a Port of Portland terminal in Portland, Ore., as part of a West Coast day of action, Dec. 12, 2011.
Wandering around downtown Manhattan midnight, looking for the Occupy Wall Street protesters, and finding a deserted park, except for a few guys and a few cops.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
Hey look, a sign that neatly sums up everything that is wrong with the ‘occupy’ movement.
A white man holding a sign that claims because he’s part of the 99% he has NO privileges?
Well, fuck intersectionality! Clearly race, gender, sexuality, disability and other factors have absolutely nothing to do with economic disparity at all!
(These links are mixed between Britain and the USA because lol first page of Google only, this is not a well researched post)
Oh wait! In 2007, the latest year with Federal Reserve figures available, the typical white household had a net worth about 14 times as large as the typical African American or Hispanic household! And ah, yes, women are still getting dicked over! Poverty and disability are still strongly linked! People still don’t want to hire disabled people, especially disabled women! Transgender people; still experience unemployment at nearly twice the rate of the population as a whole, still experiencing near-universal harassment in the workplace, still highly disproportionally below the poverty line, still highly likely to be fired, demoted, or not hired, and still disproportionally homeless! LGB people are still more likely to be poor than heterosexual people!
This shit is important and over-simplifying it does nothing to help anyone. You cannot usurp the 1% without entirely dismantling the incredibly biased structures that support them on their perch; all you’ll do is replace the humans with pigs.
I’m that guy who is going to say that class matters.
Are we really going to exclude a huge amount of people from the Occupy movement because they’re white? Or cis? Or hetero? Come, now.
We take down capitalism. We don’t “fix the system” or whatever. We take the whole goddamn thing down and construct something new. I absolutely know what you’re talking about, but you’re dismissing the entire Occupy movement because there are white, able-bodied, heterosexual cismales involved? Are you kidding me?
If anything, Occupy is flawed. Not fundamentally so, but it is flawed. On the other hand, please point to another recent movement that has received so much support from so many different groups.
This is the working class coming together. The working class needs to learn what it means to respect each other, because we’re only as strong as the weakest member. This is why activists like us are important; we’re the vanguard. We’re the teachers, the people who are supposed to help make this work in our own little way. If we start to dismiss Occupy because it’s not “perfect enough,” then what hope do we have left? What hope do any of you have left?
None. And all the reasons you just laid out for not supporting Occupy? Conservative backlash is always right behind mass left-wing movements.
Oh hey look, you wrote a whole bunch of stuff about things I didn’t say!
Look at what I said:
Hey look, a sign that neatly sums up everything that is wrong with the ‘occupy’ movement.
Where does that say “class doesn’t matter”? Where does that say “I am dismissing the entire Occupy movement”?
Ah, yes, it doesn’t! It doesn’t say “this sign neatly sums up everything about how the Occupy movement is totally worthless trash”!
And WHERE does it say I want to exclude the poor white cis hetero able men? GOD DAMNIT WHY WON’T I THINK OF THEM?
Please, please, please, PLEASE read “Animal Farm”. Someone. ANYONE.
Unless we DEAL with the racism, heterosexism, sexism, cissexism and ableism within our movements we are just swapping one set of oppressors for another set.
“I’m the guy who’s going to say class matters”. Well I’m the queer who’s going to continue pointing out that my class inequality is a different fucking animal to yours, one that you and people like you refuse to acknowledge exists because it is fed on more than just poverty, but poverty that is spiked with sexism, heterosexism, cissexism ableism etc.
And you know what? Race matters. Gender matters. Sexuality matters. Ability matters.
I’m not saying that your privilege excludes you from having a voice, or that your economic disparity isn’t as important or whatever; I am saying that your economic disparity is different to mine and in order to fight all economic inequality we need to acknowledge that difference and fight it and the causes of it.
#You tell ‘em Charlie
5 MILLION JOBS
The 99% Act
The Congressional Progressive Caucus for all the awards.
If this is accurate then it’s wonderful. There may be hope for the country yet
"Now, just as there was in Teddy Roosevelt’s time, there’s been a certain crowd in Washington for the last few decades who respond to this economic challenge with the same old tune. “The market will take care of everything,” they tell us. If only we cut more regulations and cut more taxes – especially for the wealthy – our economy will grow stronger. Sure, there will be winners and losers. But if the winners do really well, jobs and prosperity will eventually trickle down to everyone else. And even if prosperity doesn’t trickle down, they argue, that’s the price of liberty.
It’s a simple theory – one that speaks to our rugged individualism and healthy skepticism of too much government. And that theory fits well on a bumper sticker. Here’s the problem: It doesn’t work. It has never worked. It didn’t work when it was tried in the decade before the Great Depression. It’s not what led to the incredible post-war boom of the 50s and 60s. And it didn’t work when we tried it during the last decade."
President Obama, Obama on ‘Trickle Down’ Economics: ‘It Doesn’t Work, It Has Never Worked’ (via darkjez)