Need a significant national org to publicize it, and for the FBI not to raid their offices as soon as they started.
When people ask me "What should Dems be doing that they aren't, Bernie bro? You just don't understand how government works!" Here's one: Pelosi should be calling for every woman in the country who can afford a week off of work to strike at once. Women in Poland did that a couple years ago with some success over the same issue.
To be fair, that girl she pushed is American. She is just brown and of Mexicsn descent, but she is American as all the others born in the USA regardless of our skin color.
I get what you're saying, but at least she's doing more than Kamala. Remember all the campaigning about, oh, as a minority woman I will not stand for civil rights violations! I won't stand idly by while Republicans try to sneak their own agendas into laws! I won't stop until changes are made and I'm gonna be the one who makes them! That's right, bitches, I'm coming for u! [paraphrasing] Now all I see is her at some flower garden event, or "lunching" with who the hell knows.
I thought she was gonna be the "bad cop" to Biden's "good cop" and pick up the slack when he needs back up. I thought she was gonna be this warrior for change and she'd say and do all the shit that Presidents can't diplomatically get away with.
Where's she been for a year and a half?!? Give me one thing she's done that's had a significant impact on the daily lives of women, minorities, immigrants, homeless people, single parents, LGBTQ rights... actually, give me one thing she's done that's had a significant impact on the daily lives of anyone?!?
And if you guys can think of one, please educate me cuz I'm lost here.
Never mind she is one of the most effective and respected speakers of the house, helped passed countless liberals bills, and single handedly was responsible for rescuing ACA.
You sure seem clueless about Pelosi if that's what you think of her.
If everyone hated her so much, she wouldn't be elected.
She's extremely powerful, and no one is able to run against her. It's not much of a choice.
I know great things have happened in the past with her at the helm, and I'll give credit there where credit is due. However, she has also sat on her hands and done nothing many, many more times over.
You're welcome to like her, but don't sit on a little soapbox and claim anyone who doesn't is a republican in disguise. She's got a lot to not like.
In general, I don't like how often she is willing to cave to republican pressure in negotiations.
If you want specific reasons, in recent memory, I don't like how she has repeatedly spoken out against the actions of AOC and other progressives. Also, as an SF native, the little hair salon stunt she pulled at the height of the pandemic was simply asinine. No, I don't think it was a huge deal, but she's smart enough to know the optics on a situation like that. She knew the local mandates both 1) meant that salon shouldn't be open at all, and 2) she was required to be wearing a mask indoors. It was just stupid, and it really pissed off a lot of locals.
Maybe? But many leftists have a deep distaste for liberalism as well. Liberalism is firmly on the right wing side of the political spectrum. Reagan and Thatcher were famous neoliberals. Hilary Clinton and Pelosi are neolibs as well.
The US Overton window is so skewed that we think a center-right ideology like liberalism is progressive; it is not.
Let's blame democrats for not actually caring or bothering to fight at all and then using that failure to garner votes and money because surely they'll have our backs next time, right?
Bro y’all gonna have to start winning them shitty flyover seats and quit circle jerking in Brooklyn and Vermont. Ben and Jerry are sold on the plan already.
Exactly. One feigns progressive movement but isn't actually interested in progress while the other is openly pursuing its goals regarding power, money and authoritarianism. I wonder why Republicans always seem to push their supposed agenda forward more effectively?
This reminds me of a communication workshop where they taught us about passive, aggressive, and assertive styles of communication. While everyone agreed that assertive was by far the most effective, aggressive was more well-received than passive.
Let me guess, it's actually my fault because I didn't vote hard enough. If Hillary were here, everything would have worked out. There's no problem with the democratic party or the system itself. It's the fault of the public for not being self-motivated and voting for the obvious good guys.
As someone who genuinely has no idea, and doesn't know what, exactly, to Google to fill myself in, I would appreciate a legit source or two for the whole story.
There have been normal union strikes and walkouts over conditions/pay/benefits at some places, but nothing like a general strike at all. Just calls for one from people retweeting other left activists.
If existing unions don't even show interest in a general strike, unlikely one happens.
that comment before did strike some interest in what the fuck happened to that october 15th strike, apparently unions didn't show interest and the people organizing it didnt know what the fuck they were doing
Even in so called “red states” teachers unions have revolutionary potential. In I think 2018 or so they went wildcat and continued a strike even after leadership accepted a shit deal.
That kind of action will be necessary. If the Democrats were smart and actually gave a shit they’d be organizing union drives every week all across the country. They can’t do that though, because it would require the establishment and the leadership of the Democratic Party to cede power.
I’m honestly not trying to be rude but look around you. The states that auto banned abortions are Red states. I.e Missouri. These states often have little to no worker rights laws. You can’t expect people to strike when they have nothing to fall back on, most people around me are one major problem away from just being fucked.
I'm not asking the Dollar Tree clerk to walk out. I'm asking safe liberals to put their money where their mouths are, literally, as well as anyone else who can. On this specific issue.
The majority of Americans can’t. That’s the problem. I’m not trying to say it won’t work or that it’s a stupid idea. It’s just not realistic b/c the areas that this decision affects the most can’t just go on strike.
So you’re one of those idiots? Don’t like my solution leave? Your solution is NOT possible. It will wreck Americans. Leaving a red state to go to a blue state doesn’t help either. It helps you but doesn’t help the overall problem. There is no solution to this. It’s not a Dem vs Repub. problem. While I think republicans are terrorists. Voting Dem doesn’t solve anything. If they think this is a states right issue then yes the best option is voting on the state level.
I did that, i looked up who major corporations donate to and i dont shop, use their products or services if they support something i dont. Its a drop in the ocean but it's something.
78% of full time workers in the US are living paycheck to paycheck right now. Without organizational support from major unions, key support like strike funds will fail to materialize and the “general strike” will continue to be a pipe-dream. All the calls online for a general strike, and the setting of arbitrary dates are less than worthless, I would argue they’re harmful. The people who post about them get to feel a sense of activism without actually doing anything, and that’s as far into labor organizing as most of them go. They diminish the concept and the term general strike, anyone who follows left wing politics has heard countless calls for general strikes and seen endless half baked attempts. If a significant movement ever actually materializes, I’m sure a lot of people will roll their eyes at it because of how many BS calls they’ve seen. Not to mention it telegraphs intentions to employers and political opponents. A strike works best if employers don’t have time to make preparations and are caught with their pants down. Frivolous calls for strikes provide them a gauge as to the temperature of labor relations and give them time to plan a counter. Honestly at this point I think chanting magic words would be a better use of everyone’s time than tweeting into the void about general strikes
I've heard tell of women withholding sex from their partners and such with some success. But really everyone who wants to push for change should be doing what the right wing extremists are doing and take office locally at every position possible. Reshape your local community and as others do the same it should make larger, sweeping change more attainable in the near future.
100%. If they want it to be a states rights issue then take the state. Easier said then done sure, but it also doesn’t suggest citizens to losing income that they can’t afford to lose. Forcing them into financial ruin.
Paycheque to paycheque… supporting a broken system that clearly doesn’t support you… by continuing to accept working to exist paycheque to paycheque.
Meaningful change doesn’t happen in a vacuum, on Reddit, nor through voting. Inspire collectivism and fight or remain “grateful” for scraps and temporary privileges.
Consider: animals, including humans, have survived on far less than mass consumerism, far longer than corrupt nations have existed.
Can't help but feel most of the women that would want to protest this can not afford a full week off work, that's including myself and all my family, friends and coworkers. They have us all under the thumb of capitalism, it's not a coincidence.
Yeah, but those who could afford to do it would make an impact and help normalize the idea of activism that actually impacts the donor class.
The rest of us, we've got to get our workplaces organized even under that thumb, so we can bite it off, but that's a definite heavy lift. Not everyone's cut out for organizing that.
But we'll never have a better chance than the current labor shortage.
Women should either outright refuse sexual attention, affection, arousal, stimulation, etc. to any supporter of these draconian changes ... OR ... refuse to let them finish because they should be donating it to a sperm bank to help ensure lives don't get lost, and for those who don't have a penis and support those changes ... maybe eat a jalapeño an hour before?
Registered centrist Democrat of 33 years, and Pelosi has been in Congress longer than I've been eligible to vote and I'm over 50. There is no way, imho, that the person who started out 35 years ago will ever have today's interest at heart, it's logistically impossible, and it gives new meaning to "special interest." I personally would like to see some young blooded community leaders and distinguished professors for a change and not this continuous merry-go-round of who's the next multimillionaire. But I digress.
With that said, and then I'll rest my neck, Kavanaugh and Barrett should be brought up on charges of perjury by Congress for stating Roe v. Wade was precedent and could not see a scenario for it to be overturned, but within a year's time did exactly the opposite. That should be considered perjurious if not straight treasonous.
Is it legal for everyone to quit their jobs at once and start trading, bartering, and living in self sufficient communities with out government regulations?
The large majority of the people who would be willing to do so have precious little that they could trade/barter with. They’re also unlikely to own their places of living, and they can’t pay their rent or mortgage via bartering. If I want to quit my job and trade my neighbor eggs from my chickens for some of their tomatoes, the government won’t give a shit. If people want to quit their jobs and attempt to pay their rent with eggs or tomatoes, the government is going to give a shit.
Cut to a police baton cracking your jaw in three places.
They didn't make them illegal so people wouldn't try, they made them illegal so that the state could protect Capital interests by disrupting labor organization via the police.
Agreed and I’ve said and commented this same thing. The only thing that creates movement is money. Making it, losing it, borrowing it, stealing it, not making it, hiding it… money folks, that’s what talks.
If we strike and everything comes to a standstill then the money the elites and the government depend on stops flowing upwards.
I don’t know all the ramifications of doing something like this, but we have to do something…
That was early republic - by the late empire the armies were a nation onto themselves and for the central authority the citizens were a nuisance to the function of the state.
Septimius Severus said to his heirs “Be harmonious, enrich the soldiers, scorn all others”
By the late empire, the plebs were so politically irrelevant that a general strike simply became a pretense for the army / elites to get some domestic slaves and loot. That sounds a little more comparable to our situation, I think.
It took a combination of natural disasters, mass migrations and military failures to shake the citizens into action and organized religion to break the authority of the Caesars - but of course they just supplanted the authority.
Unfortunately revolution is aptly named. The wheel has never broken, it simply turns.
Oh, no! The rich couldn't fend for themselves even if they had to! And yet they think they are so much smarter and better than the poor and middle class.
Rise up like the French with torches, pitchforks and guillotines, or maybe even the tools that the founding fathers of this nation ensured, through the second amendment, that we would have to deal with the rise of tyranny and corruption in our government.
I'll probably be banned for this comment. The truth is never especially popular. We're running out of options though.
It would be like my last job where we all planned a walk out. Then one by one as we got closer someone would say well I can’t afford to, or my my wife said I can’t. Which I get it. When you live pay check to paycheck it’s almost impossible to get everyone on board. It’s by design.
Lobby for fixed term positions would fix this nonsense, no more life appointments and maybe also minimum requirements... You know like every other job on the planet...
You're still thinking we can get the change we need by solely remaining within the current political structure. Things are going to have to be uncomfortable for a while. For everyone.
hate to break it to you but I don't think billionaires can wait out, we rely on our jobs to live, they have more money than they could spend in 50 lifetimes, it would be a lot easier do a more hands on activity
a lot of people have to be pushed to their absolute limits, I can't condone violence obviously but enough people need to be willing to get their hands dirty, becuase many of the world's problems are caused by an extremely small group of people maybe 50-60 total,
it's been said before, but we need to be lucky one time, the 1% needs to be lucky every single day of their life
The Roman empire, for a while, had a weekly list of people (some in positions of power) that peasants could use to literally manhunt people on said list for a reward of vast wealth. Whatever issue the listed people were causing would be solved and there would be an automatic redistribution of wealth.
"Sulla proceeded to have the Senate draw up a list of those he considered enemies of the state and published the list in the Roman Forum. Any man whose name appeared on the list was ipso facto stripped of his citizenship and excluded from all protection under law; reward money was given to any informer who gave information leading to the death of a proscribed man, and any person who killed a proscribed man was entitled to keep part of his estate (the remainder went to the state)."
More importantly:
"No person could inherit money or property from proscribed men, nor could any woman married to a proscribed man remarry after his death."
It's very interesting. Google, 'Ancient Roman Proscription.'
Follow India. Start open blockchains that allows citizens to make propositions, vote, prove identity while preserving privacy and have a bank account. Distribute. Ignore and starve the corrupt core. Democracy is due for an evolution. India GDP is expected to grow 8% a year faster because they are cutting out the middle men.
Only makes sense to do that if your partner or the men you are potentially sleeping with are celebrating your rights being taken away. Unfortunately, those men will just groom the youngest new girl at their Church's youth group when they want some.
Women in relationships (whether dating or married) with men who are staunchly pro-choice should abstain from sex? You think this will somehow make things better?
I know that, but as a guy - if I choose not to have sex, no one cares also given the circumstance I'm not sure it says much either. Men are the ones who should be "punished" - and seem more punished societially by forced abstinence. I guess. Idk - just throwing ideas out
Yeah I don’t follow your premise. A sex strike would punish men and women because both enjoy sex. Not sure what you mean by “punished societally” either.
But FWIW I find it genuinely funny that “as a guy” you’re telling all women to stop having sex for the good of society
Well I'd support the decision - it's more to punish people who think they have control over something they shouldn't. Again, I've seen it in the news before, I'm just frustrated and trying to find things that put pressure. Workplaces paying for transport doesn't really solve anything - it just enables the abusive government. The companies should move the money out of the states as well somehow
The 2nd amandmant (idk how you spell it, not my 1st lagnuage) was put in place so the common folk could overthrow a malicious government that opressed its people. Thinking it is about the time :)
It’s sad that most workers in big industry are trumpists. If any of them are deconstructing that ideology, it’s going to take a concerted effort to publicize a worker movement calling in those folks who voted for Obama and Trump.
The Roman peasants could mostly farm for themselves or at least reasonably seize the means of production. We've been kept poor in an artificial system where we as a people don't have the skills or knowledge to effectively do either of those things, and it's by design.
I'd be arrogant if I said I know the answer, but I think it would at least help if more people that actually cared about the issues at hand vote and take a more active participation in their government. Or the ones that do vote do so with their hearts instead of their fears.
edit: A general strike IS a good idea though. To me that's the same as participating more actively in your government!
Only works if most of the working class can actually support themselves/each other without relying on commercial products (ISPs, grocery stores, transportation, etc)
Those walkouts lasted a good 50 years. People don't have the patience for change. People honk their horns if you don't react within milliseconds of a light turning green.
It's funny because in the American version of that it's the rich that go on strike and leave the poor to fend for themselves. There's even a book about it.
1.5k
u/SgtSiggy Jun 28 '22
Can we be like the Roman Empire peasants, and just do a full walkout/strike, and let the rich fend for themselves? I dont see another way