Capitalism, the law says you have to work without pay and you can't protest it or you're fired.
theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/01/shut...
theatlantic.comPosted Jan 21, 2019, 2:31 PM UTC
7029
theatlantic.comA couple months ago we had a postal worker strike here in Canada, all they wanted was better job security, no more forced overtime and various health and safety changes. They were even generous enough to do a rotating strike so people still got their mail.
The government fast-tracked "back to work" legislation because it was concerned about the "urgent economic impact of continued mail disruptions during the holiday season". That's an actual quote from the Toronto Star, they stripped workers of their rights because people's Christmas presents might be late.
Any law or motion that forces workers back to work without pay or without fair benefits is anti-democratic. That's the way it was here, and that's the way it is with the shutdown - although arguably this is even worse because this shutdown should never have even happened in the first place imo.
13
STRIKE
12
That's the thing right? They made it illegal to strike... so you put your entire pension on the line if you do.
11
Fuck the peanuts, seize the means
3
Also, illegal to protest? Yea fucking right, let's bring the cops in to arrest security guards and see how the public responds when the military takes over TSA duties. Welcome to JFK dont mind the fully armed marines patting everyone down.
3
Isn't this more the fault of the government? Forcing people to work and restricting their right to protest. I don't understand how this is the fault of capitalism. Seems more like a corrupt government with too much power.
2
The government in the USA operates within a capitalist system and thus capitalism writes the rules. It's just using the government as an enforcement arm of the capitalist class. You even notice it too in your statement you just fail to take that last step to lay the blame at it's source...
"Seems more like a corrupt government with too much power."
Corrupted by capitalism.
2
Ever heard of a wildcat strike? Come on, government employees! Your reactionary unions are failing you and in the hands of the bosses. This is exactly what the IWW is for.
6
[deleted]
3
Well, I don't know all the details, but depending on where you're at in the world, a union can get official status once a majority of workers join the union, vote to unionize the shop, and get a contract from the employer. The IWW is an activist union which strives for unity and solidarity across different industries, they aren't for a specific industry or trade.
That said, if you are interested in organizing at your workplace, I would work with an established union first. They aren't going to be as revolutionary as the IWW, and there's problems with them, but the IWW is small, and relies on members doing their own work. Plus they don't really offer ready to go benefits packages, etc. They may have legal aid, but not as free and ready to go as a mainstream union.
That said, if you are having trouble organizing with a more established union, if they are failing you, (as they are for the federal employees being enslaved during the shutdown), then the IWW is the union of last resort when you're going wildcat. Plus they have some great classes on labor activism and unionizing.
2
[deleted]
1
[removed]
5
[removed]
5
They did agree to work without pay in the case of a government shutdown
3
[removed]
2
[deleted]
1
This is pretty horrifying. As a non-American I really don’t understand how any conditions could be passed like this while the general population sits back and just accepts it as the norm. Forcing people to work for free and removing their right to strike is draconian in the extreme. In any properly functioning democracy the people would just vote to change this bullshit no? Where are all the politicians representing the interests of the working class??? Nowhere to be seen unfortunately
2
In any functioning democracy (with a conscience) the people would vote to change this bullshit no?
They would, but liberal democracies are not democracies. Even France which is far more class conscious than the US can't keep from being beholden to corporate neoliberalism without having to have its population riot in the street for two months (and what has that accomplished?).
Where are the politicians representing the interests of the working class???
Campaigns for office require money, and lots of it as well as good press. The only people with money and press control are the capitalists. The movements that forced social democratic reforms were put down bit by bit starting with the communists in the 40s and 50s, then the socialists, then the unions in the 80s and 90s.
1
[removed]
-9†
I'm gonna assume you're not just a troll and clarify this for you. Socialism redistributes wealth so that everyone is cared for, whether they can work or not. There may or may not be currency, but socialism would never force someone to work, let alone without providing for them. Capitalism can effectively starve people out by not paying them anything, since monetary compensation is the only way workers can have their basic needs met.
2†
[removed]
1
socialism would never force someone to work
I say this as a socialist: this is factually incorrect. However, socialists would guarantee that you get paid in accordance with the quality and quantity of your work.
0
I meant more if someone were unable to work.
0
Oh well yea.
0
[removed]
1
Are you saying America is socialist?
1†
A blend, yes. It's like the worst blend too. We have socialist programs peppered in a partially capitalistic / socialist market mash up.
Edit: Check out the Economic Freedom Index. Countries ranked by their free market economies. We rank lower than many economic countries that leftist claim are socialist. By that logic, we are more socialist than many left identified 'socialist' nations.
Edit: Also, read the Communist Manifesto. Marx calls for centralized government control of all aspects of wealth creation and labor through the voice of the people... we have voting. So you guys are essentially bashing the socialist aspect of our Capitalist / Socialist blended economy and blaming capitalism. It's fucking weird.
-5
A blend, yes.
This ought to be fun.
We have socialist programs peppered in a partially capitalistic / socialist market mash up.
Welfare is not socialism. It's just moving basic necessities off of the working class so they are willing to accept lower wage jobs (and so they don't revolution when Grandma is starving in the street).
Check out the Economic Freedom Index.
A bullshit statistic made up by the (totally non-partisan *wink*) Heritage Foundation to push the idea that regulation and government spending were bad for 'freedom.'
We rank lower than many economic countries that leftist claim are socialist.
Liberals claim Scandinavian countries are socialist. They are not. But hey, if you want to copy their model and provide everyone with free healthcare, college, and etc be my guest.
Marx calls for centralized government control of all aspects of wealth creation and labor through the voice of the people... we have voting.
The Greeks had voting. The Greeks also had the majority of their population as non-voting slaves. Voting in a system where the bourgeoisie controls the means of production, the media, the party structures, the lobbying structures, the education system, and the prevailing religious structures is not socialism. It's bourgeois democracy. How about you read the Communist Manifesto.
It's fucking weird.
Only because you are politically and ideologically illiterate.
2
[removed]
1
[removed]
0
L M A O
M
A
O
1
Lmao imagine being proud of being this ignorant
0†
[removed]