A_cook_not_a_chefYSK that a general strike is one of the most effective ways to push for change. There is a general strike in the works across the US for this Friday.
teftI’m all for protesting in any way possible but a general strike in three days seems really ambitious. Most strikes take months to arrange since people will need to stock up on food and household items or they risk the strike ending before the strikers get their demands.
These kinds of strikes are intended to be short term, it’s a single day strike. It’s not about stopping work until demands are met, yet. It’s about proving to those in charge that there are enough people in agreement that the next step will be much more costly if things don’t change.
Sometimes they are smart enough to get the message, other times they either think they’re smarter because they are narcissistic or inherently will win because of money.
At this level though if you actually manage to coordinate an effective strike day, what you usually end up with is hundreds or thousands of smaller organizations that can’t survive and prolonged strike siding with the strikers and getting changes made, because the cockweasels at the top still rely on the smaller companies they stepped on to get there.
That’s how I see this as well. It’s a shot across the bow much like the one day strike in MN.
Many people in the US have no experience participating in this sort of thing. I hope that this is a wake up call for the citizenry as much as for the corporations and oligarchs running the country.
The problem with a “shot across the bow” is that to the enemy it can just look like you are missing and wasting ammo.
Yes, a warning shot does rely somewhat on the intelligence of the opponent. But that is their problem.
In this analogy, though, if you even get 10% participation in a one-day cessation of economic activity, that is something the companies and therefore the governments notice. It is not something they want to repeat, or get more popular participation. It is in fact better than a warning shot in that respect. It is an attack on the money.
I think you are ascribing a lot more importance to 10% than economists and capitalists do.
Nearly 60% of of day to day spending is by the top percentage of the wealthiest. I am trying to be a realist here. The bottom 60% of Americans make up about 20% of the spending, 10% participation would be about a 4% change in profit which recent Tariffs have been higher and more impactful.
It is not a good idea to keep purposefully missing while the enemy isn’t wasting their shots. Cause they are landing most of theirs.
And yet most of the comments in here are talking about doctors appointments and going out for dinner. I am confusing it but it seems I’m not alone in that.
We are not in the right crowd to organize a strike, which would be better with actual business owners involved, but I understand we should get what we can.
Why is it so bad to take an honest look at what we are trying to accomplish and our methodology? I thought Lemmy liked science and actual data. I’m peer reviewing this so we can adjust the methodology and try to focus better.
I want to succeed I am just not gonna pretend we get there without effort.
That’s not the concern. A 24 hour strike isn’t a strike. That’s a protest. Most strike last for days or weeks because you want to get something out of the strike.
A general strike doesn’t last for weeks. A strike and a general striker different things.
Striking workers are trying to change business decision, but if everyone participates in a general strike it causes enough damage in a day that it’s effective. The threat is you’ll do it again if things don’t improve.
JännätA general strike doesn’t last for weeks.
A Finnish general strike in 1956 lasted for 20 days.
In 1905 the strike lasted 7–9 days depending on the city, and the shortest one we’ve had was 6 days.
General strikes are illegal in the US. The people coordinating them could be arrested. Also, jobs can fire workers on the spot for participating in them, even if the workers are part of a union and the union want to participate. There are no protections for this. Not to mention, national guards have been sent in to shut down general strikes in the past. There’s a reason they never happen. The likelihood of one ever succeeding is highly unlikely considering the current situation. Doing it multiple days? You realize most people live paycheck to paycheck? Nobody wants to tell their kids they’re going to be homeless.
General strikes are illegal
This is fucked up beyond belief. Strikes should be a right for every single worker
Apparently this just applies to unions and federal workers, though. At least as it was written in the Taft–Hartley Act of 1947. But yeah, the fact that it’s illegal for unions to call for general strikes is indeed fucked up beyond belief. Unions are an essential part of organizing strikes.
General strikes are illegal in the US.
It’s not illegal to strike on a date with other people. It’s illegal for unions to call for a “general strike” because it’s considered them calling a strike on behalf of other non-union employees for other businesses.
Also, jobs can fire workers on the spot for participating in them
Not always, (though yes, it would probably be likely for many people) since they can use things like sick/vacation days conveniently timed right, or if they’re backed up by a union, they might have a contract that helps to prevent at-will firing without certain specific causes, excluding striking.
However, if enough people strike, it’s kind of hard to enforce coming into work via firings, as it’s similar to if an entire unionized company goes on strike. What are you gonna do? Fire every single worker and shut down for good the next day because the only person running every single operation is the remaining CEO?
even if the workers are part of a union and the union want to participate.
As long as the union doesn’t say “this is a general strike” and just says “we are striking on this date for better working conditions”, and that date happens to be the same day other unions are striking, it’s legal. There is no law preventing different unions from striking on the same dates, and it would take very long for any legal process to try and make that claim before the strike has already occurred.
national guards have been sent in to shut down general strikes in the past.
This is the most likely outcome in my opinion. However, it’s still kind of hard to actually enforce the end of a general strike. It’s one thing to arrest someone, or to stop them from doing a given thing, but it’s another to forcibly remove people from their homes and make them work no matter their condition or reason.
Essentially, I’m saying it’d be messy.
Doing it multiple days? You realize most people live paycheck to paycheck? Nobody wants to tell their kids they’re going to be homeless.
This is the biggest hurdle, though there is a degree to which it can be mitigated, at least for a little while. For example, there are a lot of people with backyard and community gardens, small businesses with stockpiles that are willing to support their community as we’ve seen with the current situation in Minnesota, not to mention that if the situation got bad enough you’d probably just see people stealing from their nearest billionaire-owned store because fuck it, why not screw them over more?
To clarify, I’m not like, disputing your actual overarching thesis here, or saying a general strike is easy or likely to succeed, I’m just saying it’s not entirely impossible :)
By all means, people should try. Not saying people shouldn’t. The mountain to overcome fascism isn’t going to get any smaller as we dive deeper into it. And a strike wouldn’t even have to happen in every area or even every state. It just has to happen enough to shut stuff down across the US. I just worry that most things tend to start out small and grow with time. For all of the reasons I stated, this can’t start out small. It has to start loud and strong. If it starts out small, it will get crushed in a way that scares people away from trying again.
Going homeless at the same time as many others opens the possibility to make communities helping each other out (food, protection, communication).
I know, it is wishful thinking, but building such communities in a peaceful way during a general strike with enough time is better than a sudden brutal civil war scenario, I think.
You won’t get food easy if you have to fear getting shot as soon as you leave your house and they can’t run companies efficiently only with AI and MAGA workers.
You realize most people live paycheck to paycheck? Nobody wants to tell their kids they’re going to be homeless.
People have to realize the alternative is having their kids growing up in a fascist regime, where they can be murdered on the streets without consequences simply because some “regime official” is having a bad day.
I am not saying its easy but it won’t get easier when people don’t act now. In the end stage people trying to resist the regime will be insta killed or worse. Now you still can talk to like minded people and organize. Tell them you want to strike but are afraid of the consequences, maybe they will offer help.
You realize most people live paycheck to paycheck?
Yes, that’s why it takes months to organize a normal strike, let alone a general strike. A one day strike isn’t a stike, it’s a protest.
The difficult thing is people need to organize it outside of work. If management gets wind of that kind of stuff, they can fire and replace any workers they know are participating long before it actually happens.
That’s highly illegal if we’re going by the NLRA.
Now whether those companies get a wrist slap for firing people in today’s political climate? That’s a different question entirely but firing someone for striking or organizing a strike has been illegal for almost a century.
In a right to work state, they don’t need to give a reason. Any rules against firings are pretty much unenforceable, and the company is considered innocent unless proven guilty.
They don’t need to give a reason but if a company fires someone who is organizing a strike and that person has been a decent employee then the labor board is going to side with the person, not the company since it’s obvious why they were fired. Amazon keeps getting in trouble for this exact thing. Which is why amazon et al are trying to get the NLRB dismantled.
elephantiumRight to work laws make it so workers in a union shop don’t need to join the union.
Are you thinking of at-will employment? It’s a common mixup.
While that’s true, every state except for Montana has at-will employment. Despite that, unions often negotiate contract requirements that effectively guarantee job security. But if you live in a right to work state, chances are there isn’t even an option to join a union at your job, giving you no means of collective bargaining.
Doing a quick search…looks like about half the states are “right to work” ones.
And…well, I don’t live in a ‘right to work’ state, but I couldn’t join a union either way. There aren’t many unions in my line of work.
What’s the point? Anything you delay doing that day we will made up with spending in the future.
These strikes don’t really work. If you’re stocking up in anticipation then you’re not really striking because you still contributed a day earlier.
A better option would to just go local.