I don't want a city on Mars.
I don't want AI in every app.
I don't want data centres in space.

I want clean water.
I want a stable climate.
I want bees to survive.

People who think we shouldn't ridicule our unions might want to explore why people who would otherwise support them? Do so very critically.

Like, idk. Maybe check your unions for things like:

• workerism and love of productivity (which ties into ableism, refusal to engage with homelessness, a denial of tactics that could deal with climate change, and a refusal to engage with anti-consumerist practices);
• how they treat freelancers/contractors (effectively calling them 'bosses' even if they technically run a business of one and are more easily exploited; this also ties into who they consider a "worker" and therefore who they consider "deserving" of support);
• how they treat sex workers;
• how they handle abuse and harassment campaigns (which basically points to how they engage with victims and survivors, which is often very poorly);
• bigotries of all sorts;
• maintenance of hierarchy.

The Big Tent Syndrome (i.e., "we need numbers to do anything") of unions often leads them to having low principles and doing very little in the way of change, focusing almost entirely on reforming shit rather than pushing for any kind of change. Also, their workerist bullshit helps them justify existing until the end of time instead of them realising that they shouldn't be forever-groups and that they should either stop existing or take new forms.

Not to mention, the unions of today don't even do nearly as much as unions used to (e.g., engaging in the outside community). Not that I'm nostalgic for shit of years I wasn't around, but it's hard not to notice that unions being engaged in their community even when a strike wasn't on helped them build the numbers they claim they can't make today.