Republican lawmakers are arguing that Americans are prepared to tolerate higher prices as a necessary cost of supporting Donald Trump’s agenda, even as worries over inflation continue to mount. The comments follow Trump’s announcement that his threatened tariffs on China, Mexico and Canada are set to take effect from today — a move economists warn could further drive up inflation.…
Before a general strike can happen, there needs to be a general strike fund set up and financed to give strikers a safety net in the event that they get fired/laid off and lose benefits. If people know they will have financial support and security, they will be more inclined to participate in the strike.
Pretty much this. The average American is homeless without their next paycheck, if not dead. We do not have social medicine, we do not have safety nets of any sort. We don’t have a culture of mutual aid despite what we might claim, nor enough charities to bridge the gaps. Being homeless is effectively a death sentence in much of the US, anyway - if the cops don’t kill you, it’s a good chance that the weather will.
I don’t disagree that mutual aid would benefit all those who would strike, but a general strike is never going to be a clean thing that labor pulls off unscathed. IMO Waiting until the general populace has the capital to rise up is a bad strategy because said capital is controlled by the people who we’re trying to rise up against.
Understand that I’m not disagreeing with you, but I have some important questions.
How would a general strike fund work? If it’s not widespread, it won’t be effective. Who should we trust to manage and distribute such a large pile of money and resources?
That sounds like a job perfect for the government, but they’re obviously not going to do it. Even at a local level, it’s not really in the government’s best interest to encourage people to stop working.
These are valid questions and not many I can answer definitively, because I’m not an expert on the subject - just a desperate citizen trying to think of a solution to the terrible situation we are in.
I’d think it would have to be a very, very carefully vetted progressive grassroots operation.
The issue with some progressive movements is that it can get infiltrated by bad actors and grifters (see: Sinema, Fetterman), so there would need to be quite a lot of background checks on everyone involved in this hypothetical organization. It would have to have a squeaky clean record so they don’t get nuked from orbit by the government for misspelling a word on administrative forms or something.
I can’t really pinpoint any existing group that would be willing or able to do this, but something’s gotta give, sooner or later.
General strike is the best option.
Before a general strike can happen, there needs to be a general strike fund set up and financed to give strikers a safety net in the event that they get fired/laid off and lose benefits. If people know they will have financial support and security, they will be more inclined to participate in the strike.
Pretty much this. The average American is homeless without their next paycheck, if not dead. We do not have social medicine, we do not have safety nets of any sort. We don’t have a culture of mutual aid despite what we might claim, nor enough charities to bridge the gaps. Being homeless is effectively a death sentence in much of the US, anyway - if the cops don’t kill you, it’s a good chance that the weather will.
I don’t disagree that mutual aid would benefit all those who would strike, but a general strike is never going to be a clean thing that labor pulls off unscathed. IMO Waiting until the general populace has the capital to rise up is a bad strategy because said capital is controlled by the people who we’re trying to rise up against.
No one is coming to save you. That’s just the reality of our situation. We can wait and starve on trumps terms or we can work together on ours.
Understand that I’m not disagreeing with you, but I have some important questions.
How would a general strike fund work? If it’s not widespread, it won’t be effective. Who should we trust to manage and distribute such a large pile of money and resources?
That sounds like a job perfect for the government, but they’re obviously not going to do it. Even at a local level, it’s not really in the government’s best interest to encourage people to stop working.
Unions do this, but I doubt they’re going to cover people outside of their members, and union membership has unfortunately been in decline for quite some time.
I’d have trouble trusting almost any organization that selflessly volunteers to accept donations to manage this.
I’m not seeing an obvious solution.
These are valid questions and not many I can answer definitively, because I’m not an expert on the subject - just a desperate citizen trying to think of a solution to the terrible situation we are in.
I’d think it would have to be a very, very carefully vetted progressive grassroots operation.
The issue with some progressive movements is that it can get infiltrated by bad actors and grifters (see: Sinema, Fetterman), so there would need to be quite a lot of background checks on everyone involved in this hypothetical organization. It would have to have a squeaky clean record so they don’t get nuked from orbit by the government for misspelling a word on administrative forms or something.
I can’t really pinpoint any existing group that would be willing or able to do this, but something’s gotta give, sooner or later.
Removed by mod
Don’t forget sitting out opportunities to change policies, then blaming the system and offerings when things go south.
This or violence. There are no other viable options.
And it’s probably too late for a general strike, sooo