this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
80 points (72.7% liked)
Memes
487 readers
1 users here now
Good memes, bad memes, unite towards a united front.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't get it.
It's just liberal bait, best to ignore them.
When rail unions were preparing for a potential strike, Biden made it illegal for them to do so.
Rail unions wanted to strike for better benefits, vacation time most importantly as the corporations had them working a lot of hours with virtually no paid time off. Part of 'efficiency' in the pursuit of profit, running as much freight, with as few train engines and workers also means greater wear on the infrastructure and less maintenance work being done. All this contributes to the more regular occurrence of accidents, some incredibly damaging to public health and the environment.
They got some minor benefit increases, but i don't believe much, if anything, related to their main complaints. And now they have no real recourse. The only credit Biden and the democrats should get is from their capitalist sponsors.
Here's an opinion piece summary from a rail union member
They did end up getting four of them.
heres a link. I am definitely not a liberal. I just read that they did. What Biden did was shitty. He should have forced the sick days.
If you read your own link, you'll see that this is only for a couple rail companies, and not a guaranteed right in the future. It's cool that they got something, but this is not a big win by any chance.
Also 4 sick leave days is frankly too little for a critical infrastructure and transportation industry in the country that had 1 million die of covid.
So you'd rather they get nothing then. Gotcha
No, I'd rather a general strike brought the entire USA industry to a halt and the government/corporate classes to their knees, until the workers got every single one of their long overdue demands. Way to miss the mark.
Ok, so, seeing as that's not going to happen, you'd rather the status quo than the marginally better situation. Hope that works out for you
Are you done putting words in my mouth? What a weird one you are.
This carrot and stick approach is the Democrats' speciality, block the strike through legislation while also confusing the narrative and giving breadcrumbs for a small portion of the workers to sap the momentum and put worker against worker.
If you want so hard to know what should've happened (you don't really, you've already made up your mind about me), first off it should be up to the rail workers, but if I were one of them I'd recommend the strike go on despite any laws. The purpose of an union is to represent the will of all workers, not just the uplifted few or their politician buddies.
I did read my own link. I agree with you. But rail laborers did get more sick days.
Congress had the ⅔ supermajorities to override Biden’s veto anyways. All Biden had to do was veto the bill to say he tried to prevent the legislation as “the most pro-union president” but it was out of his hands, and he couldn’t even do that.
Ok dude
Out of curiosity, what do you consider yourself?
Well this is probably the only time I defended Biden. Usually I want to quit my job and molotov government buildings. But I usually vote democrat while wishing there was a laborers party in the US. So left somewhere.
In that case, maybe stick around and you might learn something about what we believe!
Maybe read some theory — you might end up agreeing with it!
Tianamen square wasn't real. Only theory matters, never look at real things.
Like I'm not already a socialist, mate. Bunch a crabs in a bucket right here.
I am not trying to pile on, genuinely curious about your perspective as a socialist.
I don't think many people around here have an issue with strategic voting alongside actual organizing and support. The way you worded your first comment sounded like uncritical support for Biden/Democrats in regard to their rail union 'achievements'. From later comments it doesn't sound like that is what you intended, but I am struggling to understand why they deserve any credit. Even from the article you posted, they removed the only actual leverage the workers have, then after significant public pressure, helped avert further unrest by convincing the companies to give less than 50% of the workers 3 or 4 days of paid sick leave a year. I don't see anything laudable here. (And for the absolute idiots, [email protected], I agree 4 sick day more gooder than 0 sick day).
I only said that because I had just lurked another article that seemed trust worthy and I hate both sides people. I think voting needs restructuring, education needs more funding in the public sector, and the US needs some damn social safety nets. But seeing as I don't think we'll ever see that I tend to settled for booing and anarchist fantasies.
I feel like they brought light too it because the article I posted was afterwards and mentioned pressure from the public. I think its a good thing, even if Biden fucked it in an unimaginable way. Because it brought awareness and people need to realize our power is each other. Get together, get angry, and go put pressure on injustices. I believe just the press around that entire event helped further that end. Even if it wasn't by the President's hand (it should have). I think we need a Laborer's Party here. Increasingly moreso every year.
So yeah, he didn't do what he was supposed to. But it ended up banding people together to do something and thats what we need everywhere right now. On so many issues.
Maybe I misread my article, but in the end I just want to see the people band together to punch The Man in the face and take our lives back from corporations. Thats my final summarized stance. We live in this way because of them.
so you're just a socdem.....
Idk man, I dont think CEOs and shit should exist. I think Laborers should own the value they produce. If that makes me a socdem then I guess.
sorry, its just absolutely hard to imagine you being a socialist when you're here complementing and defending the democRATS.
Yeah? Once in my original comment? Ok
"But I usually vote democrat while wishing there was a laborers party in the US."
https://pslweb.org
Okay
What don't you get? You're saying both sides are the same even though that's just factually untrue
TIL the Ba'als from Bravely Second were based on something
Baal's name reminds me of Molag Bal from The Elder Scrolls
Baal was one of the ancient Canaanite gods, one of those deities worshipped as king of the world, dying and resurrecting every year, also was god of storms, fertility and cattle.
His name got somehow twisted into an evil god because of ancient Hebrews who smeared him incessantly in the Bible since it was also one of the main gods of hellenistic Seleucid Empire and Selucids were forcing Jews to woship him, causing tons of religious tensions - and they were doing it in the time that significant parts of Bible got compiled so naturally the current issues took main place in those.
Moloch is also Canaanite god, but it's kinda discussable if it was even a separate god or just other title of the same god (Moloch is just Melek which means "king", while Baal means "lord"). Also got smeared in Bible and later christian theology for the sacrifice of newborns. And while that practice is confirmed, it's still unclear if it's even tied to Moloch/Baal and most probably the sacrifices werent alive but the babies that were stillborn or died soon after birth, since newborn mortality in those time was huge.
In short, it's incredibly convoluted part of ancient mythology with tons of missing context, but the Elder Scrolls daedric prince Molag Bal is a combination of both names in fully biblical sense since as the god of rape, cruelty and domination he's probably the most evil and nasty of all daedras (which is an achievement since the competition in evil and nastiness is harsh there).
It's likely the other way around. Molag Bal - Moloch Baal. "Baal" just means "lord" or "master"
So you don't care about actually helping anyone. Because if you're sitting there and trying to say that no one is better off with the democrats than the republicans, it's not wonder you're on lemmygrad. You're either 12, or have the critical thinking skills of a 12 year old.
Lemmygrad’s position is not that no one is better off under Democrats than Republicans. Instead, our position is that when it counts (helping the working class), both parties are united in giving workers the middle finger.
Tell your comrades that.
How has it helped anyone to have had Jim Crow Joe in power? Any examples at all?
Not to defend Dems by any means, but there are some groups (e.g. our trans comrades) who are targeted by reactionary policies by Republicans that Democrats aren’t doing
Okay but the US is 4% of the world's population. There's millions more who don't get to be trans because they get killed by the USA. In the past two decades alone is estimated (by US bodies) that they've killed 4.5 million people and displaced tens of millions more. It makes no difference who is in power, red or blue. In fact some argue that the blue are the more warmongering of the two. When you support them, you enable them. This is what people mean about culture wars and identity politics. Trans issues are miniscule and have an inordinate focus because they don't threaten anything. People arguing about them does the square root of zero to affect the status quo of a vastly greater evil. They steer discussions away from real things and into LGBTQ stuff.
I don’t want you to misinterpret me. I do agree with you. Certainly, the U.S.’ impact is unacceptable regardless of who is in power.
Certainly, the best thing a US President could ever do is ensure that the U.S. will not live to see another day.
The truth is though, I might be a citizen and all, but no matter what I do, I don’t get a say in voting for someone other than the warmongers. I don’t get to vote for the communists, and even if I did, anyone who would propose a serious threat would be eliminated in some fashion.
Anyways, it’s getting late, but there are people for whom the tiny marginal difference between ordinary liberal and hyper-reactionary liberal is a big deal. To say the tiny marginal difference affects “no one” isn’t correct, although it may very well be close to a rounding error in the grand scheme of things.
Does it make any difference to the millions of people bombed abroad whether the bombers supported trans rights? Of course not, and we both know that.
Okay I get it but be wary of falling into the trap of actually supporting them and knee jerking when someone criticise them etc.
Both sides are bourgeois.