909
Slavery was abolished, so the rich are now trying to make economic oppression the equivalent of slavery.
(i.imgur.com)
this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2023
909 points (96.6% liked)
Work Reform
9963 readers
1192 users here now
A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.
Our Philosophies:
- All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
- Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
- Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
- We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.
Our Goals
- Higher wages for underpaid workers.
- Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
- Better and fewer working hours.
- Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
- Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This has always been the case. Look at immigrant exploitation, the truck system, sharecropping, child labor, exporting work to undeveloped countries to exploit unregulated labor forces there.
It was always about bringing back slavery without calling it slavery.
And it will always be so long as we let them keep trying.
Violence is not the answer until the hour that it is.
These kind of conversations will get to the attention of a 3 letter agency. Our just social stances will get lemmy raided.
I half wish it did. Within the far-right sectors of the social mediaverse, calls for murder or desires to engage in pogroms are commonplace, and are typical in the social media histories of rampage killers in the weeks leading up to their respective incidents. It's conspicuous how often their rage-filled comments discussing violence have failed to trigger an investigation to see if that there fellow needs to be watched for a while.
In my case, I'm not going to engage in violence. At very least, I'm not fit for service in mischief or sabotage. My own next step is to do some research on mutual aid organizations which can serve to support protestors and, if necessary, saboteurs and other makers of mischief.
My comment is a reminder to myself that yes, violence eventually does end up on the table, as happened with Iran when the Mahsa Amini protests were responded to violently by Iranian law enforcement, which is when the banners were swapped for molotov cocktails, and state offices were burned to the ground.
In our case, we know the public will not gain rights until we make it disadvantageous to our governing officials to not do so. And as we're seeing, they're glad to take those rights away once they believe the threat has subsided. This is the justification for The Terror in France: while The Terror itself ended with Robespierre, the guillotines came out and aristocratic heads were piled high multiple times in the following century when kings had a propensity for rolling back established constitutional rights.
So long as we're not going to tear the establishment down to distribute power more sparsely, we're going to need some way to hurt officials who fail to defend the public interest from their donors, maybe so hard that it hurts the donors. How to do this is well beyond my pay grade, but without such capacity the transnational white power movement is going to continue advancing, and we can expect the US Supreme Court to keep stripping away our rights.