• nosuchanon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    All you need to do is shutdown AWS for a few days. All the apps will fail and the corporations will lose all that advertising money.

  • Noxy@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    16 hours ago

    It’s been a hot minute since a headline made me say “whoa” out loud

    • lemmylump@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I stopped the day he was elected, opted out and put what would be going to taxes into a VT and VXUS index funds, hopefully to cover me when the time comes to pay.

      I realize that’s investing in fascist companies enabling this, but I will Shashank Redemption crawl through fascist shit to not fund this administration and cover my own ass.

      Best plan I could think of, I’m all ears if someone has a better idea. So far, I’m up.

  • Breezy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    19 hours ago

    New event for the no kings movement. Along with taking to the streets people who normally cant make it or are to anti social can start calling out the same day.

  • Drusas@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    107
    ·
    1 day ago

    There has never been a true, nationwide general strike in the United States, though a series of post-World War II work stoppages remembered as the “great strike wave of 1946” mobilized five million American workers demanding leaders to address economic instability and untenable working conditions.

    In its aftermath, congress cracked down with the Taft-Hartley act, a legislation prohibiting a broad range of union tactics, including calling for political strikes. The 1947 law is still in place, despite repeated attempts to repeal it.

    Oh, imagine that.

    • altphoto@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      13 hours ago

      I got this question answered by the AI that’s trying to replace us:

      What happened to the average American who participaten in the great general strike wave of 1946?

      The average American who participated in the great general strike wave of 1946 experienced both short-term gains in wages and conditions and long-term setbacks in labor power due to political and legislative backlash. This period marked a crucial turning point in U.S. labor history. The Immediate Experience (1945–1946)

      Following World War II, over 4.3 to 5 million American workers across industries such as steel, auto, coal, rail, and public utilities went on strike in 1945–1946, making it the largest labor upheaval in U.S. history. Most workers demanded wage increases to offset postwar inflation and to restore pay parity after wartime restrictions. Many strikes succeeded in securing modest wage gains and better benefits, including the United Auto Workers’ victory over General Motors, which resulted in increased wages and improved workplace conditions.

      ​ Everyday Impact on Workers

      The strikes were often exhausting and financially challenging for participants. The average work stoppage lasted about 24 days, three times longer than wartime strikes, forcing families to rely on savings or community support. Nonetheless, solidarity and union membership surged temporarily as workers saw their actions bring some tangible improvements in pay and bargaining power.

      ​ Political and Economic Consequences

      Successes were short-lived. Media and political elites increasingly portrayed labor as disruptive, especially as nationwide strikes affected transportation and goods distribution, leading to food shortages and logistical chaos. This backlash fueled anti-union sentiment, culminating in the Taft–Hartley Act of 1947, which curtailed key labor rights such as secondary strikes and sympathy actions, required union leaders to sign anti-communist affidavits, and enabled “right-to-work” laws in several states.

      ​ Long-Term Outcomes

      By the early 1950s, many of the workers who had gone on strike returned to relative economic stability, but with weakened collective bargaining power. Union growth plateaued after 1948, and labor’s political influence declined as conservative forces gained control of Congress in 1946, shifting U.S. labor relations toward employer dominance for decades.

      In essence, the average worker from the 1946 general strike wave gained short-term material benefits but ultimately saw the labor movement’s power constrained—ushering in a postwar order defined by limited union influence and the rise of corporate-led industrial relations.

      • titaniumarmor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        Did you compare this against a reliable source before sharing? If so, could you share a source?

        I’m not necessarily disputing these particular factual claims — since I’m on not an expert on this moment in history — but please, please don’t rely uncritically on AI for factual questions.

        Edit: a typo

        • altphoto@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          12 hours ago

          No I did not. The AI had references and I removed them. I think it behooves us to use their machines against them and in the process pollute the pool so that AI companies cannot easily dig up facts from our daily conversations.

          Its not important to tell where the info came from. Its more important to learn that all this has played before. We are on the brink of economical collapse and soon will be loosing our voice to even talk about the subject.

          • MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Its not important to tell where the info came from. Its more important to learn than all this has played before.

            See, without verification (or a reader already being aware of the factual accuracy or inaccuracy of this AI output), what you posted is about as reliable as fanfiction. It is not appropriate to make a statement like “it’s important to know this has happened before and how it went” even as you say you’re unwilling to provide evidence for your claims.

            The AI history output sounds reasonable. But if any of it is skewed in favor of the ruling class - or was manually edited in such a way - then the potential effect is readers having just a little bit more sense that any action in favor of Labor is doomed to fail. Quite shitty if that’s the takeaway of something not actually accurate.

          • titaniumarmor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            10 hours ago

            Its not important to tell where the info came from.

            In other words: there’s no point in continuing this conversation. Later 👋

  • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    167
    ·
    1 day ago

    It’s never happened before because the working class has never been unified nationwide before. Soybean farmers in Utah are not connected to teachers in Boston or steelworkers in Pittsburgh or auto manufacturers in Michigan or nurses in San Diego. There’s never been a singular cause that affected all of those groups of people at the same time.

    If it ever could happen, it would be because the President was a colossal dipshit who fucked every aspect of the economy across the country, except that would almost certainly cause the legislature to put an end to such rampant and corrupt tyranny.

    Right?

    • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      19 hours ago

      The last time people across the country organized general strike of sorts the government went into action to make a law that made it illegal for unions to organize such a thing.

      And with this corrupt Congress and this idiot president and this ridiculous SCOTUS, I think it’s likely they will worm their way into making a law that makes it illegal for any citizen to strike for any reason.

      Trump already illegally outlawed government unions. And nothing, absolutely nothing, was done about it.

      • HasturInYellow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        15 hours ago

        The people strike.

        Congress says: that’s illegal now!! Go back to work!

        Why the fuck would we? Literally what could possibly convince people that the gov is going to arrest a million people for striking? Genuinely, how braindead are people that that is a concern?

        • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          14 hours ago

          I would suggest you not underestimate just how unbelievably stupid our current president is and how likely he is to actually use the United States army against its own people regardless of how legal or illegal it actually is. Not to mention his sycophantic Congress that will blithely stand by and let him do whatever the fuck he wants. This is what corruption looks like.

        • anomnom@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          19 hours ago

          And its donors haven’t felt it yet. Or if they have, they’re pretty sure they can buy up the wreckage after it all fails. Like they did after every other recession and depression since the 70s.

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      There’s never been a singular cause that affected all of those groups of people at the same time.

      The attack on Pearl Harbor and 9/11 were both pretty unifying. The former had an immediate and unambiguous opponent with Imperial Japan. 9/11 took weeks and months to figure out what happened and who did it, so it didn’t have as immediate a response.

      • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        For sure, there have been events that affected all Americans in various ways, good and bad, but the context of the conversation is events that would encourage a general labor strike. The moon landing, world wars, the Great Depression, the Macarena, big things happen. I probably could have been clearer by saying that nothing in history has unified the American working class as a singular political group to use our power as a labor force to exert pressure to stop oligarchical abuses by means of a general strike, but that seems overly pedantic.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          16 hours ago

          Being working class doesn’t just mean you perform work. It’s a social class defined by the relation to the means of production.

          Soy farmers in the US own their fields, own their equipment, set their own hours, and directly profit from selling commodities on the market. They’re small business owners, they are not workers. Workers don’t own or control shit, they sell their labor to someone else who actually owns capital and land. Workers toil under a boss and soy farmers do not, they are their own boss.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          16 hours ago

          Small business owners do labor too, but that doesn’t make them working class. Workers don’t own shit, but these farmers own capital and land and directly profit from their own labor rather than being forced to sell their labor on the market.

          It’s a social class, defined by their relation to the means of production.

        • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          19 hours ago

          “Farmer” has come to mean the corporate owner of fields in which crops are grown, rather than the people waking up at the ass crack of dawn to tend to the fields and bring in the harvest.

          “Farm workers” are now the ones doing all the labor.

      • Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Yeah, the guy who owns the farm that borders my yard is just some dude with a full time job. He spends a couple days driving a big tractor thing planting in the spring, and several more days in the fall driving a different big tractor thing around to harvest it. Soybeans and corn on rotation.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          15 hours ago

          Farmers do plenty of work besides driving their tractor around, but class relations are defined by their relations to property and capital and profit rather than how much work they do. He owns the land, and the tractor, and reaps all the profit. He’s small business owner, and his politics probably align with other small business owners.

          • Sam@fed.eitilt.life
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            13 hours ago

            Yeah, there’s certainly a fair petite bourgeois population among farmers, but I think you overestimate its size. Many farmers might own the land… if it weren’t still under morgage to the bank. The tractor is almost certainly also still on loan from the dealership since the same “trade in for new, better equipment” scam is as prevalent there as it is for personal vehicles. The corn and especially soybeans aren’t something that can be sold directly at scale (farmers’ markets can only support so much) unlike dairy which you can theoretically turn to regional groceries for – you’re selling to one of a small number of processors and aggregators, and if they decide they don’t need as much as you sold them last year you’re left scrabbling for something to do with a lot of worthless product. At the end of the year, most of the profit has gone right back to the financiers rather than to the farmer themself.

            The evident situation is different for a farmer than for a factory worker, but tenant farmers are proletarian, and modern commercial farming is often closer to tenant farming than it’s advertised as being. The financial systems nowdays (especially around farming) are set up to give the trappings of small business ownership, without the degree of self-determination that came with that status back when the foundational theory was being written.

            re: @[email protected]
            via @[email protected]

          • Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            13 hours ago

            The value these small farmers obtain is still derived from their labor. They aren’t passively owning a profit creating assets.

  • Lasherz@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’m dubious that a general strike is possible in the US. All of the other countries that have had massive strikes affecting large chunks of the market were driven by large unions. Our unions don’t have that sort of sway and they rarely help others to maximize their diminishing bargaining power with the ongoing degradation of workers rights. Importantly this also happens on the supply side, the consumer side will just buy it tomorrow instead usually. A day of no productivity has much bigger consequences.

    That being said, I’ll definitely participate.

    • QuarkVsOdo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      16 hours ago

      I fear that the average american can’t afford to strike, because of the lingering threat of poverty from losing employment and getting crushed by outstanding debt. But this is a sign, that there are already not enough worker’s rights.

      From far away it looks like a construct.

        • JonEFive@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          And many, many more rely on their jobs not only for income, but also for access to healthcare. Something seems wrong here.

      • markovs_gun@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        23 hours ago

        What is the point if scheduling a strike so far in advance? Also, aren’t UAW leadership aligned with Trump?

        • Lasherz@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          27
          ·
          22 hours ago

          The point as I understand it is that they’re allowing other unions to set their contract expiration to the same date, which increases the potential for pain during their next negotiations and makes for a quasi general strike across all unions who participated. It’s a pretty good idea all in all.

          Also, it’s complicated who Sean Fain aligns with. He’s pro-tariff and praised Trump for incentivizing cars to be made in the US, although it seems like that’s the extent of it, and I wonder how he feels about it now that it’s been fully unmasked to just be market manipulation by Trump’s circle of billionaires. Sean’s speech still hit most of the socialist talking points of pro labor even though it was to a bunch of Republican donors, leading to the funniest and most revealing awkward silences after sections about how the working class is who provides all of the value in an economy.

          • Cethin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            19 hours ago

            Pro-tariff makes sense purely from a “protecting American labor” point of view. The ideal of them is to encourage internal markets to favor domestic production. However, that first requires domestic production to exist, and it also needs to be done in a way that doesn’t harm domestic production. The Trump tariffs aren’t this, obviously.

            • Frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              18 hours ago

              Historically, what the UAW wants isn’t necessarily good for the rest of us. The “chicken tax” that pushes larger and larger trucks in the US was done as part of LBJ negotiating with the UAW. The result was that foreign small trucks couldn’t possibly be profitable, and thus had no competition for domestic manufacturing to make the largest trucks possible and nothing else.

        • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          19 hours ago

          What they are doing is asking all unions to set May 1st 2028 as the expiration date for their next labor contract. They aren’t actually scheduling a strike, just laying the groundwork.

        • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          18 hours ago

          It was planned before the election, and they likely didn’t anticipate Trump would win again.

          From what I’ve seen the UAW leader is fairly left leaning.

    • shane@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 day ago

      The article says that a 1947 law makes it almost impossible for unions to organize a general strike.

      • ManOMorphos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Anything that would cause real economic damage and put power back in the hands of workers will be treated as “illegal” regardless of what the books say. But what could they realistically do, arrest everyone in their homes who didn’t go to work that day?

        Wildcat strikes are “illegal” in the sense that your employer is allowed to retaliate with firing you or docking pay if you do so. I highly doubt someone’s going to prison for not showing up at a regular job.

        • PunnyName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          13 hours ago

          But what could they realistically do, arrest everyone in their homes who didn’t go to work that day?

          Considering that the US has the highest incarcerated population in the world, it’s not like they aren’t trying to do this very thing.

      • Cassanderer@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Most strikes were illegal by polit definitions. Teamsters got into pitched club battles with cops and mob organized strike breakers.

        Had guys with guns on standby in case of escalation too.

        And they won, circa 19teens.

      • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        It’s preferable to break that anti-labour red scare law if it means avoiding the country getting to the point where civil war happens instead.

  • Zachariah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    78
    ·
    1 day ago

    Summoning people of all backgrounds to unite and take a stand against President Donald Trump’s “tyranny,” the “ultra-wealthy” and corporate greed, Johnson said, “We are going to make them pay their fair share in taxes to fund our school, to fund jobs, to fund healthcare, to fund transportation.”

    “Democracy will live on because of this generation,” he proclaimed. “Are you ready to take it to the courts and to the streets?”

    It was an audacious declaration from the mayor, who has risen to the top of Trump’s list of enemies as he resists the vicious immigration operations and arrival of hundreds of National Guards currently shaking Chicago.