Minus: You think that the surplus-salaried CEO's are smart enough to weaken and commodify/ deracinate labour deliberately?
Yes. It is a deliberate strategy.
Copilot: If one considers a unionized workforce as the original or intended state of labor (at least in industrialized settings where unions were a key force in shaping workers' rights), then anti-union tactics do align with the figurative "uprooting" implied by deracination.
Where are those "industrialized settings" in todays economy? China? Russia?
Unions are a solution to a nineteenth century economic problem. How can you tell? The biggest Unions in the US are GOVERNMENT WORKERS UNIONS.
In 2024, 32.2% of public-sector workers in the US were union members, a rate significantly higher than the 5.9% union membership rate in the private sector.
To say that Democrats represent WORKERS (not "union members") is to tell bold and blatant lies.
The economic model for today (and forseeable future) is the third wave petit bourgeois model. To be successful, however, it will need to outlaw and abolish technofeudalism. "Markets" should not be captured and controlled with algorithms and "search engines" that generate revenues for the technofeudal lords who "arrange" the 'market' transactions.
Minus: The biggest Unions in the US are GOVERNMENT WORKERS UNIONS.
Sure, because the government allows them, while the private sector fights them. While aided by republitutds (right to work for less laws). We need legislation that makes it easier for private sector employees to unionize and impossible for employers to stop them.
Copilot: It sounds like the blog author is trying to make a rhetorical leap, but their argument doesn’t really hold water. The disappearance of Jimmy Hoffa is widely believed to involve organized crime, specifically the Mafia, which operated independently of political parties. Linking Hoffa’s fate to "Democratic gangsters" seems like a stretch without any evidence to back it up. Your point about "Democratic gangsters" being imaginary is valid -- there’s no credible basis for such a term.
18 comments:
The origin is rightturd false narratives.
You think that the surplus-salaried CEO's are smart enough to weaken and commodify/ deracinate labour deliberately? I'm in the Hanlon's Razor camp.
Minus: You think that the surplus-salaried CEO's are smart enough to weaken and commodify/ deracinate labour deliberately?
Yes. It is a deliberate strategy.
Copilot: If one considers a unionized workforce as the original or intended state of labor (at least in industrialized settings where unions were a key force in shaping workers' rights), then anti-union tactics do align with the figurative "uprooting" implied by deracination.
Where are those "industrialized settings" in todays economy? China? Russia?
Unions are a solution to a nineteenth century economic problem. How can you tell? The biggest Unions in the US are GOVERNMENT WORKERS UNIONS.
In 2024, 32.2% of public-sector workers in the US were union members, a rate significantly higher than the 5.9% union membership rate in the private sector.
To say that Democrats represent WORKERS (not "union members") is to tell bold and blatant lies.
The economic model for today (and forseeable future) is the third wave petit bourgeois model. To be successful, however, it will need to outlaw and abolish technofeudalism. "Markets" should not be captured and controlled with algorithms and "search engines" that generate revenues for the technofeudal lords who "arrange" the 'market' transactions.
We need to exclude all "middlemen".
...and fairly unite Buyers with Sellers.
The origins are leftturd lying, cheating, stealing and killing. There! Fixed it for ya, Buttstink Dervish.
Minus: The biggest Unions in the US are GOVERNMENT WORKERS UNIONS.
Sure, because the government allows them, while the private sector fights them. While aided by republitutds (right to work for less laws). We need legislation that makes it easier for private sector employees to unionize and impossible for employers to stop them.
Minus: ...abolish technofeudalism.
It is 100 percent guaranteed d0n0ld will do the opposite.
It still beats the alternative.
So Democratic gangsters can control the entire economy... @@
...we need to "bust all trusts" not "enable" them.
I don't give a 💩 about imaginary "Democratic gangsters" or delusions about them trying to "control the entire economy".
So where is Jimmy Hoffa's body buried/
Copilot: It sounds like the blog author is trying to make a rhetorical leap, but their argument doesn’t really hold water. The disappearance of Jimmy Hoffa is widely believed to involve organized crime, specifically the Mafia, which operated independently of political parties. Linking Hoffa’s fate to "Democratic gangsters" seems like a stretch without any evidence to back it up. Your point about "Democratic gangsters" being imaginary is valid -- there’s no credible basis for such a term.
Didn't Joe Kennedy get his son elected president, thanks to the mob?
...and didn't the mob eventually kill his son?
Post a Comment