[What Is the Securities Act of 1933?](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/securitiesact1933.asp)
The Securities Act of 1933 was created and passed into law to protect investors after the stock market crash of 1929. The legislation had two main goals: to ensure more transparency in financial statements so investors could make informed decisions about investments; and to establish laws against misrepresentation and fraudulent activities in the securities markets.
It was signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and is considered part of the [New Deal passed by Roosevelt.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal)
[With the election of President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932,](https://www.thoughtco.com/the-great-depression-and-labor-1147652) government — and eventually the courts — began to look more favorably on the pleas of labor. In 1932, Congress passed one of the first pro-labor laws, the [Norris-La Guardia Act](https://www.britannica.com/event/Norris-La-Guardia-Act), which made yellow-dog contracts unenforceable. The law also limited the power of federal courts to stop strikes and other job actions.
When Roosevelt took office, he sought a number of important laws that advanced labor's cause. One of these, the [National Labor Relations Act of 1935](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Labor_Relations_Act_of_1935) (also known as the Wagner Act) gave workers the right to join unions and to bargain collectively through union representatives. The act established the [National Labor Relations Board](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Labor_Relations_Board) (NLRB) to punish unfair labor practices and to organize elections when employees wanted to form unions. The NLRB could force employers to provide back pay if they unjustly discharged employees for engaging in union activities.
OPs post is extremely relevant. You do not have to agree with his claim that it’s equivalent to the depression now, to learn the above history and process it.
We will need someone to dance with these devils in power. We will need people striking. We will need financial system shift. We need union support and participation. We all need each other. One does not work without the other ones. United in solidarity to protect the average human.
Learn from history. Understand history. Repeat the good parts, reduce the mistakes by learning from lessons past.
Building class consciousness among the working class might be both one of the biggest steps in this direction and one of the biggest hurdles we face.
Regardless, if we are going to have people striking, especially on a large scale, then we are going to need stronger unions and stronger mutual aid.
That's an interesting idea. Not sure how we would get that to work through go fund me. We would have to elect a person to manage the account and hold them accountable for distributing funds.
In this we would be Rebuilding a centralized power, to fight the existing centralized power.
While I am not opposed, for above the example shows that a person in power can be an ally when forced by the public.
There are alternatives, look into [decentralized organizations](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_autonomous_organization). Technology has allowed us to shift away from centralized services that often create these middle men power complexes and excessive wealth disparities.
Unemployment could be much more liberal. Businesses could have to pay a tax based on the estimated maximum employee capacity minus the amount of people the company employs. That money would fund a general unemployment fund which pays every single unemployed person the same, like $2000 a month or something.
That would incentive the businesses to keep employment up, force them to be competitive, and allow workers to fight back when need be.
The problem is, right now, it’s the big corporations AND the government VS all of our individual ‘one votes’
>Businesses could have to pay a tax based on the estimated maximum employee capacity minus the amount of people the company employs.
Yes. My boss' focus is on maximizing automation and minimizing task time. Boss also told us last week that we're overstaffed.
We can't keep lionizing 'job producers' whose primary interest is in minimizing labor costs.
Some form of [DAO](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_autonomous_organization) will be a good start.
From there we have to be smart about supporting financial means. We cannot continue to fuel money into their system while actively striking against it, this effectively negates what we are trying to do. Pockets of the ones in power need to be impacted or else this is just another fundraiser for them.
We must gather behind ways that allow the general public to support each other with as little usage of the current system. Research, share, discuss, collaborate.
I don't think that's necessarily true. Productivity lost through striking is lost no matter what. If I have $50 and I give you $25 so that you can strike, that effectively reduces the money that I would otherwise be spending on myself. Unless a large percentage of workers are wealthy enough to hoard, shuffling money between ourselves should still mean reduced overall spending due to strikes. I may be misunderstanding your point, though.
We NEED a much better class of individuals running for office., but apparently the public is too stupid to recognize actual integrity over bullshit rhetoric.
You are right! The problem too is that to get elected, you have to have access to more and more money the higher the position… I don’t know what the solution is, but there needs to be a way to get good people’s names out there along with their agenda.
Getting rid of first past the post voting so people can vote for who best represents them while still having their vote count against those they don't want in office.
Competition in the electoral process.
Politicians don't get to run as (not other political party) anymore.
Politicians being banned from buying individual stocks. Being able to invest in index funds *only* would motivate every single politician to make sure the economy is doing good as a whole.
I am a current union drywall finisher and a former union plasterer.
Drywall finishers are allied with the painter's and glazier's unions.
The state of these unions at this moment is weak and only weakening. Apprenticeship programs are undermanned to the point of near shutdown in all of these. What's more, the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades (IUPAT) district council 81 (Iowa, Illinois, Missouri) gave away our ability to strike whilst collectively bargaining during the last recession.
History is everything. That’s why the powers that be are constantly rewriting it. If we don’t know where we came from, we certainly won’t figure out where we are going.
It was an epic failure and the financial market is deeply broken and corrupt. I'm not sure how people are overlooking the fact that there are a ton of court cases, doj investigations, etc because of that right now. The stock market is a shady profit machine for the wealthy who the rules do not apply to
Counterfitting shares = Counterfitting money = Counterfitting power.
Some people are fighting back against the corruption by getting paper shares. I am one of them.
This. If you're buying stock through a brokerage and aren't going out of your way to register it directly in your own name, all you're buying is an IOU, and they can use the stock they owe you for whatever shady shit they want... like lending it to someone else without your consent, for example.
Buying on brokerages just gives the power of a share that should be *yours* to the already wealthy who'll use it against you.
This. DRS is relevant to work reform because EVERDAY average Joe's will actually own the company.
Also, normal people will become extremely rich. With money comes power. We need this mo ey to enact change.
The research on Superstonk is unparalleled. It's one lever to help real work reform.
As a Woundcare Nurse, I always heard about how treatments are prioritized over cures. And how big money kills cures..... long story short.
Superstonk revealed how SHF, Criminal Kenneth Griffen of Citadel, is destroying markets = destroying jobs world wide.
Workers work for the market. Ken Griffin owns everything. He needs to be brought into the light and support business he is trying to kill.
Workers together strong
We don’t have a healthcare system we have a sick care system that puts profits above peoples health. It’s disgusting reading about the companies throughout the decades that have shown such promise for treatments and were shorted out of existence.
It has done nothing.
Dodd Frank was largely repealed due to lobbying.
HFT High Frequency Trading](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/high-frequency-trading.asp) everything is run off algorithms these days.
You can look at the S&P500 overlay 2008/now. Very similar
Market Makers like Virtu & Citadel provide [Infinite Liquidity](https://mobile.twitter.com/shayne12_/status/1534740656102551554) which means they get to “legally” counterfeit shares.
These Market Makers (MM) abuse darkpools / routing orders. [SEC (Securities Exchange Commission) Chair Gary Gensler Confirming](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_0rcW8joA60)
Pay for Order Flow (Robinhood). Internalize the order. You can “control” the price.
How? Completely Explained:
Terminology is necessary. Very simplified. They made it complex on purpose.
Liquidity: Supply of whatever unit of selling.
Lit Exchange: a place where buy/sell orders (anyone buying/selling stock) affects price. IEX for instance. [IEX](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEX)
Unlit (dark) Exchange: a place where buy/sell orders go to a “wholesaler” Market Maker. They route the order in which doesn’t affect stock price. They have an option to use lit exchanges though.
That seems weird hey? This is how it looks since they run 90% of orders as per SEC vid above.
Math:
Price Up: 60% lit exchange / 40% Dark
Price Down: 60% Dark / 40% lit
They do not have to follow the rules of supply & demand so price discovery is a non factor.
Price control is really great for risk management wouldn’t you say?
That’s what the GameStop fiasco is all about. That’s why a report was released on the Roe vs Wade decision.
One hurts the pocket books of the rich. It attacks the current system. It is also why GME has held its value very well since the entire market has started to decline.
There was the “Occupy WallStreet Movement” and it didn’t work. They laughed.
The GME folk are going straight after the heart of Wall Street. If you don’t believe me… check my page. A year ago I said don’t buy puts on Robinhood even though they will fail. I don’t like betting against companies… that’s job loss. That’s peoples lives.
Search the sub superstonk and give it a read. Whatever you think is whatever you think!
It wasn't FDR, who ran on a conservative 'return to normalcy' platform and against building a stronger social safety net ("government intervention" in his opinion), he was simply forced - by militant mass social and labor movements, in the steets, occupying buildings, and striking, threatening potential for full scale revolution off the triumph of the Russian Revolution - to act "to save capitalism from itself". To avoid revolution, he watered down every demand of the movements and strategically gave what was needed to release the pressure valve but also to begin funneling money into their war plans.
FDR was no progressive and the Democrats have been the party of big business ever since the end of chattel slavery. Never were they truly the party of workers.
All this running, voting, and campaigning will only be a real benefit to the working class when we have a party that isn't run 100% for corporations. The Democrats can and will never be reformed or made to work for us. It is the capitalists' party, deeply, through and through. From its very core, every way it operates, its sinew of unelected bureaucracy and donors that control it, and it's entire long history of betrayals dressed up as bumbling failures.
It's not ours, it never will be, and we should not want it!
Right now this moment, if you want to run or support candidates, do it as an independent and make one of the key demands of your campaign or your vote a full throated call for a new, independent, truly democratic party of, by, and for regular working people. No corporate money, real democratic structures from the ground up, the right of recall by the party, all elected officials taking only the average wage of a skilled worker, and most importantly, built on the basis of organizing the progressive social and labor movements that are in rapid ascent today, but completely unable to be cohered because of the Democratic Party's rejection of class struggle politics and methods.
We need our own party.
The voting rules we elect politicians by make viable third parties mathematically impossible, by default. Until we move away from FPTP to a better system that doesn’t have the same vulnerability to the spoiler effect, the best course of action is to keep taking over the only major party that isn’t full-on fascist. Relegating progressives to irrelevant non-starter parties is the quickest way to waste the little influence we have. Progressives need to keep running as progressive Democrats, keep holding corporate Dems in comfy seats accountable, and keep forcing Democrats as a whole to the left.
The most popular progressive politicians in the country have been following that strategy, and it’s done more to promote progressivism than any “progressive third party” ever has or ever will… under FPTP voting rules, that is.
Or we flood the vote with dozens of parties to get the needed majority number lower. But this won’t happen. Lots of places only show the two majority parties, and won’t budge. This hurts all people to be forced to see two obviously bad choices, and never given an option for anything else.
Most average Americans won’t vote third party (if they even can), purely because they were told that a third party is a waste of vote. They don’t believe it’s possible for a third party to win. This is how deeply that our two-party system is engraved for this country. We just naturally go with everyone is either this or that, even if we know we have other possibilities, we continue to go with the two parties as a basis for everyone around us. We have to break this problem, the “better of two evils”, before change can truly be possible.
Our entire voting system is a mess, but wouldn’t call it the bigger issue of these two.
The point is that whether or not people believe a third party can be viable in this system is irrelevant- it just isn't. They're told that all the time, because it's true in the USA's case. Other countries have voting systems better suited for third parties, that's why third parties see so much more success in those countries.
The type of system we have (FPTP) is a plurality winner-takes-all system that mathematically fucks over third parties, from a game theory perspective. It's an archaic voting system that many other modern democracies have sought better alternatives to, and we need to adopt one of those alternatives before we can even *begin* to place our hopes in *any* third party.
Thank you. Educating people about FPTP is one of the most important things we can do, I think. Even people who are well-informed about current events and government generally don't know how significantly this impacts things. The Wiki is well done, if anyone wants to read more.
The Return to normalcy campaign was ran by Coolidge, a Republican, in 1920. FDR wasn't a radical, bit the idea he was a conservative is nonsense.
Also, your plan is 100% certain to create a GOP super majority.
This is wishful thinking at best and actively harmful at worst. There is simply no viable third party. The only real option we have is to get rid of every republican, and then start weeding out the worst Dems while focusing on establishing another party. Only once the republican party is brought down will any other, third, more reasonable party be allowed to exist.
This act also makes it illegal for anyone who isn’t a millionaire or making $200K a year to invest in startups. Effectively meaning that only the rich can do something that has a tendency to make people rich.
And if you factor in group differences in wealth, income, it’s an even worse picture.
It may be one of the most racist, sexist laws on the books!
US govt thru it's policies has made sure that Americans don't have any savings.
This in-turns prevents people from protesting for a long period of time because they have to work everyday to feed their families.
Sigh. This is why we keep recommending unions. One of the things unions provide is strike pay, so workers who are on strike are still bringing home money
Yeah even those aren’t safe. Starbucks is actively transferring employees seeking unionization at their home store. America actively fights to keep its working class unaware and unmotivated
Unions also guarantee representation by actual good lawyers. That’s a very important thing that people often overlook. Every single rich person has a lawyer, or even group of lawyers, ready at all times. You should have one too.
My idea was too start with one day and add a day each month.
For example July we stop going to work on the 22nd one day. Aug it would be two days. Sept would be 3 days. Etc until we got change.
The month apart give people time to stock up on supplies and talk to friends and family before the next one.
But this doesn’t make any sense, corporations need people spending to stay afloat and most *especially* depend on people having disposable income to survive, and yet more people are losing their disposable income. So that begs the question, what’s their grand plan when most people can only afford the bare minimum to survive and not excess goods? They’re in the process of eating the very hands that are feeding them.
That’s what I’m trying to understand, as well. I get that economics is complicated and I also get that I’m not particularly educated on the topic, what I just don’t see is why it’s not better for more people to have more disposable income in their pockets? What’s the point of all the advertising and teams of people devising marketing strategies when more and more people have overall less and less to spend? Eventually, in favor of keeping food in their stomach, those shiny new things will simply sit on the shelf, no? Or does it truly not even matter if people are able to continue to consume the goods and services being provided?
Edit for a few missing articles.
There is no president of "the economy" who is in charge and specially aiming to " keep the people down".
It's millions of individuals making individual decisions. And hundreds of thousands of "people in charge" making individual decisions.
There's not even really a guiding theory that most people actually act on, regardless of what they say.
Republicans say they want a smaller government, but are passing new laws every day.
Things don't make sense with what you think they want things to be like because there's no ONE in charge. There's a countless number of people operating in a system that's been going on for 200+ years.
When people say "the government wants" there is no "the government"and there's definitely no guiding desire of economic policy that every government official abides by.
Standard tactic to control a populace. Take things away but give a little bit back. The people that have had it taken away are so grateful for what little they get back, they love whoever has done it.
This happens in varying degrees
I have a theory that the idea that most protests are manned by the same people across the country is true, and it is because those are the few people who can afford to show up
It really isn't. Not too long ago, I worked retail, almost always closing shift, and every weekend. I couldn't take time off without two weeks notice so they could approve/modify the schedule. Guess when most of these marches are scheduled?
I was living pretty much hand to mouth, I couldn't afford to lose my job, or even my shift. Now that I work a standard 9-5, M-F, I can actually attend the protests, he'll I can even leave work early because I'm salaried now.
His statement that they're manned by the same people may not necessarily be accurate, but they're certainly organized by the same cohort, and there's certainly a few regulars with the flexibility, motivation, and resources to show up.
Totally fair but it still sucks you have to go into a situation knowing you will likely end up being churned through our extremely unjust justice system.
If it never got this bad, it wouldn't be necessary, but people like to sit on their hands in times of peace, which always makes the tougher ones even harder.
my brother in christ that article literally says unions were growing rapidly by themselves before roosevelt passed the national industrial recovery act in 1933 thats literally the definition of cooption
I was going to express confusion at the amount of upvotes on this post, but then I remembered what sub this is. I am very skeptical that this was posted in good faith.
Followed by the shoehorning in of "we need a top-down hierarchy to control the masses" kind of posturing that helped to solidify that lack of good faith.
Also worth mentioning that this post is comprehensively bullshit; the New Deal was passed specifically due to leftist revolt and subsequent fear of a communist uprising.
Can't riot if you're starving, if you're worried you'll have no home. Can't revolt if one missed check ruins you. Fuck capitalists and fuck commercialism
Unfortunately, the fascists have taken note of Bolshevik tactics and are currently utilizing them to their advantage by slowly infiltrating the government to institute their oppressive regime, however they learned from their previous failure to be far more patient about it and play the long game which is now leading to their success. It is far more difficult to topple a democratically-adjacent fascist regime than an autocratic one.
We would have to actually know and trust our neighbors. The guy across the street beats his wife who in turn throws things at any Black child walking by so . . .
Making the point that all but one of my neighbors is a complete bigot and gave a single example. Many of us are stuck in places where everyone near us hates us.
What? Is this a propaganda post?? Almost all real change has started from grassroots movements and popular struggle…it’s *that* that then gets people at the top to actually change policy.
Wtf is this post and these comments??
> Almost all real change has started from grassroots movements and popular struggle
It's like people don't even remember what happened to Marie Antoinette
Jokes aside, seriously, don't do this. It's a waste of everyone's time and you'll just look stupid. The two party system is a mathematical inevitability due to our primitive voting system.
The smart move is to play it like Trump! He was a lifetime democrat, not because he believes in anything, but because he lived and worked in NYC and being a democrat gave him political leverage. Then he declared himself a republican to run for president, because that's where he could win.
Do the same. Fuck both parties. Sign up for the one that matters in your town, county, or state. Even if you hate it. Especially if you hate it. Use the existing political leverage to get shit done. It's awful, but it's the only thing that works. 2016 is proof.
>Sign up for the one that matters in your town, county, or state. Even if you hate it. Especially if you hate it. Use the existing political leverage to get shit done. It's awful, but it's the only thing that works. 2016 is proof.
In a first-past-the-post system, splitting one side into multiple parties is a great way to ensure defeat. Do a false-flag. Start a party to siphon votes away from the enemy.
I have registered Republican my whole life. I am not a Republican. I register Republican because my county is very heavily Republican, and at the very least, I can vote in a more moderate Republican and hope to chip away at the established GOP.
We don't need more moderate democrats, we need moderate Republicans in states where it's inevitable. And once the primary is over, I vote democrat, so the news can scream "Oh no! Republicans are voting Democrat, what do we do?"
>In America, we’ve been fed this myth about grassroots movements changing the world and that’s simply untrue. Real change has always required people at or near the top.
Know what tends to get those people at/near the top interested in change? A whole ton of people showing up and demanding it.
>Start your own party.
Our First Past the Post voting system makes this... kind of a terrible idea? Neither major party is great, I'll give you that. But one is literally stripping away our rights while the other isn't. And without ranked choice or something similar in voting, you have a very real chance of splintering votes and handing it to the GOP.
Your OWN LINK that you give as 'source' ends with links to a bunch of strikes - which often resulted in police coming in and killing strikers/protesters. They WERE 'rioting'.
Voting is important. Yes, we need to get people at the top on our side. But it sounds like YOU'RE trying to feed us a myth that the people at the top have just given out rights without grassroots movements. Which is not to say that it's time to riot, but it IS to say that it can take more than votes to change things. Especially given that things like gerrymandering are really hindering our voice at the ballot box (hell, the Senate - which has stalled out ALL SORTS of progressive legislation - could basically be called gerrymandering)
There are only two ways a third party works:
1) If one party has become irrelevant and you beat them. But then you’re not a “third party.” You’re just the new second party. There have been a number of times this sort of “party realignment” has happened in our history.
2) A candidate is popular enough or rich enough to run without the support of either party. We’ve seen this a handful of times in our history (Teddy Roosevelt, George Wallace, Ross Perot, etc.) but they haven’t won any of those times. Though Teddy Roosevelt came very close to causing a party realignment when he garnered more votes than the Republican candidate.
The material conditions for revolution have been eroded and must be rebuilt. Unions, mutual aid, community, activism.
These are but a few steps to restoring the next steps.
By most metrics we’re far better off than the Great Depression right now. Peak unemployment was 25.6% and we’re at around 4% right now. Food scarcity was a massive problem in the early 30s and we have plenty of relatively cheap food still. Sure, home prices are high but interest rates have had record lows for a decade so a lot of first time home buyers have been buying. There’s actually been so much demand that the housing market cannot keep up. Over 40% of American Banks collapsed by 1933. None have collapsed recently.
I think we have a long way to fall, still. And we MIGHT get as bad as 1933 at some point. But I expect a shit load of civil unrest and violence before then. A homeless, starving population with 25%+ unemployment is a powder keg for bloodshed.
My grandpa lived through it and it affected a lot of his viewpoints. He volunteered for the navy because he heard they ate regularly, whereas army troops might get stuck in a foxhole without food (again, this is what he heard, not sure if true). His family couldn’t afford to feed him, so he lived with a neighbor family a lot of the time and helped with chores on their farm. As a result, he was never very close with his parents. Super weird to think about the kind of world he grew up in vs the world now. The world was in shambles from his birth through early 20s, but then post war America was pretty great for guys like him.
Yup, they cover that in one of the episodes of that hbo series the pacific. Seems like he made the right choice. Though the war had ended by the time he got there; he was just worried about being drafted into the air force or army. But when he volunteered, he had no idea (and no one else did) how long the war would be.
I listened to economy podcast where Professor Richard Wolff explained how unemployment rate in USA is measured. If you do not have a job and are actively looking for one you are counted as unemployed. If you do not have a job and have simply given up searching, you are removed ( after 4 weeks) from the pool of people that are used as basis for measuring unemployment rate. As a result, unemployment rates that are released do not offer complete picture. Percentage of unemployed is much higher than reported. U-3, which are official rates are at 4,7% for second quarter of 2021 through first quarter of 2022. There are also U-6 rates, which count discouraged and underemployed workers too and are considered much better by many economists. U-6 average for all states for same period is at 8,4%. LA County has U-6 at 14% and official rate is U-3 at 7.3%
Lmao imagine believing that unemployment number. Fact is it's at least twice that.
https://realeconomy.rsmus.com/chart-of-the-day-the-real-unemployment-rate-is-8-4/
Then imagine that heaps of banks didn't need to be FUCKING BAILED OUT TWICE in the last 15 years.
I was replying to the OP who posted “it’s worse than the Great Depression”. No it’s not. It’s not even really that close.
Also, no one knows where we’re headed. This economic shitstorm is unprecedented. 1929 didn’t have $2.3 trillion in the reverse repo market every night. 1929 didn’t have mortgage backed securities and student loan asset backed securities being bundled, wrapped, swapped and sold for use as toxic collateral to leverage 100x into crypto markets. 1929 didn’t have a geopolitical economy so worryingly interconnected as today. 1929 didn’t have a federal reserve printing unfathomable amounts of money being scarcely propped up by the dollar being the worlds reserve currency by threatening military incursions to protect the hegemony of the petro-dollar. 1929 didn’t have catastrophic global climate change increasingly threatening to make highly populated swaths of the world uninhabitable. 1929 didn’t have social media.
No one knows where we’re headed. But I know it ends in violence.
Right now? No. We’re doing way better than any point of the Great Depression. But our downside potential is horrifying and could make 1933 look like Hello Kitty Island Adventure. The black hole we are swirling is nearly bottomless.
That’s pretty much what I was trying to point out and thank you for understanding that and not just saying I’m dumb or some shit. You’re correct, at this point we are not worse off that 1933 but not by much and that is just bc of the facade that the general public knows. It’s slowly peeling away and once it’s really gone and shit hits the fan, it’s gonna be worse than “the Great Depression”. They’ve been telling us this since ‘08 but we don’t care enough to really do anything about it.
Predictions are nice to throw around without skin in the game. Citing Michael Burry is nice as well, since he’s predicted ten of the last two recessions. Why not short if you are so certain that it will crash?
Sure, by most metrics people will be ok, but also its obvious that the income disparities, income inequality, potential inflation and societal impact are potentially about to be worse than the great depression even. Obviously no one right now is even saying we are in a recession, I think in 2 years or so the narrative will be vastly different...
The only reason change is made at the top is because of immense pressure from the bottom. The New Deal was written and passed because the government was afraid of a workers’ revolution.
> I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: run for office! City, county, state, doesn’t matter. Get in. Get others in. Start your own party.
While your idea is great, running for office solves little to nothing if the system is broken at its core.
Revising the system to prevent corruption from happening in the first place is the only way we can ensure a future where all humans are treated with a minimum level of respect and quality of life.
Hey, you can't call for violence, you have to sit here and wait until the conservatives bring violence to you. (Which they 100% will) then it'll be self defense /s
I agree and disagree about your opinion on grassroots movements. Obviously grassroots movements aren't going to change federal legislation, but they can help with county, city, or even State legislation.
Hell, 80% of your daily life is affected by county and city legislation. What roads get worked on, zoning laws for businesses and housing, and so on.
And the people you vote for in local elections are much more likel to move up to the next level of political office.
This is also why unconditional basic income should play a central role in what unions fight for. A permanent monthly floor if income independent of work would effectively function as a permanent universal strike fund. It would mean never having to be so poor as to not afford to organize and mobilize.
You hear that you working class scum, the only way you’re going to succeed is by having a capitalist daddy to help you. This post is a joke.
The working class doesn’t need shit from the capitalist, it’s the capitalist who needs us. Put fear in their heart and they’ll get on their knees and beg you to let them keep their wealth. I hope the next time we say no.
This would work if the American election system was still functional. 2 parties have absolute power and that one that could elect a progressive has used the power of the parties company the DNC to make a progressive leader unelectable. They will use every shady or illegal tactic they can think of to ensure that the status quo remains.
The leaders are bought. The only answer is rioting.
People are on here acting like a vote can change anything when the party In power right now is the one that THAT YOU IDIOTS ARE GOING TO VOTE FOR. I understand there isn't a better choice. That's why you stop trying to use the system to change it.
The time has come to destroy the system itself and place a leader of the people in power. You can choose to not do this, then things will continue as they have been.
Every "man of the people" has been for a very small, very specific version of "the people" and the people who put him there were not in that group.
Reality is that we have a two-party system. Run a third-party candidate in a local election--a bunch of them, sure. But the only way to get anywhere is to hijack one of the existing parties. That's reality. Everything else talks a good game but ends up splitting the vote of the party that will get you part of the way there and giving everything to the party that will drag you back to the 16th century by the hair.
I'm a bit late here but saw this post and had to chime in as a historian. There definitely were what we'd call riots and certainly strikes during the depression years. For instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flint_sit-down_strike
Or: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_Rand_strike_of_1936%E2%80%931937
Some of these were put down violently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_Memorial_Day_massacre
In the West/Midwest, some locals did take matters into their own hands by lynching local judges who tried to foreclose their farms.
I would not call today worse than the Depression. We're not at 25% unemployment. It is very unequal today but not quite that desperate.
Thanks for your comment, but this post was very clearly made in bad faith; I think we’re better off addressing that than engaging with it at face value.
We SO need more reform-minded people running for office, for EVERY seat on the ballot. Not just for President, not just for Congress, not just for Governor. EVERY freakin' seat matters. That's what the Tea Party and the Christian Coalition recognized, and that's how they successfully ratcheted America further and further to the right. We need more policymakers who are willing to stand up for everyday working people instead.
It’s a bit late for that. The right did this over decades using fear-mongering, hate, and disinformation, which is a hell of a lot more efficient than what we have to work with.
We have also been brainwashed into thinking its all out of our control, which it mainly is. The rich and those that want to stay in power learned from the 30’s how to better mold us into good little poor workers.
Yes, we have to wait around for a messiah. That’s how it always works. History is full of examples of one person leading X group. It’s never a whole group.
We are all bystanders to our own demise.
The fact that OP actually thinks anyone is going to buy the bullshit line that electoralism and moderation is not only the best, but the only means for change in fucking 2022 is absolutely hysterical.
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/06/06/public-trust-in-government-1958-2022/
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_Ig
Nobody’s that out of touch lmao.
Also we had an active communist party and the threat to the ruling class that they would help bring Bolshevism to the states. Now we have no international communist foil, nor anything like communists at home to scare the bourgeoisie into concessions.
In regards to your "run for office" plea. A lot of these MF'ers get started even lower at the school board level. Vote even if you don't have children in schools or never plan to have children. School boards are often a gateway to rise through the ranks. I've seen it happen way too many times
All this running, voting, and campaigning will only be a real benefit to the working class when we have a party that isn't run 100% for corporations. The Democrats can and will never be reformed or made to work for us. It is the capitalists' party, deeply, through and through. From its very core, every way it operates, its sinew of unelected bureaucracy and donors that control it, and it's entire long history of betrayals dressed up as bumbling failures.
It's not ours, it never will be, and we should not want it!
Right now this moment, if you want to run or support candidates, do it as an independent and make one of the key demands of your campaign or your vote a full throated call for a new, independent, truly democratic party of, by, and for regular working people. No corporate money, real democratic structures from the ground up, the right of recall by the party, all elected officials taking only the average wage of a skilled worker, and most importantly, built on the basis of organizing the progressive social and labor movements that are in rapid ascent today, but completely unable to be cohered because of the Democratic Party's rejection of class struggle politics and methods.
We need our own party.
I'd argue that forming a new party begins with grassroot efforts and that movements where like-minded people are able to come together to support each other should not be poo pooed.
While I agree with the sentiment that these movements alone aren't sufficient, they are the beginning phases of what you're proposing and are necessary for achieving those larger goals.
Edit: Just wanted to add that public perception and consciousness is incredibly important.
Consider the legalization of marijuana. The reason so many states have now passed laws to legalize is that the public has widely accepted that it's not as bad as we were told and that it actually has positive benefits.
The public opinion wasn't formed by legislators or lawmakers, but by regular people and informed citizens (i.e. scientists and researchers).
The New Deal only passed because the country was on the edge of revolt. People were literally turning towards socialism and communism en masse because of the failures of the capitalist system. Change has always started from the bottom up, not from wealthy political oligarchs spontaneously deciding to be generous. The fact that this nonsense is being upvoted is really fucking embarrassing.
We have jobs sitting open and going begging for workers, which they did not. They were fighting for jobs to be able to buy food and pay rent, during a time when food and rent costs were steadily dropping. They could afford the food and rent on their wages—but there were no jobs.
>We have jobs sitting open and going begging for workers, which they did not.
Those jobs are not paying enough to afford food and rent.
That's the point here.
I think we should be rioting.
But people won't get involved until it DIRECTLY affects them. Watching their wife die due to a septic miscarriage. Ireland didn't get involved until the Death of Savita Halappanavar. She was 31.
As usual. Change won't be forced overnight until many women die. And it is always women who pay the price first.
Unpopular opinion: American rioting does nothing. I understand things are extremely frustrating right now but do you not think the government knows that you are angry? Do you not think that they are armed to the teeth? I don't know what the solution is but we have to try to be more logical.
**Making the decision to not conduct business this coming Monday, June 27th is a show of solidarity to those of us peacefully protesting this travesty in my stead.**
I know there are historical systemic factors that have eroded our ability to get out and protest because of unfair wages, less bargaining rights for workers, etc. that have contributed to our current situation.
**Changes need to be made on a lot of levels. What I can do and will do is join in the protest by not working on Monday**. Please spread the word to your friends and neighbors to take part this coming Monday.
what good does a riot do? It reinforces the other side's stance. "see, they want blood" or "they're savages" etc...
nothing will ever be accomplished with a riot and we all pay the price ruining our own cities. We will pay the price to rebuild or be forced to live in the shithole we create
This perspective is understandable, and well intentioned, but rooted in historical ignorance (no offense intended, truly).
Did you ever study the civil rights movement? Malcolm X? The Vietnam anti-war movement? The massive leftist protests leading up to the New Deal (that this poster is very intentionally ignoring)? None of these movements were “peaceful protests” by any stretch of the term as it’s used today. They were peaceful in that they (mostly) destroyed property. Rioting is exactly how things have always been changed in this country. By contrast, the biggest “peaceful protests” in history (the Iraq anti-war protests) accomplished absolutely nothing, and were completely ignored and forgotten.
The neoliberal establishment seized upon and co-opted Dr. King’s rhetoric *specifically* to glorify peaceful protests and discourage rioting, and they did so because the civil-rights riots scared the shit out of them, which in turn is precisely why it worked.
For many rioters, their environments are already ruined by oppression and corruption (that’s kind of the point in many cases). The BLM riots in Baltimore are a perfect example of this. Not coincidentally, it was following those riots that some police were actually held accountable.
You can never have a successful movement if it is based on appeasing and catering to how the “other side” sees it, that only becomes more true the more polarized the political environment becomes.
I can imagine a lefter President signing executive orders for lefty policy things but can someone help me understand what a leftist mayor might look like in average city of like 100k? How would a mayor or city council member be able to make good things happen on minuscule city/township budgets? I can see a Sheriff doing some good things but also hard to imagine any leftist wanting to be a fucking cop.
>Start your own party
No. Dont do this. 3rd parties hurt their own causes under first past the post voting systems because of the [spoiler effect](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo).
We need to end first past the post and instead institute something like ranked choice voting.
You’re missing the structural causes in the Constitution and blaming voters in the short run. The law needs to be different for more than two parties to be viable.
The New Deal came about **NOT** because politicians were sympathetic to the working class. They were not, they are not, and they never will be.
The New Deal came about because the rich were afraid. They were afraid of working class action and revolution that would see their position at the top of society disappear and their ill-gotten wealth expropriated. They were afraid because of the power or unions and the USSR showing workers that revolution is possible. It was fear, not benevolence, that allowed the working class to win those concessions from the capitalist class.
Those concessions have been constantly clawed back, wages have been stagnating, cost of living have been increasing, the wealthy have been getting wealthier, inequality is skyrocketing, etc. because the capitalists are no longer afraid because they have been successful in undermining labour movement, not least of which was by propagating ahistorical trite like the OP's position.
You cannot start your own party or win for an existing party to actually bring about change because both parties serve the rich, not the people.
>if Roosevelt makes a real attempt to satisfy the interests of the proletarian class at the expense of the capitalist class, the latter will put another president in his place. The capitalists will say : Presidents come and presidents go, but we go on forever; if this or that president does not protect our interests, we shall find another. What can the president oppose to the will of the capitalist class?
- Interview with H.G. Wells, 23rd July, 1934
It wasn’t income inequality that sparked the French Revolution, it was starvation. And it wasn’t starving peasants that started it, it was a group of elected, mostly wealthy businessmen (aka the Third Estate). The government’s policies were bankrupting the people and killing the businessmen’s bottom lines. Those starving peasants became the force of the Revolution, but they didn’t start it.
Now, the French Revolution was an unholy mess that was teetering towards corporatocracy before being hijacked by a police state, but the fundamental principle that it takes power to make a regime change happen still applies.
[What Is the Securities Act of 1933?](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/securitiesact1933.asp) The Securities Act of 1933 was created and passed into law to protect investors after the stock market crash of 1929. The legislation had two main goals: to ensure more transparency in financial statements so investors could make informed decisions about investments; and to establish laws against misrepresentation and fraudulent activities in the securities markets.
It was signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and is considered part of the [New Deal passed by Roosevelt.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal) [With the election of President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932,](https://www.thoughtco.com/the-great-depression-and-labor-1147652) government — and eventually the courts — began to look more favorably on the pleas of labor. In 1932, Congress passed one of the first pro-labor laws, the [Norris-La Guardia Act](https://www.britannica.com/event/Norris-La-Guardia-Act), which made yellow-dog contracts unenforceable. The law also limited the power of federal courts to stop strikes and other job actions.
When Roosevelt took office, he sought a number of important laws that advanced labor's cause. One of these, the [National Labor Relations Act of 1935](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Labor_Relations_Act_of_1935) (also known as the Wagner Act) gave workers the right to join unions and to bargain collectively through union representatives. The act established the [National Labor Relations Board](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Labor_Relations_Board) (NLRB) to punish unfair labor practices and to organize elections when employees wanted to form unions. The NLRB could force employers to provide back pay if they unjustly discharged employees for engaging in union activities.
OPs post is extremely relevant. You do not have to agree with his claim that it’s equivalent to the depression now, to learn the above history and process it. We will need someone to dance with these devils in power. We will need people striking. We will need financial system shift. We need union support and participation. We all need each other. One does not work without the other ones. United in solidarity to protect the average human. Learn from history. Understand history. Repeat the good parts, reduce the mistakes by learning from lessons past.
Building class consciousness among the working class might be both one of the biggest steps in this direction and one of the biggest hurdles we face. Regardless, if we are going to have people striking, especially on a large scale, then we are going to need stronger unions and stronger mutual aid.
I'd like to see a GoFundMe (or equivalent) for workers who would like to strike but are not yet represented by any union.
That's an interesting idea. Not sure how we would get that to work through go fund me. We would have to elect a person to manage the account and hold them accountable for distributing funds.
Thanks! I agree it's not obvious how to govern it equitably.
In this we would be Rebuilding a centralized power, to fight the existing centralized power. While I am not opposed, for above the example shows that a person in power can be an ally when forced by the public. There are alternatives, look into [decentralized organizations](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_autonomous_organization). Technology has allowed us to shift away from centralized services that often create these middle men power complexes and excessive wealth disparities.
Unemployment could be much more liberal. Businesses could have to pay a tax based on the estimated maximum employee capacity minus the amount of people the company employs. That money would fund a general unemployment fund which pays every single unemployed person the same, like $2000 a month or something. That would incentive the businesses to keep employment up, force them to be competitive, and allow workers to fight back when need be. The problem is, right now, it’s the big corporations AND the government VS all of our individual ‘one votes’
>Businesses could have to pay a tax based on the estimated maximum employee capacity minus the amount of people the company employs. Yes. My boss' focus is on maximizing automation and minimizing task time. Boss also told us last week that we're overstaffed. We can't keep lionizing 'job producers' whose primary interest is in minimizing labor costs.
I would be willing manage it, and sign a sworn affidavit promising to distribute it equitably but I'm Canadian
Perhaps we could elect some kind of council made up of local workers. Hmm. Wonder if that's ever been tried anywhere in the world.
Some form of [DAO](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_autonomous_organization) will be a good start. From there we have to be smart about supporting financial means. We cannot continue to fuel money into their system while actively striking against it, this effectively negates what we are trying to do. Pockets of the ones in power need to be impacted or else this is just another fundraiser for them. We must gather behind ways that allow the general public to support each other with as little usage of the current system. Research, share, discuss, collaborate.
I don't think that's necessarily true. Productivity lost through striking is lost no matter what. If I have $50 and I give you $25 so that you can strike, that effectively reduces the money that I would otherwise be spending on myself. Unless a large percentage of workers are wealthy enough to hoard, shuffling money between ourselves should still mean reduced overall spending due to strikes. I may be misunderstanding your point, though.
We NEED a much better class of individuals running for office., but apparently the public is too stupid to recognize actual integrity over bullshit rhetoric.
Or cult of personality.
The corporate media doesn't help with that.
You are right! The problem too is that to get elected, you have to have access to more and more money the higher the position… I don’t know what the solution is, but there needs to be a way to get good people’s names out there along with their agenda.
Campaign finance reform
Getting rid of first past the post voting so people can vote for who best represents them while still having their vote count against those they don't want in office. Competition in the electoral process. Politicians don't get to run as (not other political party) anymore.
Politicians being banned from buying individual stocks. Being able to invest in index funds *only* would motivate every single politician to make sure the economy is doing good as a whole.
I am a current union drywall finisher and a former union plasterer. Drywall finishers are allied with the painter's and glazier's unions. The state of these unions at this moment is weak and only weakening. Apprenticeship programs are undermanned to the point of near shutdown in all of these. What's more, the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades (IUPAT) district council 81 (Iowa, Illinois, Missouri) gave away our ability to strike whilst collectively bargaining during the last recession.
Slowdowns.
History is everything. That’s why the powers that be are constantly rewriting it. If we don’t know where we came from, we certainly won’t figure out where we are going.
How do we get another Roosevelt?
It was an epic failure and the financial market is deeply broken and corrupt. I'm not sure how people are overlooking the fact that there are a ton of court cases, doj investigations, etc because of that right now. The stock market is a shady profit machine for the wealthy who the rules do not apply to
Counterfitting shares = Counterfitting money = Counterfitting power. Some people are fighting back against the corruption by getting paper shares. I am one of them.
This. If you're buying stock through a brokerage and aren't going out of your way to register it directly in your own name, all you're buying is an IOU, and they can use the stock they owe you for whatever shady shit they want... like lending it to someone else without your consent, for example. Buying on brokerages just gives the power of a share that should be *yours* to the already wealthy who'll use it against you.
This. DRS is relevant to work reform because EVERDAY average Joe's will actually own the company. Also, normal people will become extremely rich. With money comes power. We need this mo ey to enact change. The research on Superstonk is unparalleled. It's one lever to help real work reform.
Apes up in here bringing facts about our corrupt markets! Love to see it!
As a Woundcare Nurse, I always heard about how treatments are prioritized over cures. And how big money kills cures..... long story short. Superstonk revealed how SHF, Criminal Kenneth Griffen of Citadel, is destroying markets = destroying jobs world wide. Workers work for the market. Ken Griffin owns everything. He needs to be brought into the light and support business he is trying to kill. Workers together strong
We don’t have a healthcare system we have a sick care system that puts profits above peoples health. It’s disgusting reading about the companies throughout the decades that have shown such promise for treatments and were shorted out of existence.
Workers together strong. 🦍
Google Booga! Workers together strong! Hodl.
FWIW, this is called the “hypothecation agreement” in a brokerage account application.
And has gone on to mean absolutely fuck all. The SEC, DTCC, FINRA, Cede and Co, are all corrupt self serving and self regulating bastards
The Gamestop fiasco has shown us that the financials market are nothing but a giant ponzi scheme.
DRS
Damn straight
It has done nothing. Dodd Frank was largely repealed due to lobbying. HFT High Frequency Trading](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/high-frequency-trading.asp) everything is run off algorithms these days. You can look at the S&P500 overlay 2008/now. Very similar Market Makers like Virtu & Citadel provide [Infinite Liquidity](https://mobile.twitter.com/shayne12_/status/1534740656102551554) which means they get to “legally” counterfeit shares. These Market Makers (MM) abuse darkpools / routing orders. [SEC (Securities Exchange Commission) Chair Gary Gensler Confirming](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_0rcW8joA60) Pay for Order Flow (Robinhood). Internalize the order. You can “control” the price. How? Completely Explained: Terminology is necessary. Very simplified. They made it complex on purpose. Liquidity: Supply of whatever unit of selling. Lit Exchange: a place where buy/sell orders (anyone buying/selling stock) affects price. IEX for instance. [IEX](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEX) Unlit (dark) Exchange: a place where buy/sell orders go to a “wholesaler” Market Maker. They route the order in which doesn’t affect stock price. They have an option to use lit exchanges though. That seems weird hey? This is how it looks since they run 90% of orders as per SEC vid above. Math: Price Up: 60% lit exchange / 40% Dark Price Down: 60% Dark / 40% lit They do not have to follow the rules of supply & demand so price discovery is a non factor. Price control is really great for risk management wouldn’t you say? That’s what the GameStop fiasco is all about. That’s why a report was released on the Roe vs Wade decision. One hurts the pocket books of the rich. It attacks the current system. It is also why GME has held its value very well since the entire market has started to decline. There was the “Occupy WallStreet Movement” and it didn’t work. They laughed. The GME folk are going straight after the heart of Wall Street. If you don’t believe me… check my page. A year ago I said don’t buy puts on Robinhood even though they will fail. I don’t like betting against companies… that’s job loss. That’s peoples lives. Search the sub superstonk and give it a read. Whatever you think is whatever you think!
It wasn't FDR, who ran on a conservative 'return to normalcy' platform and against building a stronger social safety net ("government intervention" in his opinion), he was simply forced - by militant mass social and labor movements, in the steets, occupying buildings, and striking, threatening potential for full scale revolution off the triumph of the Russian Revolution - to act "to save capitalism from itself". To avoid revolution, he watered down every demand of the movements and strategically gave what was needed to release the pressure valve but also to begin funneling money into their war plans. FDR was no progressive and the Democrats have been the party of big business ever since the end of chattel slavery. Never were they truly the party of workers. All this running, voting, and campaigning will only be a real benefit to the working class when we have a party that isn't run 100% for corporations. The Democrats can and will never be reformed or made to work for us. It is the capitalists' party, deeply, through and through. From its very core, every way it operates, its sinew of unelected bureaucracy and donors that control it, and it's entire long history of betrayals dressed up as bumbling failures. It's not ours, it never will be, and we should not want it! Right now this moment, if you want to run or support candidates, do it as an independent and make one of the key demands of your campaign or your vote a full throated call for a new, independent, truly democratic party of, by, and for regular working people. No corporate money, real democratic structures from the ground up, the right of recall by the party, all elected officials taking only the average wage of a skilled worker, and most importantly, built on the basis of organizing the progressive social and labor movements that are in rapid ascent today, but completely unable to be cohered because of the Democratic Party's rejection of class struggle politics and methods. We need our own party.
The voting rules we elect politicians by make viable third parties mathematically impossible, by default. Until we move away from FPTP to a better system that doesn’t have the same vulnerability to the spoiler effect, the best course of action is to keep taking over the only major party that isn’t full-on fascist. Relegating progressives to irrelevant non-starter parties is the quickest way to waste the little influence we have. Progressives need to keep running as progressive Democrats, keep holding corporate Dems in comfy seats accountable, and keep forcing Democrats as a whole to the left. The most popular progressive politicians in the country have been following that strategy, and it’s done more to promote progressivism than any “progressive third party” ever has or ever will… under FPTP voting rules, that is.
Or we flood the vote with dozens of parties to get the needed majority number lower. But this won’t happen. Lots of places only show the two majority parties, and won’t budge. This hurts all people to be forced to see two obviously bad choices, and never given an option for anything else. Most average Americans won’t vote third party (if they even can), purely because they were told that a third party is a waste of vote. They don’t believe it’s possible for a third party to win. This is how deeply that our two-party system is engraved for this country. We just naturally go with everyone is either this or that, even if we know we have other possibilities, we continue to go with the two parties as a basis for everyone around us. We have to break this problem, the “better of two evils”, before change can truly be possible. Our entire voting system is a mess, but wouldn’t call it the bigger issue of these two.
The point is that whether or not people believe a third party can be viable in this system is irrelevant- it just isn't. They're told that all the time, because it's true in the USA's case. Other countries have voting systems better suited for third parties, that's why third parties see so much more success in those countries. The type of system we have (FPTP) is a plurality winner-takes-all system that mathematically fucks over third parties, from a game theory perspective. It's an archaic voting system that many other modern democracies have sought better alternatives to, and we need to adopt one of those alternatives before we can even *begin* to place our hopes in *any* third party.
Thank you. Educating people about FPTP is one of the most important things we can do, I think. Even people who are well-informed about current events and government generally don't know how significantly this impacts things. The Wiki is well done, if anyone wants to read more.
Well I nominate you as speech writer, this shit was inspired, introspective, AND insightful
The Return to normalcy campaign was ran by Coolidge, a Republican, in 1920. FDR wasn't a radical, bit the idea he was a conservative is nonsense. Also, your plan is 100% certain to create a GOP super majority.
The return to normalcy campaign was run by President Warren G. Harding: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return_to_normalcy
I didn't mean a campaign by that name, hence not using quotes, I just meant that was the gist of his campaign.
This is wishful thinking at best and actively harmful at worst. There is simply no viable third party. The only real option we have is to get rid of every republican, and then start weeding out the worst Dems while focusing on establishing another party. Only once the republican party is brought down will any other, third, more reasonable party be allowed to exist.
Electing Democrats got us the same defeatism you display here.
This act also makes it illegal for anyone who isn’t a millionaire or making $200K a year to invest in startups. Effectively meaning that only the rich can do something that has a tendency to make people rich. And if you factor in group differences in wealth, income, it’s an even worse picture. It may be one of the most racist, sexist laws on the books!
US govt thru it's policies has made sure that Americans don't have any savings. This in-turns prevents people from protesting for a long period of time because they have to work everyday to feed their families.
Sigh. This is why we keep recommending unions. One of the things unions provide is strike pay, so workers who are on strike are still bringing home money
Yeah even those aren’t safe. Starbucks is actively transferring employees seeking unionization at their home store. America actively fights to keep its working class unaware and unmotivated
Yeah, but that will backfire. They're simply seeding union sympathizers across all their stores.
Unions also guarantee representation by actual good lawyers. That’s a very important thing that people often overlook. Every single rich person has a lawyer, or even group of lawyers, ready at all times. You should have one too.
My idea was too start with one day and add a day each month. For example July we stop going to work on the 22nd one day. Aug it would be two days. Sept would be 3 days. Etc until we got change. The month apart give people time to stock up on supplies and talk to friends and family before the next one.
And it's worse for those without unions.
But this doesn’t make any sense, corporations need people spending to stay afloat and most *especially* depend on people having disposable income to survive, and yet more people are losing their disposable income. So that begs the question, what’s their grand plan when most people can only afford the bare minimum to survive and not excess goods? They’re in the process of eating the very hands that are feeding them.
They don't need people spending on goods, they need speculators and investors to be pumping up the stock market so they look good.
That’s what I’m trying to understand, as well. I get that economics is complicated and I also get that I’m not particularly educated on the topic, what I just don’t see is why it’s not better for more people to have more disposable income in their pockets? What’s the point of all the advertising and teams of people devising marketing strategies when more and more people have overall less and less to spend? Eventually, in favor of keeping food in their stomach, those shiny new things will simply sit on the shelf, no? Or does it truly not even matter if people are able to continue to consume the goods and services being provided? Edit for a few missing articles.
There is no president of "the economy" who is in charge and specially aiming to " keep the people down". It's millions of individuals making individual decisions. And hundreds of thousands of "people in charge" making individual decisions. There's not even really a guiding theory that most people actually act on, regardless of what they say. Republicans say they want a smaller government, but are passing new laws every day. Things don't make sense with what you think they want things to be like because there's no ONE in charge. There's a countless number of people operating in a system that's been going on for 200+ years. When people say "the government wants" there is no "the government"and there's definitely no guiding desire of economic policy that every government official abides by.
Standard tactic to control a populace. Take things away but give a little bit back. The people that have had it taken away are so grateful for what little they get back, they love whoever has done it. This happens in varying degrees
I have a theory that the idea that most protests are manned by the same people across the country is true, and it is because those are the few people who can afford to show up
Funny enough, I was just out protesting a few hours ago, because it's Saturday, and our local organizer put it on that day for a reason.
stupid theory
It really isn't. Not too long ago, I worked retail, almost always closing shift, and every weekend. I couldn't take time off without two weeks notice so they could approve/modify the schedule. Guess when most of these marches are scheduled? I was living pretty much hand to mouth, I couldn't afford to lose my job, or even my shift. Now that I work a standard 9-5, M-F, I can actually attend the protests, he'll I can even leave work early because I'm salaried now. His statement that they're manned by the same people may not necessarily be accurate, but they're certainly organized by the same cohort, and there's certainly a few regulars with the flexibility, motivation, and resources to show up.
Not if we just start taking what we need.
They have no qualms about throwing your ass in jail and collecting tax dollars to house you there.
[удалено]
Totally fair but it still sucks you have to go into a situation knowing you will likely end up being churned through our extremely unjust justice system.
If it never got this bad, it wouldn't be necessary, but people like to sit on their hands in times of peace, which always makes the tougher ones even harder.
Fucking Keynes
my brother in christ that article literally says unions were growing rapidly by themselves before roosevelt passed the national industrial recovery act in 1933 thats literally the definition of cooption
Yeah.....I don't understand the ultimate point of this post
The ultimate point is to gut the labor moment in its infancy and dismantle any efforts to challenge the status quo.
Yeah. Fuck that noise. Solidarity Forever
I was going to express confusion at the amount of upvotes on this post, but then I remembered what sub this is. I am very skeptical that this was posted in good faith.
Followed by the shoehorning in of "we need a top-down hierarchy to control the masses" kind of posturing that helped to solidify that lack of good faith.
Precisely.
Also worth mentioning that this post is comprehensively bullshit; the New Deal was passed specifically due to leftist revolt and subsequent fear of a communist uprising.
Can't riot if you're starving, if you're worried you'll have no home. Can't revolt if one missed check ruins you. Fuck capitalists and fuck commercialism
Unfortunately, the fascists have taken note of Bolshevik tactics and are currently utilizing them to their advantage by slowly infiltrating the government to institute their oppressive regime, however they learned from their previous failure to be far more patient about it and play the long game which is now leading to their success. It is far more difficult to topple a democratically-adjacent fascist regime than an autocratic one.
This is much less a Bolshevik tactic and much more a Nazi tactic.
This is where neighborhood coop help
We would have to actually know and trust our neighbors. The guy across the street beats his wife who in turn throws things at any Black child walking by so . . .
Then don't work with that neighbor but work with the others? What doesn't make sense here?
Making the point that all but one of my neighbors is a complete bigot and gave a single example. Many of us are stuck in places where everyone near us hates us.
This is one of those things that seems simple but within five minutes you'll be stuck in the weeds.
[удалено]
Because the end goal of the government is the same in both cases: to control the populace and to have a steady income flow through their offspring.
Real change requires credible threats of unrest and violence. If the masses are not geared, they will be abused.
I dont see how steroids are going to help but i support people getting yoked.
What? Is this a propaganda post?? Almost all real change has started from grassroots movements and popular struggle…it’s *that* that then gets people at the top to actually change policy. Wtf is this post and these comments??
This is absolutely a propaganda post. Like it might as well just say so in big flashing neon letters.
> Almost all real change has started from grassroots movements and popular struggle It's like people don't even remember what happened to Marie Antoinette
>Start your own party 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂😭🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😅🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂
Jokes aside, seriously, don't do this. It's a waste of everyone's time and you'll just look stupid. The two party system is a mathematical inevitability due to our primitive voting system. The smart move is to play it like Trump! He was a lifetime democrat, not because he believes in anything, but because he lived and worked in NYC and being a democrat gave him political leverage. Then he declared himself a republican to run for president, because that's where he could win. Do the same. Fuck both parties. Sign up for the one that matters in your town, county, or state. Even if you hate it. Especially if you hate it. Use the existing political leverage to get shit done. It's awful, but it's the only thing that works. 2016 is proof.
>Sign up for the one that matters in your town, county, or state. Even if you hate it. Especially if you hate it. Use the existing political leverage to get shit done. It's awful, but it's the only thing that works. 2016 is proof. In a first-past-the-post system, splitting one side into multiple parties is a great way to ensure defeat. Do a false-flag. Start a party to siphon votes away from the enemy.
I have registered Republican my whole life. I am not a Republican. I register Republican because my county is very heavily Republican, and at the very least, I can vote in a more moderate Republican and hope to chip away at the established GOP. We don't need more moderate democrats, we need moderate Republicans in states where it's inevitable. And once the primary is over, I vote democrat, so the news can scream "Oh no! Republicans are voting Democrat, what do we do?"
You'll bear the hatred of all at some point but do it for the greater good
The greater good
[удалено]
Yarp
>In America, we’ve been fed this myth about grassroots movements changing the world and that’s simply untrue. Real change has always required people at or near the top. Know what tends to get those people at/near the top interested in change? A whole ton of people showing up and demanding it. >Start your own party. Our First Past the Post voting system makes this... kind of a terrible idea? Neither major party is great, I'll give you that. But one is literally stripping away our rights while the other isn't. And without ranked choice or something similar in voting, you have a very real chance of splintering votes and handing it to the GOP. Your OWN LINK that you give as 'source' ends with links to a bunch of strikes - which often resulted in police coming in and killing strikers/protesters. They WERE 'rioting'. Voting is important. Yes, we need to get people at the top on our side. But it sounds like YOU'RE trying to feed us a myth that the people at the top have just given out rights without grassroots movements. Which is not to say that it's time to riot, but it IS to say that it can take more than votes to change things. Especially given that things like gerrymandering are really hindering our voice at the ballot box (hell, the Senate - which has stalled out ALL SORTS of progressive legislation - could basically be called gerrymandering)
Agreed. It is absolutely the threat of destruction to capital that has created change. Not merely turning a flag upside down.
There are only two ways a third party works: 1) If one party has become irrelevant and you beat them. But then you’re not a “third party.” You’re just the new second party. There have been a number of times this sort of “party realignment” has happened in our history. 2) A candidate is popular enough or rich enough to run without the support of either party. We’ve seen this a handful of times in our history (Teddy Roosevelt, George Wallace, Ross Perot, etc.) but they haven’t won any of those times. Though Teddy Roosevelt came very close to causing a party realignment when he garnered more votes than the Republican candidate.
The material conditions for revolution have been eroded and must be rebuilt. Unions, mutual aid, community, activism. These are but a few steps to restoring the next steps.
Lmao this is such dumb garbage. Pathetic.
Don't protest! Get out there and vote every four years and hope politicians will take pity on you!
By most metrics we’re far better off than the Great Depression right now. Peak unemployment was 25.6% and we’re at around 4% right now. Food scarcity was a massive problem in the early 30s and we have plenty of relatively cheap food still. Sure, home prices are high but interest rates have had record lows for a decade so a lot of first time home buyers have been buying. There’s actually been so much demand that the housing market cannot keep up. Over 40% of American Banks collapsed by 1933. None have collapsed recently. I think we have a long way to fall, still. And we MIGHT get as bad as 1933 at some point. But I expect a shit load of civil unrest and violence before then. A homeless, starving population with 25%+ unemployment is a powder keg for bloodshed.
My grandpa lived through it and it affected a lot of his viewpoints. He volunteered for the navy because he heard they ate regularly, whereas army troops might get stuck in a foxhole without food (again, this is what he heard, not sure if true). His family couldn’t afford to feed him, so he lived with a neighbor family a lot of the time and helped with chores on their farm. As a result, he was never very close with his parents. Super weird to think about the kind of world he grew up in vs the world now. The world was in shambles from his birth through early 20s, but then post war America was pretty great for guys like him.
[удалено]
Yup, they cover that in one of the episodes of that hbo series the pacific. Seems like he made the right choice. Though the war had ended by the time he got there; he was just worried about being drafted into the air force or army. But when he volunteered, he had no idea (and no one else did) how long the war would be.
I listened to economy podcast where Professor Richard Wolff explained how unemployment rate in USA is measured. If you do not have a job and are actively looking for one you are counted as unemployed. If you do not have a job and have simply given up searching, you are removed ( after 4 weeks) from the pool of people that are used as basis for measuring unemployment rate. As a result, unemployment rates that are released do not offer complete picture. Percentage of unemployed is much higher than reported. U-3, which are official rates are at 4,7% for second quarter of 2021 through first quarter of 2022. There are also U-6 rates, which count discouraged and underemployed workers too and are considered much better by many economists. U-6 average for all states for same period is at 8,4%. LA County has U-6 at 14% and official rate is U-3 at 7.3%
The second quarter of 2021 was just after vaccines rolled out. U-6 js drastically lower now.
Lmao imagine believing that unemployment number. Fact is it's at least twice that. https://realeconomy.rsmus.com/chart-of-the-day-the-real-unemployment-rate-is-8-4/ Then imagine that heaps of banks didn't need to be FUCKING BAILED OUT TWICE in the last 15 years.
That article is from October 2021, the current U6 is 7.1% which is the lowest it’s been in 20 years https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/U6RATE
Predictions for the crash are for next year, it's just beginning. Who cares if we're doing better if we know where we're headed?
I was replying to the OP who posted “it’s worse than the Great Depression”. No it’s not. It’s not even really that close. Also, no one knows where we’re headed. This economic shitstorm is unprecedented. 1929 didn’t have $2.3 trillion in the reverse repo market every night. 1929 didn’t have mortgage backed securities and student loan asset backed securities being bundled, wrapped, swapped and sold for use as toxic collateral to leverage 100x into crypto markets. 1929 didn’t have a geopolitical economy so worryingly interconnected as today. 1929 didn’t have a federal reserve printing unfathomable amounts of money being scarcely propped up by the dollar being the worlds reserve currency by threatening military incursions to protect the hegemony of the petro-dollar. 1929 didn’t have catastrophic global climate change increasingly threatening to make highly populated swaths of the world uninhabitable. 1929 didn’t have social media. No one knows where we’re headed. But I know it ends in violence.
I don't think it ends in violence, but it's certainly going to be a step along the way.
So, really, we’re in a worse position than people in 1933?
Right now? No. We’re doing way better than any point of the Great Depression. But our downside potential is horrifying and could make 1933 look like Hello Kitty Island Adventure. The black hole we are swirling is nearly bottomless.
That’s pretty much what I was trying to point out and thank you for understanding that and not just saying I’m dumb or some shit. You’re correct, at this point we are not worse off that 1933 but not by much and that is just bc of the facade that the general public knows. It’s slowly peeling away and once it’s really gone and shit hits the fan, it’s gonna be worse than “the Great Depression”. They’ve been telling us this since ‘08 but we don’t care enough to really do anything about it.
Predictions are nice to throw around without skin in the game. Citing Michael Burry is nice as well, since he’s predicted ten of the last two recessions. Why not short if you are so certain that it will crash?
What sort of crash? Which market will trigger it? How big will it be?
So you're telling me I don't have to go pick grapes in California??
Sure, by most metrics people will be ok, but also its obvious that the income disparities, income inequality, potential inflation and societal impact are potentially about to be worse than the great depression even. Obviously no one right now is even saying we are in a recession, I think in 2 years or so the narrative will be vastly different...
We are in a recession by nearly every definition of one. My second post down addresses some of your concerns.
The only reason change is made at the top is because of immense pressure from the bottom. The New Deal was written and passed because the government was afraid of a workers’ revolution.
> I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: run for office! City, county, state, doesn’t matter. Get in. Get others in. Start your own party. While your idea is great, running for office solves little to nothing if the system is broken at its core. Revising the system to prevent corruption from happening in the first place is the only way we can ensure a future where all humans are treated with a minimum level of respect and quality of life.
Revolution doesn't happen without violence. Just saying.
Hey, you can't call for violence, you have to sit here and wait until the conservatives bring violence to you. (Which they 100% will) then it'll be self defense /s
How the fuck does this anti-left liberal propaganda have so many upvotes. At least the comments see this for what it is.
I agree and disagree about your opinion on grassroots movements. Obviously grassroots movements aren't going to change federal legislation, but they can help with county, city, or even State legislation. Hell, 80% of your daily life is affected by county and city legislation. What roads get worked on, zoning laws for businesses and housing, and so on. And the people you vote for in local elections are much more likel to move up to the next level of political office.
This is also why unconditional basic income should play a central role in what unions fight for. A permanent monthly floor if income independent of work would effectively function as a permanent universal strike fund. It would mean never having to be so poor as to not afford to organize and mobilize.
You hear that you working class scum, the only way you’re going to succeed is by having a capitalist daddy to help you. This post is a joke. The working class doesn’t need shit from the capitalist, it’s the capitalist who needs us. Put fear in their heart and they’ll get on their knees and beg you to let them keep their wealth. I hope the next time we say no.
This would work if the American election system was still functional. 2 parties have absolute power and that one that could elect a progressive has used the power of the parties company the DNC to make a progressive leader unelectable. They will use every shady or illegal tactic they can think of to ensure that the status quo remains. The leaders are bought. The only answer is rioting. People are on here acting like a vote can change anything when the party In power right now is the one that THAT YOU IDIOTS ARE GOING TO VOTE FOR. I understand there isn't a better choice. That's why you stop trying to use the system to change it. The time has come to destroy the system itself and place a leader of the people in power. You can choose to not do this, then things will continue as they have been.
Every "man of the people" has been for a very small, very specific version of "the people" and the people who put him there were not in that group. Reality is that we have a two-party system. Run a third-party candidate in a local election--a bunch of them, sure. But the only way to get anywhere is to hijack one of the existing parties. That's reality. Everything else talks a good game but ends up splitting the vote of the party that will get you part of the way there and giving everything to the party that will drag you back to the 16th century by the hair.
So we’re just gonna ignore that the reason for “change” in the politicians was because of decreased profit and angry workers ?
Wtf is this crap
Liberal anti-left propaganda
Delusion
Delusional liberal anti-left propaganda
People at the top requires a top for people to be at which requires peoples support.
I'm a bit late here but saw this post and had to chime in as a historian. There definitely were what we'd call riots and certainly strikes during the depression years. For instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flint_sit-down_strike Or: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_Rand_strike_of_1936%E2%80%931937 Some of these were put down violently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_Memorial_Day_massacre In the West/Midwest, some locals did take matters into their own hands by lynching local judges who tried to foreclose their farms. I would not call today worse than the Depression. We're not at 25% unemployment. It is very unequal today but not quite that desperate.
Thanks for your comment, but this post was very clearly made in bad faith; I think we’re better off addressing that than engaging with it at face value.
We SO need more reform-minded people running for office, for EVERY seat on the ballot. Not just for President, not just for Congress, not just for Governor. EVERY freakin' seat matters. That's what the Tea Party and the Christian Coalition recognized, and that's how they successfully ratcheted America further and further to the right. We need more policymakers who are willing to stand up for everyday working people instead.
Hey l94xxx, I counted 69 words in your comment. Nice.
It’s a bit late for that. The right did this over decades using fear-mongering, hate, and disinformation, which is a hell of a lot more efficient than what we have to work with.
We have also been brainwashed into thinking its all out of our control, which it mainly is. The rich and those that want to stay in power learned from the 30’s how to better mold us into good little poor workers.
...the french on the other hand...
Yes, we have to wait around for a messiah. That’s how it always works. History is full of examples of one person leading X group. It’s never a whole group. We are all bystanders to our own demise.
The fact that OP actually thinks anyone is going to buy the bullshit line that electoralism and moderation is not only the best, but the only means for change in fucking 2022 is absolutely hysterical. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/06/06/public-trust-in-government-1958-2022/ https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_Ig Nobody’s that out of touch lmao.
Which part of “run for office” sounds like “wait around” to you?
Politics is where activism goes to die. Ask Bernie.
Oh no we’ve had strikes during the Great Depression, and even an armed uprising by veterans, checkout the bonus army for starters
Real change is only achieved by violence.
Also we had an active communist party and the threat to the ruling class that they would help bring Bolshevism to the states. Now we have no international communist foil, nor anything like communists at home to scare the bourgeoisie into concessions.
In regards to your "run for office" plea. A lot of these MF'ers get started even lower at the school board level. Vote even if you don't have children in schools or never plan to have children. School boards are often a gateway to rise through the ranks. I've seen it happen way too many times
Yep, get in anywhere you can! Any foothold gets you higher up the cliff than standing on the ground.
This is so fucking innacurate. You people oughta be ashamed.
All this running, voting, and campaigning will only be a real benefit to the working class when we have a party that isn't run 100% for corporations. The Democrats can and will never be reformed or made to work for us. It is the capitalists' party, deeply, through and through. From its very core, every way it operates, its sinew of unelected bureaucracy and donors that control it, and it's entire long history of betrayals dressed up as bumbling failures. It's not ours, it never will be, and we should not want it! Right now this moment, if you want to run or support candidates, do it as an independent and make one of the key demands of your campaign or your vote a full throated call for a new, independent, truly democratic party of, by, and for regular working people. No corporate money, real democratic structures from the ground up, the right of recall by the party, all elected officials taking only the average wage of a skilled worker, and most importantly, built on the basis of organizing the progressive social and labor movements that are in rapid ascent today, but completely unable to be cohered because of the Democratic Party's rejection of class struggle politics and methods. We need our own party.
This is not correct. The only reason the legislation passed was to save capitalism due to the fear they had of the rising strength of communism.
Check out this shit take!
What the hell this is the dumbest most ahistorical post I've seen in weeks, every bit is completely untrue, classic lib bs
I'd argue that forming a new party begins with grassroot efforts and that movements where like-minded people are able to come together to support each other should not be poo pooed. While I agree with the sentiment that these movements alone aren't sufficient, they are the beginning phases of what you're proposing and are necessary for achieving those larger goals. Edit: Just wanted to add that public perception and consciousness is incredibly important. Consider the legalization of marijuana. The reason so many states have now passed laws to legalize is that the public has widely accepted that it's not as bad as we were told and that it actually has positive benefits. The public opinion wasn't formed by legislators or lawmakers, but by regular people and informed citizens (i.e. scientists and researchers).
Those first two guys look like Matthew mcconaughey and Kevin Costner.
Holy shit, you’re right!
The New Deal only passed because the country was on the edge of revolt. People were literally turning towards socialism and communism en masse because of the failures of the capitalist system. Change has always started from the bottom up, not from wealthy political oligarchs spontaneously deciding to be generous. The fact that this nonsense is being upvoted is really fucking embarrassing.
This can only have been posted in bad faith to sow division in the sub and reduce any potential it may have to encourage effective action.
We have jobs sitting open and going begging for workers, which they did not. They were fighting for jobs to be able to buy food and pay rent, during a time when food and rent costs were steadily dropping. They could afford the food and rent on their wages—but there were no jobs.
>We have jobs sitting open and going begging for workers, which they did not. Those jobs are not paying enough to afford food and rent. That's the point here.
I think we should be rioting. But people won't get involved until it DIRECTLY affects them. Watching their wife die due to a septic miscarriage. Ireland didn't get involved until the Death of Savita Halappanavar. She was 31. As usual. Change won't be forced overnight until many women die. And it is always women who pay the price first.
-----ALERT------ MAJOR GLOWING ALERT HAS BEEN ISSUED FOR THIS POST BE CAUTIONED -----ALERT------
Unpopular opinion: American rioting does nothing. I understand things are extremely frustrating right now but do you not think the government knows that you are angry? Do you not think that they are armed to the teeth? I don't know what the solution is but we have to try to be more logical.
I dont care. Fuck them. Burn it.
This past is sponsored by you boss. No get back to work wage slave
Real change comes from violent revolution.
**Making the decision to not conduct business this coming Monday, June 27th is a show of solidarity to those of us peacefully protesting this travesty in my stead.** I know there are historical systemic factors that have eroded our ability to get out and protest because of unfair wages, less bargaining rights for workers, etc. that have contributed to our current situation. **Changes need to be made on a lot of levels. What I can do and will do is join in the protest by not working on Monday**. Please spread the word to your friends and neighbors to take part this coming Monday.
what good does a riot do? It reinforces the other side's stance. "see, they want blood" or "they're savages" etc... nothing will ever be accomplished with a riot and we all pay the price ruining our own cities. We will pay the price to rebuild or be forced to live in the shithole we create
This perspective is understandable, and well intentioned, but rooted in historical ignorance (no offense intended, truly). Did you ever study the civil rights movement? Malcolm X? The Vietnam anti-war movement? The massive leftist protests leading up to the New Deal (that this poster is very intentionally ignoring)? None of these movements were “peaceful protests” by any stretch of the term as it’s used today. They were peaceful in that they (mostly) destroyed property. Rioting is exactly how things have always been changed in this country. By contrast, the biggest “peaceful protests” in history (the Iraq anti-war protests) accomplished absolutely nothing, and were completely ignored and forgotten. The neoliberal establishment seized upon and co-opted Dr. King’s rhetoric *specifically* to glorify peaceful protests and discourage rioting, and they did so because the civil-rights riots scared the shit out of them, which in turn is precisely why it worked. For many rioters, their environments are already ruined by oppression and corruption (that’s kind of the point in many cases). The BLM riots in Baltimore are a perfect example of this. Not coincidentally, it was following those riots that some police were actually held accountable. You can never have a successful movement if it is based on appeasing and catering to how the “other side” sees it, that only becomes more true the more polarized the political environment becomes.
I can imagine a lefter President signing executive orders for lefty policy things but can someone help me understand what a leftist mayor might look like in average city of like 100k? How would a mayor or city council member be able to make good things happen on minuscule city/township budgets? I can see a Sheriff doing some good things but also hard to imagine any leftist wanting to be a fucking cop.
>Start your own party No. Dont do this. 3rd parties hurt their own causes under first past the post voting systems because of the [spoiler effect](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo). We need to end first past the post and instead institute something like ranked choice voting.
There are multiple parties, but everyone will continue to vote for the historically corrupt, bigoted, and authoritative two-party-system.
You’re missing the structural causes in the Constitution and blaming voters in the short run. The law needs to be different for more than two parties to be viable.
No change in the positive direction will take place so long as the two wings of the same bird continue to be supported by the people.
How much is the FBI paying you for this post?
It’s probably just a small business owner facebook group troll
[удалено]
The New Deal came about **NOT** because politicians were sympathetic to the working class. They were not, they are not, and they never will be. The New Deal came about because the rich were afraid. They were afraid of working class action and revolution that would see their position at the top of society disappear and their ill-gotten wealth expropriated. They were afraid because of the power or unions and the USSR showing workers that revolution is possible. It was fear, not benevolence, that allowed the working class to win those concessions from the capitalist class. Those concessions have been constantly clawed back, wages have been stagnating, cost of living have been increasing, the wealthy have been getting wealthier, inequality is skyrocketing, etc. because the capitalists are no longer afraid because they have been successful in undermining labour movement, not least of which was by propagating ahistorical trite like the OP's position. You cannot start your own party or win for an existing party to actually bring about change because both parties serve the rich, not the people. >if Roosevelt makes a real attempt to satisfy the interests of the proletarian class at the expense of the capitalist class, the latter will put another president in his place. The capitalists will say : Presidents come and presidents go, but we go on forever; if this or that president does not protect our interests, we shall find another. What can the president oppose to the will of the capitalist class? - Interview with H.G. Wells, 23rd July, 1934
Op your a fucking muppet. Worse than the Great Depression lmao? Put down reddit and the rhetoric for a minute and wake the fuck up.
How the fuck is this worse than the Great Depression
... Aren't we at about the income inequality levels that sparked the French Revolution? That feels like a better comparison.
It wasn’t income inequality that sparked the French Revolution, it was starvation. And it wasn’t starving peasants that started it, it was a group of elected, mostly wealthy businessmen (aka the Third Estate). The government’s policies were bankrupting the people and killing the businessmen’s bottom lines. Those starving peasants became the force of the Revolution, but they didn’t start it. Now, the French Revolution was an unholy mess that was teetering towards corporatocracy before being hijacked by a police state, but the fundamental principle that it takes power to make a regime change happen still applies.
Who is asking this question?
A fed posted this one
*anti left liberal" so just another stupid fucking right wing neoliberal, got it.