X revokes paid blue check from United Auto Workers after strike called::After a report called out Musk’s union-busting, UAW’s blue check got reinstated.

      • aidan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Only after elected they absorb the union into the state. Before elections the Nazis backed many of the unions.

          • aidan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No? I don’t generally agree with how a lot of people group the right, the Nazis were a lot closer to the Soviets than they were capitalists. Furthermore, I didn’t say they were pro every Union, I said they supported unions that supported them.

        • orrk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          well no, the Nazis paid lip service to “workers” in general but literally got into bloody (as in armed paramilitary) conflicts with unions (Iron Front vs. SA) for years before the complete takeover of the government, after the takeover of the government almost all union organizers got sent to the concentration camps as political prisoners because “they were all Marxists”, the Nazis then replaced the unions with the German Labor Front (DAF), an organization that existed to keep the worker in his place, going as far as to literally take money from the workers to pay for building new production lines.

          so, no, they did not absorb the unions, and they definitely didn’t back the unions, unless you call strike-breaking with a machine gun “backing”

          • aidan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, they had a ton of conflict with the more liberal unions, but they also organized Nazi aligned unions. They were not very successful at recruiting members to them but they tried to. Also, occasionally they cooperated with communist unions.

            the Nazis then replaced the unions with the German Labor Front (DAF)

            Yes, absorption? As in unions used to be allowed to exist as independent entities, then workers were forced to join the state “union”

            unless you call strike-breaking with a machine gun “backing”

            Source on Nazi strike breaking before 1932/3?

        • teuast@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is blatantly ahistorical and you’d almost have to deliberately keep yourself ignorant to think this.

          • aidan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The KPD leadership initially first criticised but then supported the 1931 Prussian Landtag referendum, an unsuccessful attempt launched by the far-right Stahlhelm to bring down the social democrat state government of Prussia by means of a plebiscite; the KPD referred to the SA as “working people’s comrades” during this campaign.

            In November 1932, the KPD and the Nazis worked together in the Berlin transport workers’ strike.

            They had an entire organization for infiltrating unions to try to get support

            The NSBO had overall little success among German organized workers, except in certain regions where they supported strikes, such as the 1932 Berlin transport strike.

            Almost like exactly what I said.

            • teuast@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              My guy, your source proves my point, not yours, even by your own summary of it. If you were capable of feeling ashamed of yourself, now would be a great time to do so.

      • orangebussycat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, it’s part of the capitalist agenda and its a good thing. If you don’t want to do your job then quit. That goes for cops, UAW workers, teachers, and more.

        • teuast@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Union-busting is absolutely part of the fascist agenda.

          No, it’s part of the capitalist agenda

          That’s what they just said.

          and its a good thing.

          If you’re an obscenely wealthy ghoul who profits off the suffering of everyone who has less money than you, then yes. In all other cases, absolutely the fuck not.

          If you don’t want to do your job then quit. That goes for cops, UAW workers, teachers, and more.

          So you’d be happy if all the cops, auto workers, teachers, nurses, firefighters, etc. quit? You’d rather have massive and continuous societal upheaval than workers collectively bargaining for the right to make a decent living doing their jobs? I’d rather have a functioning society, personally, and that’s why I support unions and you should too.

            • teuast@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Then why does a Big Mac cost almost the same at a unionized McDonald’s in Denmark as it does at a non-unionized one in Tennessee? I mean, I guess anything is possible when you just lie, but a lot of things become a lot clearer once you acknowledge reality.

                • teuast@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You know that song “Think About It” by Flight Of The Conchords? “They’re turning kids into slaves just to make cheaper sneakers, but what’s the real cause? 'Cause the sneakers don’t seem that much cheaper. Why are we still paying so much for sneakers when you got 'em made by little slave kids? What are your overheads?”

                  Funnily enough, I used to work in a running shoe store, and Jemaine is actually 100% right. Nike, Asics, Brooks, Adidas, most of them mostly manufacture in southeast Asia, or at least did at the time and probably still do. Nike has famously had their name attached to the word “sweatshop” on multiple occasions. Meanwhile, New Balance manufactures in the US. Prices are similar, quality is basically the same, personally I don’t get on with either of them as well as I get on with Altra but that’s beside the point. Nike’s CEO makes like 100x what NB’s does, which means NB manages to match Nike on price and quality with a much more equitable pay structure and manufacturing in the US.

                  If your metric for the economy is anything other than how much money the CEO makes, then New Balance is the clear winner. And I just want to note how fucked it is that I’m looking at a CEO making almost 300k a year, who also happens to be kind of a right wing dipshit, and saying “yeah, he seems equitable” just because I have to compare him to one making 32 mil.

                  Another example is that Orbea bicycles, which are literally made by a worker-owned co-op in Mondragon in Spain, with a lot (though admittedly not all) of their manufacturing either in house or just over the border in Portugal, compete and win in top-level racing, so the quality is obviously there, with prices that match or beat ones set by giants like Trek, Specialized, Cannondale, or, well, Giant, all of whom do most of their manufacturing in Taiwan (to be fair, Giant is a Taiwanese company, but Trek, Spesh, and 'Dale are all American and, weirdly, Giant handles a lot of their manufacturing).

                  If you can’t show me that I’m wrong, then sure, pivot to something else again. But the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting something to change. Vaas from Far Cry 3 taught me that.

      • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Like, unironically. Fascists are extremely anti-union.

        There’s obviously a lot more to it, and this is a relatively minor example even after Elon made paid accounts have more visibility, but this is very much one of their things.

        • aidan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          The Nazis and Soviets did the same thing about unions. Picked unions that had a lot of their backers in them and backed those, then once elected they created state ran unions and banned all others.

          • orrk@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            for the fascist please refer to my previous comment, for the Communists, the Bolsheviks didn’t have much to do with the small and numerous Russian unions (Russia had a very beurocratically decentralized industry at that point in time) and later fought against them as they mostly joined the white Russian faction (the bolsheviks being backed by the Entente), and ironically the term Tankie comes from an event where the soviet unions crushed mainly union uprisings against the soviets in Hungary, with tanks, because the soviets also couldn’t stand unions (like ever fascist ever)

            please stop repeating American Cold War era misinformation.

            • aidan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              the Bolsheviks didn’t have much to do with the small and numerous Russian unions (Russia had a very beurocratically decentralized industry at that point in time) and later fought against them as they mostly joined the white Russian faction

              Source for this? Everything I find contradicts that, but most of those are Marxist sources.

              the bolsheviks being backed by the Entente

              You mean central powers

              and ironically the term Tankie comes from an event where the soviet unions crushed mainly union uprisings against the soviets in Hungary

              I clearly stated they opposed unions not reporting to the state. Also the Hungarian revolution was a bit more than a strike. Both the Nazis and the Soviets constructed unions that were organs of the state.