https://xcancel.com/TeamsterSOB/status/1813233768137662564
The C-suite long ago sold out the United States, shuttering factories in the homeland and gutting American jobs, while using the profits to push diversity, equity, and inclusion and the religion of the trans flag.
They have forged trade deals that led directly to the hemorrhaging of 4 million good jobs to China.
But as O’Brien correctly observed Monday night, that isn’t the Republican Party’s true tradition. There was a time when Republicans knew that American strength depends squarely on American workers—and their way of life: family, neighborhood, church, union hall. Ronald Reagan knew it.
China is ripping us off, and strong tariffs must be maintained and expanded.
Teamsters blaming transgender people, "DEI", and China for the suppression of the labor unions in America. Gives support to family, church, and Ronald Reagan.
At least that's changed in the last century. I believe dual carding is encouraged, secretly if the business union forbids it. Mostly though the wobblies today focus on shops that don't receive any organizing support from business unions.
Sort of the same way Lenin calls for dual power, workers looking to take control of their business union need a way to organize within it independently of its power structures if the union is wholly coopted by class traitors. Every high profile case where rank-and-file have gained power in american unions in the last ~decade (RWU, UAW, etc.) has featured some dual organizing like that.
IWW has an internal discipline management problem that devolves the entire organization into factionalist infighting due to the fact that the only measure of membership discipline they have is through expulsion from the IWW.
This also doesn't mention the fact that the IWW is a hollowed out shell of its former glory and has only recently begun clawing itself back from irrelevance in the labor organizing field meaning that the IWW is fundamentally not where the working class is located. Dual unionism is an alright thing if you think you can learn something from them, but I'd say you'll have better luck studying Foster.
I would agree about the internal discipline problem. It’s like the farthest thing from a democratic centralist org as can be, and my local branch is infested with real life anarchobidenists, but it’s the only active local org that isn’t trots or CPUSA.
I hate where I live lmao
You have my sympathy, I may be surrounded by jack diddly shit up here which has its own problems but I can't imagine being surrounded by some of the most annoying libs in America and having to try and materially create some good wherever you're at.
Yeah I mean the ideology at its root is fundamentally anarchist so if you're looking for demcent you're barking up the wrong tree. But if you work in an industry that's not already well organized, they're probably your best choice for learning how to organize your workplace. The DSA's been doing a lot of work there recently too and deserve a shoutout. The only other alternative is to reach out to a business union, which is how you get the Teamsters representing prison guards, the AFT organizing a hospital, etc. And those business unions are better than nothing but you'll still need to do your own organizing to counteract the likely comprador leadership of the union (the whole impetus for this thread lol).
Wobblies are big tent tho, there's plenty of anarchobidenists and a few MLs too. But like the labor leaders Lenin mentioned at the top of your cited section of "Left-Wing" Communism, the MLs who are members are there for workplace organizing and not trying to make the org itself demcent:
Worth noting that the union leadership Lenin talks about didn't just turn Party member overnight. It's one of the outcomes of pursuing a dual power strategy for a long period of time.
I'd appreciate you removing this FUD comrade. It's both not how the NLRB works nor how internal wobbly elections work (as much as they do), and it's borderline fedjacketing from a place of admitted ignorance.
Internal wobbly politics are shit, not defending that. I ignore it as much as possible. But the most active membership is focused on shop floor organizing, and on the whole it's a good org for that purpose. Which is why I mentioned them. They're not a replacement for party organizing, nor do they claim to be, and that wasn't the purpose of my comment. Just noting that it's a marked difference from the IWW at the height (or just after) of its power that Lenin was critiquing.
I'll grant that, as it's second-hand information drawn purely from my swiss cheese memorybanks.
I'd point out that such a dual power strategy is the result of a communist party pursuing it for a long period of time and not
relying on social democrats or unions that've had their ranks drained and stripped of their Reds for decades - which while DSA should get a pat on the head for their accomplishments in the field, they also deserve to get their nose rubbed in their own turds with regards to their ties to the TDU.
Ultimately this discussion boils down to Communists need to be joining or building or expanding unions and working their way up their power structures to the best of their ability in order to reorientate them as proletarian structures. Something that's not accomplished by going ick at the currently existing structures and running off to build your own unions and believe your left-sounding phrasemongering will suddenly inspire union workers to flood over to you. You get in there and kick the foxes out of the henhouse and slam the door on their asses
The discussion of the current state of the IWW just goes to me pointing out that a notable difference from a century ago is that they're a small part of the movement to, "get in there and kick the foxes out of the henhouse and slam the door on their asses," and have largely abandoned 'left-sounding phrasemongering to suddenly inspire union workers to flood over to them'.
Ty for removing the FUD. The IWW is far from perfect but they are largely a good org when it comes to organizing for shop floor power.