this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2025
83 points (100.0% liked)

Working Class Calendar

1580 readers
38 users here now

!workingclasscalendar@lemmy.world is a working class calendar inspired by the now (2023-06-25) closed reddit r/aPeoplesCalendar aPeoplesCalendar.org, where we can post daily events.

Rules

All the requirements of the code of conduct of the instance must be followed.

Community Rules

1. It's against the rules the apology for fascism, racism, chauvinism, imperialism, capitalism, sexism, ableism, ageism, and heterosexism and attitudes according to these isms.

2. The posts should be about past working class events or about the community.

3. Cross-posting is welcomed.

4. Be polite.

5. Any language is welcomed.

Lemmy

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
roig@lemmy.world
redrumBot@lemmy.ml
83
Dorothy Day (1897 - 1980) Dorothy Day, born on this day in 1897, was an anarchist activist who founded the Catholic Worker movement (stahmaxffcqankienulh.supabase.co)
submitted 4 days ago by roig@lemmy.world to c/workingclasscalendar@lemmy.world
14 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Dorothy Day (1897 - 1980)

Mon Nov 08, 1897

Image

Dorothy Day, born on this day in 1897, was an anarchist activist who founded the Catholic Worker movement. "The greatest challenge of the day is: how to bring about a revolution of the heart, a revolution which has to start with each one of us?"

The Catholic Worker movement, founded by Day and her partner Peter Maurin, started with the publication of the first issue of the Catholic Worker on May 1st, 1933.

The paper was priced at one cent, and published continuously since then. It was aimed at those suffering the most in the depths of the Great Depression, "those who think there is no hope for the future", and announced to them that "the Catholic Church has a social program...there are men of God who are working not only for their spiritual but for their material welfare." It accepted no advertising and did not pay its staff.

Like many newspapers of the day, including those for which Day had already been writing, the Catholic Worker was an unapologetic example of advocacy journalism. It provided coverage of strikes, explored working conditions, especially of women and black workers, and explicated papal teaching on social issues.

Its viewpoint was partisan and stories were designed to move its readers to take action locally, for example, by patronizing laundries recommended by the Laundry Workers' Union. Its advocacy of federal child labor laws put it at odds with the American Church hierarchy from its first issue.

Day's activism continued throughout the rest of her life, resulting in multiple arrests. In the summer of 1973, she joined César Chávez in his campaign for farm laborers in the fields of California. She was also arrested at the age of 75 for defying a ban on picketing, spending ten days in jail.

"The Gospel takes away our right forever, to discriminate between the deserving and the undeserving poor."

- Dorothy Day

top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 10 points 4 days ago

The borough that gave Mamdani the fewest votes was Staten Island.

There is a Staten Island ferry named after Dorothy Day.

NYC politics is weird.

[–] TomMasz@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago

There are some folks who think she should be canonized a saint. She would have laughed at that.

[–] ccunning@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago (5 children)

Can someone explain to me how anarchism is pro working class?

[–] birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 4 days ago

Anarchism has various branches. A misconception of anarchism is that it means 'disorder'. It would be more accurate to say that anarchism means there is no vertical power structure; in other words, all people are equal, without a rigid hierarchy.

One of those anarchist branches is for example anarchist communism, in where society is decentrally organised within communes. What in a capitalist society would be considered 'private property', ie. land and natural resources within there - that are then deprived from everyone -, would instead be owned by the society as a whole.

[–] Thwompthwomp@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

It might help if you explain why you might think it is not pro working class.

My understanding is that anarchism is not necessarily pro working or pro ruling class, but more pro equality. Many revolutionaries would argue that raising the working classes conditions is a goal and morally good. They would also argue that freeing the ruling classes from their hierarchy and ruling relations is freeing, humanizing and also morally good.

That just seems to be general leftist ideas though and not necessarily related to anarchism vs communism or any specific ideologies within larger leftism.

If you’re asking about theory there are a lot of online discussion spaces for discussions like that.

[–] ccunning@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It might help if you explain why you might think it is not pro working class.

Agreed!

My perception is anarchism is basically Libertarianism turned up to 11 with no regulation or oversight over those with outsized access to resources who are then able leverage those resources over folks who are less fortunate.

[–] Telemachus93@slrpnk.net 4 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

No, that's not anarchism! Anarchism wants a society without any hierarchies or authorities. Exclusive access to resources (e.g. private property of factories etc) needs hierarchy/authority to keep that access exclusive. If there is someone calling themselves boss/king/whatever and wants you to do their bidding, he won't have any power if neither you nor anyone else accepts their claim. If they resort to violence, then the community should come together in solidarity to defend against that.

There are people calling themselves anarchocapitalists and what they argue for would indeed lead to the problems you envisioned. But they're not accepted among "real" anarchists who are definitely and absolutely against capitalism (which is where we are aligned with others on the far left) but also against any other form of oppression, including the supposed "workers' states" like the soviet union.

[–] ccunning@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

Anarchism wants a society without any hierarchies or authorities. Exclusive access to resources (e.g. private property of factories etc) needs hierarchy/authority to keep that access exclusive.

Then is the idea of Anarchism purely theoretical? Because this seems unachievable in reality to me.

Maybe I’m thinking about it wrong? To even consider the idea, I can’t imagine the complexities of overlaying something like this on society as it exists today. So just as a thought experiment, to consider it I have to start with a clean slate, and I can’t imagine a scenario where humans don’t, almost immediately, start hoarding resources for themselves and protecting those resources. So you immediately run into the problem of enforcing a lack of hierarchy, which…¯\_(ツ)_/¯ the experiment has already failed.

[–] Telemachus93@slrpnk.net 3 points 4 days ago

I wouldn't say purely theoretical. Of course it's incredibly far away from what our society looks like today in the grand scheme of things but as the other answer points out, anarchism is always there in the little things. A really great text pointing that out is David Graeber's "Are you an anarchist? The answer may surprise you!": https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-are-you-an-anarchist-the-answer-may-surprise-you

Another point I'd like to make concerning the "purely theoretical" aspect is one that comes from my background as an engineer. In electricity distribution planning and probably many similar problems, "green field" planning plays a significant role. Engineers look at where the electricity sources and consumers are and, in a first step, disregard the current state of the grid. Instead, they try to find an ideal distribution system layout. THEN they look at the current state of things and start planning what changes can be made in what order. That can take decades but if the ideal vision is constantly kept as a goal to move closer to, the system will resemble that ideal state more and more.

Anarchists often take a similar approach. We know that humans are well capable of both, competing for resources AND of cooperating for the common good (actually, a great early anarchist was also an academic whose general ideas in opposition to narrow-minded social darwinism are close to what evolutionary biology knows today: see Petr Kropotkin's "Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution" if you're interested in that story). Capitalist society has ingrained the ideology in us that everything is about competition. The society we envision is all about cooperation. Society is always changing and that change comes from how humans operate in this society. So what anarchists do is very many diverse things, smaller and greater deeds, but all either about unlearning competition and hierarchy or learning, practicing, showing and teaching cooperation. A great video essay diving deeper into these ideas would be Zoe Baker's "The unity of means and ends": https://youtu.be/syR0P-2uwp4

[–] Thwompthwomp@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago

If you enjoy science fiction, I think Ursula le guins Dispossessed is a great tool to help imagine what something like this could be like on a larger societal scale.

In many ways anarchism is the default way of living for humans. Unless you are religiously conservative, that’s how husbands and wives operate, and in many ways the global order is also anarchistic (that’s debatable of course and there is definitely asymmetric power strictures but at the core there is no ruling country and instead joint resolutions are reached).

The devil is always in the details and that’s why leftist infighting exists. The ultimate shared vision and the morality though are there.

The flip side is that capitalism is inherent with inconsistencies and cannot function on paper. (How can basing a society on infinite growth operate?) But we live in this system and it does work. (For some at least. Perhaps it’s better to say that even though on paper the system does not make sense in practice it is able to function.)

Would idealized anarchism work? I don’t know. However, is it a dream with aspiring towards? I’d say yes.

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 7 points 4 days ago

First, they'd have to explain to you that anarchism isn't a monolith, and that there are many different types.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/anarchy.asp

https://medium.com/left-right/a-guide-to-understanding-the-types-of-anarchism-2a72d05b48c7

Two random hits from a quick search. You're encouraged to talk to an actual teacher.

[–] Bo7a@piefed.ca 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Note - Early morning simplifications. As dagwood mentions, seek a teacher. I am just a dude.

Even just simplifying anarchism to dictionary terms can help a bit. Anarchy means 'no hierarchy'.

Whether that be claimed natural hierarchy (religions, monarchy, patriarchy), financial (oligarchy, plutocracy), or governmental (police/military.)

The basic tenet is 'We are all equal". That is how anarchism is pro-worker, because in a system like this, we are all working towards the common goal of minimizing suffering. It is impossible to be an anarchist and not also be 'for' the working class.

[–] birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Technically there's "anarcho-capitalism" and "anarcho-libertarianism". But virtually all anarchists reject that, since ancaps and anlibs assume that private property still is a thing; and that will still enable wealth accumulation, and therefore power accumulation and thus an hierarchy.

[–] redrumBot@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 days ago

In short: the working class is oppressed, anarchism is against hierarchies and, by extension, oppressions. Then it can only be pro working class.

In the USA, the words libertarianism and anarchism has been co-opted against their traditional use. You can read more about individualist-anarchism in the Appendix G of The Anarchist FAQ and their anticapitalist and social roots.