A general strike on May Day?

[Eye See You]

Saturday, April 15, 2006

Will there be a national general strike on May Day? Don’t bet on it!

The Latino community has gone on activist overdrive recently. The next big move is a national boycott on May first (See link) Anti-war activists want to latch on to this boycott and call for a general strike against the war. Which means staying home from work or school. Historically, the last time the USA had anything close to a general strike was during the Great Depression of the 1930’s by unemployed workers. The media back then ignored the action. There is still debate among old activists if those strikes were effective. There is only 2 weeks until May Day and to think that a general strike would materialize is pure folly. A general strike: particularly in the USA would require massive organizing and publicity. Not that I am oppose to the idea, but reality is reality. A general strike is the highest form of civil disobedience. It is too high of a goal to reach at this juncture. Sit in‘s, die in’s, hunger strikes, or walkouts have to happen on a daily bases. It is difficult to get Americans to come to a major demonstration on a weekend. If you want to start a massive movement to have to start from the ground up. Students and union workers have to initiate it then the snowball effect will happen.
In order to have an effective general strike, it must be planed months ahead. How about this September 11th? This upcoming boycott will have a minor effect on the Southwest portion of the United States and maybe a few major cities, but a general strike? It will be like some flu epidemic but the wheels of industry will keep rolling. You can halt the war machine for a day and that might put a scare in the Aryan ruling class but it will take 24/7 organizing! Though this general strike idea is just an Internet rumor, the seeds have been planted for a grass roots action!

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0415immigration0415.html

[Deja Q]

1. EVERYONE has to do it.

And, much like in those cartoons where the 'ruffian' makes suggestions, everyone else feels safer falling into line... :think:

So, nothing happens.

[RagingInMiami]

2. If you're unemployed, how effective is it to engage in a general strike?

"Historically, the last time the USA had anything close to a general strike was during the Great Depression of the 1930’s by unemployed workers."

[sam sarrha]

6. i dont think the issue is "Their" Unemployment.. it is to keep a job

they got by illegally entering a foreign country. my issue is 'my' unemployment.... lack of health care and bad health that inhibits employment.. and i am here legally

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/2/26/164611.shtml

the real issue that needs to addressed before we even attempt to decide what to do is that Mexico is exporting their poverty here to make their richest richer.. in a Country that the UN declared..'Morrally Bankrupt and Democratically Irretrievable. the biggest growth investment in mexico isn't Walmart it is migrants sending billions of dollars from the the United States to Mexico.

the really big tragedy is that if you give amnesty to the ones already here it is a green light for a catastrophic migration for what the rest of the Mexican government wants to get rid of, rather than do what they have the ability to do.. take care of their people.. catastrophic for the migrants and for our economy.

what is happening now is Nothing to what will happen when 2 or 3 times more show up because they feel amnesty is eminent.. our economy is about to collapse do the incompetence of the Rat Fart we have for president.. if we need workers, we should have program based on the facts.. something this government CAN'T DO.. deal with facts, all they see is short term profits for the richest people in the history of mankind.

[RagingInMiami]

11. I was asking about the strikers during the Great Depression

And yes, Mexico's poverty is not only a result of Mexico's rich trying to get richer, but the rich in this country trying to get richer, because I've read that up 20 percent of Mexican farmers lost their land once NAFTA was put into place.

[Toucano]

8. It's not just striking from work.

It's striking from consuming. It's blocking roads so deliveries can't be made, and people who won't participate can't get to work.

You don't do anything that supports the machine. You fight the only thing the machine truly loves: the wallet.

[RagingInMiami]

12. If that could only happen in today's consumer-driven society

I'm afraid things will have to get much worse before a general strike even becomes a possibility.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PetraPooh]

4. I think it would be wrong to join the two issues.

If anti-war combines with illegal immigration support, since the II is the "known" issue; it will be reported as being that issues support. This would be bad, IMHO. I sure wish we could get anti-war protests to rival the immigration protests and boycotts, but separately and distinctly related to anti-war and or anti-bush antics.

[sam sarrha]

9. that is just nuts....so Illegal immigrants against the war? those soldiers

are gonna want their jobs back when they get home...

[RagingInMiami]

14. Do you know how many illegal immigrants are actually fighting in the war?

Do you know how aggressive recruitors get in Latino immigrant neighborhoods?

It's not as separate of an issue as you would like to believe.

[PetraPooh]

16. But the rallies won't be reported as "illegal immigrants" against the war

It will be reported as citisens for illegal immigration. I understand that many immigrants are fighting the war, though I am curious how ILLEGAL immigrants are fighting the war. Nonetheless, I believe the issues need to be kept clearly separated. I don't think it would help the anti-war movement, which is near and dear to my heart, to be directly connected to the ILLEGAL immigration issue that isn't, and also clearly splits the democratic party followers as evidenced here on many threads. PLUS many repubs are now anti-war, but wouldn't be open to the supporting the encouragement of illegal immigration.

[Toucano]

5. September 11 is a terrible idea.

It's already a symbol of horror and betrayal.

May 1st is an excellent date.

A general strike doesn't have to be planned months ahead to be effective.

Look at the demonstrations in France recently. There was no advanced planning.

To be effective, it simply has to be done.

[RagingInMiami]

13. The problem with May 1st

Is that the right-wingers will quickly point out that it's a "communist holiday". And even though it is technically not, your average dumbass American will still believe it's a celebration of the evil communism.

[Toucano]

32. That's a valid point. n/t

[hiley]

7. Aryan ruling class

??

[Coexist]

10. so how will people know if you are striking against the war

or against immigration policies?

[Lars39]

15. What percentage of the dead troops are Hispanic/Latino?

The protests against the immigration policies could easily morph from anti-immigration to anti-bush administration to anti-war.

[PetraPooh]

17. The better question is "legal" or "illegal," not ethnicity.

[Lars39]

18. Many have been promised citizenship if they join the US Army.

It'll be interesting to see how the protests shape up.

[PetraPooh]

19. Yes, but legal or illegal. Many legal immigrants are promised

citizenship, but I doubt illegal immigrants are trying to join an armed forced that would likely boot them for illegally entering and/or illegally applying for the armed services.

[Lars39]

20. This administration has trolled for warm bodies in many countries

to fill the quotas needed. Mexico is just one of many.

[PetraPooh]

21. Still avoiding the question. I am again going to assume that

if invited or trolled by the administration, that still makes them LEGAL.

[Lars39]

22. Will we ever know how many were offered enlistment instead of

deportation?

[VLC98]

23. Where did you get that info?

To join the service you have to have a green card. That is a fact. My husband was an AF recruiter a few years ago.

[Lars39]

24. Read the mainstream articles a few years ago here at DU.

Fiji was also among the countries combed for recruits.

[VLC98]

26. I just don't believe it.

When my husband was recruiting, there was absolutely no way an illegal alien could join. Granted, the Air Force is more choosy than the Army, but I've never heard of an undocumented immigrant joining any branch of service. Feel free to prove me wrong though.

[Lars39]

27. I didn't say 'illegal'.

I said they trolled countries for recruits, promising US citizenship upon completion of service.

[VLC98]

28. And I'm saying BS. nt

[RagingInMiami]

29. According to this link, there is a way around that

Although it doesn't explain how.

It does confirm what you said; that illegal immigrants are ineligible to enlist, but it also says that they are required to register with the Selective Service.

Then it goes on to mention that as of April, 2003, there were 68,826 foreign-born persons serving in the United States armed forces -- almost 5 percent of those serving. And about half of these are not citizens.

http://www.nilc.org/immlawpolicy/DREAM/Facts_About_Immigrant_Participation_In_the_Military.pdf


And here is a link about recruiters who was arrested for selling fake documents to illegal immigrants in order for them to join the military.

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0540,gillison,68594,2.html

[VLC98]

31. Good info, thank you.

I can now see that illegal immigrants have been able to join the service, but fraudulently. My husband sucked as a recruiter because he does everything by the book. He got on great with the Navy recruiters, but none of them spoke to their Army counterparts, who were known to be ruthless. Why anyone, citizen or not, would want to join nowadays is beyond me.

[RagingInMiami]

25. If you're going to hold a person's immigration status against him

Despite the fact that he is fighting in the war, then you really got some serious issues.

Here are some facts from the National Immigration Law Center:

Of the U.S. members of the military killed in the Iraqi war, about one in every ten was foreign-
born.

As of April, 2003:

• There were 68,826 foreign-born persons serving in the United States armed forces -- almost 5
percent of those serving. These individuals served in every branch of the military.

• About half of those serving in the armed services are naturalized citizens. The other half
have not yet become citizens."

http://www.nilc.org/immlawpolicy/DREAM/Facts_About_Immigrant_Participation_In_the_Military.pdf

[mdmc]

30. i am jiggy with IT!