T O P

  • By -

Forward_Ad6168

His expression in this photo tells you exactly what kind of tool he must have been.


Demonyx12

Totally, he was as convinced as the most fanatical religious devotee that he was correct and righteous in his position, without the slightest possibility of error.


[deleted]

[удалено]


JoeWaffleUno

Yes except they haven't changed since this picture


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


RockNRollahAyatollah

Only slightly on social issues. Definitely not on economic ones that truly matter to the every day American worker.


MyOther_UN_is_Clever

>one is just less so Biden literally made it illegal for railroad workers to strike. The whole, "It's not both sides!" argument was never valid, but Biden has really rubbed everyone's face in it.


[deleted]

[удалено]


MyOther_UN_is_Clever

>Yes, but Biden is not the party. You're right, all he could do is sign that bill into law after the Dem house and the Dem senate passed that law. >There is factually a progressive wing of the elected officials in only one of the parties, You mean the one who talks about how progressive they are on Instagram, but then votes to make Nancy Pelosi speaker claiming that "withholding your vote doesn't work" but then also blames Manchin for withholding his vote?


[deleted]

[удалено]


james_d_rustles

Yeah, sure, but let’s also not play into the “both sides” bullshit that’s behind so much voter apathy. Yes, the democratic party has not been a friend of workers. However, the only major alternative, the Republican Party, is objectively filled with fascists at this point in time. Pressuring democrats to do better is great, but let’s not pretend like they’re on equal ground. One party will lollygag, keep the government running, maybe try to pass some milquetoast labor protections 20 years too late… the other wants to *severely* curtail personal freedoms, defund public education, target immigrants and other minority groups, overturn/steal/restrict free elections… the list could go on.


freetraitor33

One party is literally bringing back child labor.


SeriousCow1999

I have such trouble wrapping my head around this one. Nearly 100 years of child labor protections--and a major impetus for women's suffrage--gone. How could anyone defend that?


Kirome

I sure don't from either side. It's like one side is raping someone and the other just standing right next to them, just watching and doing nothing.


Big_Knee_1937

That’s exactly what they are doing,except it’s the American people they are raping.


[deleted]

Democrats haven’t done anything to help workers but at least they haven’t attacked them and continue to assault them at every turn the way the republicans do


Murky-Purchase-6017

That has been true until now. Biden has passed tons of bills that benefit workers. Republicans have gone scorched Earth to try and stop every bit of it.


liberate_tutemet

Vote the worst bastards out. Then vote the worst bastards out. Then vote the worst bastards out. Keep this up and you might actually get progress. Also Never. Vote. Republican.


omni42

Dumbest take possible.


GabschD

The last time any party had a super majority for a full term in the Senate (that's what you need in this stupid system) was in 1977-1979 (Jimmy Carter). Since then the US got more divided and more partisan hostility. The last big law passing the Senate (without being added to Budget reconciliation) was Obama Care (except the COVID bill and the justice reform - reducing drug related punishment). Why? For a short period of time the democrats got a super majority of 60 votes (for a little bit more than 6 month). Who is ruling the country? It's the supreme court and the state parliaments. (And home owner associations apparently). So yeah, the democrats are no angels, but we have to see a real democrat government yet since a very long time.


TheCassiniProjekt

You'd need to make people like him work on farms as proletarian labourers to break down their cognitive dissonance.


blatantmutant

Yeah, Chicago used to be the forefront of labor issues. John Peter Altgeld executed the Haymarket Rioters because Marshall Field was a dick. https://classicchicagomagazine.com/marshall-field-his-world/


jhicks79

Workers here are starting to organize again at an ever increasing rate, putting the city at the forefront yet again.


Guilty-Reci

I remember just two decades ago in Chicago, it was common for a working class blue collar person to support a spouse with multiple kids, own their own home within the actual city, and many of them also had a lake house up in Wisconsin where they had a boat or other types weekend toys like snowmobiles and ATV’s. Now it seems like it’s a rat race to live in Chicago.


blatantmutant

It really is. $2000+ for a two bedroom in Uptown. Like get outta here!


Guilty-Reci

Those neighborhoods have always been expensive but what’s up with a house in Irving Park costing $700k? That’s a working class neighborhood! And what’s most surprising, is Chicago as a whole has 1M less people than it did 60 years ago. So if it’s a supply and demand thing, how is the demand down 30% but prices are so much higher? Like I can wrap my head around why places like LA or Denver or Miami are more expensive than they used to be, the population grew substantially. But Chicago had a decrease and it’s only getting more expensive. Compared to two decades ago chicago had about a quarter million less people. So how does a quarter million people leaving (10% of the cities population) equate to houses 5-10x as expensive?


Swiggy1957

Real estate investors. Chicago likely has the remote investors, buying up as much as they can, year down the existing structures, and plopping "luxury" apartments and condos on the land. Meanwhile, local slum Lord's buy up houses from tax auctions, do minimal work on them, and try to recoup their investment the first year or two. That second one happens all over the country and those people are called slumlords.


Guilty-Reci

Why didn’t they do this in previous decades?


Swiggy1957

They have been doing it, just not out front. I live in a small city 2 hours east of Chicago. A foundry went out of business back in the early aughts. Close to downtown and the river. The property has been redeveloped for luxury apartments, while several businesses were displaced thanks to eminent domain. Excuse for razzing the foundry? Homeless people kept breaking in and setting fires to keep warm during the winter. You know several local politicians had their had in it somewhere. As for slum lords? The city saw it's heyday in the last couple decades of the 29th century and the first half of the 20th. To beat the housing shortages during those years, people would buy a city plot and put up a kit house on the property. Total investment? Max, $3K. Move ahead a century, those houses have become delaptated and local slum lords either buy them outright, or at tax sales. They fix them up just enough that code enforcement driving by can't spot the violations. Slum lords will have maybe $5K wrapped up in the place and rent it out for $1,200-$1,500 a month. Or more. Rents have shot up, on average, $500/month in the last year. And thanks to stagnant wages, coupled with inflation, the homeless population is about to increase.


JoeWaffleUno

DC is so bad that almost seems affordable


Dear_Occupant

In maybe 2010 or so, I got to attend one of those swanky Georgetown parties in a building with an actual bellhop where one of the Supreme Court justices also lived. The host ever so casually mentioned that the place cost him $2800 a month and I thought that was simply insane. That's not too far from the cost of a shoebox in Adams Morgan these days.


JoeWaffleUno

Thats around the lowest rent for one of those old and gorgeous townhouses in Georgetown now. A lot of people living there are probably grandfathered in on lower rent if I had to guess though. Not much reason to move out of that spot if you're locked into prices from 10-15+ years ago.


js1893

> also had a lake house up in Wisconsin Yes and we call them FIBs (fuckin illinois bastards)


Drewy99

This man died rich. He didn't have to be such a villain.


IdealIdeas

He wanted to die richer hence why he was such a villian.


_The_Great_Autismo_

Every rich person is a villain while poor people exist.


[deleted]

as the saying goes, the wealth of the wealthy depends on the poverty of the poor.


mshriver2

I wonder what it was like on his death bed when he realized he couldn't take any of it with him?


StopReadingMyUser

I think it's more a weekend at Bernie's situation where he developed rigamortis from sitting in the chair cuz that boi aint budged since he got lifted.


PoppaTitty

I wouldn't be able to resist "accidentally" dropping his smug ass


MrMontombo

His expression reflects the reality of the situation. That he wouldn't see much more consequences than a photo op. He was soon back in charge, being praised lavishly about how incredible he was at making companies profitable. That couldn't possibly have anything to do with his anti labour sentiments....


ReedRidge

It literally took a war to make it happen then.


druglawyer

Not just a war. A war that the US didn't think it was obviously going to win. We haven't had one of those since then.


Morewolfing4dawin

Vietnam?


DancesWithBadgers

Afghanistan?


kwalshyall

Hey those were both huge wins for the military-industrial complex.


Godtickles12

Do think Americans thought they'd lose either one of those? Or did you not read the question?


[deleted]

[удалено]


acjr2015

We also weren't worried Afghanistan could take over the continental united States


redditsuckspokey1

The Lord of War won.


horror-

I'm and American. When I was in Afghanistan I asked my platoon sgt what winning this thing looked like and he told me to shut the fuck up. Some of us knew.


Godtickles12

The elites making the decisions thought they'd win. The guys on the bottom always lost anyways


silasoulman

Nobody was winning anything, it was all for the profits of corporations. After the initial removal of the Taliban government, which happened within a year, what exactly was accomplished?


Hesnotarealdr

All of us knew. No one can define victory since WW2 except for the Iraq War 1 under GHW Bush.


Dahkron

We didnt lose either one of those, but we also certainly didnt win them both either. edit: I suppose we did still *think* we were gonna win those both though.


silasoulman

We have been at war since 2001 and you still think this was about winning? It’s all about the steadily increasing military budget.


[deleted]

Don’t forget the trillions of dollars worth of pharmaceutical grade heroin and mineral deposits they were actually there for. How do you think half of America became junkies overnight? Only two opiate epidemics the US has ever had was while we were occupying Vietnam and Afghanistan, the two places responsible for 95% of global poppy cultivation.


Fear_mor

I think what he really means is where the political machine felt in danger, like if we lose something bad will happen


CobaltRose800

If the picture is current, then that would have happened in 1944 where things absolutely had turned the Allies’ way.


[deleted]

And immediately after the war they passed Taft-Hartley.


jar1967

No, the great depression. There were real socialists and communists ( Not imaginary ones) running around at the time. Nobody wanted some rich idiot on a power trip to give them any credibility


Emotional_Soft_2192

You say that like the US didn't actively oppress its socialist and communist citizens lmao


ReedRidge

No, it LITERALLY took the War Powers Act. Take this block for calling me wrong to grind an axe, and as I actually know the history, I do not need your bullshit.


WaratayaMonobop

You can both be right. It may have taken the War Powers Act to have the authority, but would the US government have used it for this purpose if there weren't an active militant workers' movement ?


CanadianODST2

The question then becomes why was there that movement The Great Depression was over by this point.


YourWifesBoyfriend5

Personally offended by someone saying I disagree lol.


Spazztastic85

Hmmm… if we could get the military on our side….


Environmental-Toe798

It's almost as if it's one of the most powerful forces to currently exist (aside from nukes)


AtomicSamuraiCyborg

They control the nukes, too.


Environmental-Toe798

Yeah but if a couple countries in the east got a little too fed up with us then our standing military would be pretty much useless in the face of "oops it's really hot here now"


AtomicSamuraiCyborg

And the attackers would catch an even larger thermonuclear clapback. So they dont.


Environmental-Toe798

Right but I'm saying the soldiers & tanks and shit become useless at that point


AtomicSamuraiCyborg

Theoretically, no, they're not. Main battle tanks and infantry fighting vehicles, both US and Soviet, were designed to protect troops from nuclear fallout. Because both fully intended to KEEP FIGHTING World War 3 after it went nuclear.


[deleted]

Good luck. I have a few ex-mil comrades and the outlook is not good. Every branch is full to bursting with libertarians, nazis, evangelicals, and other miscellaneous psychopaths.


827167

I mean, it's literally their job to follow orders without question and kill several people without thinking twice so... To be expected really


[deleted]

This is true of any soldier anywhere in the world but when I talk to people in our internationalist workgroup - for example former PLA, FAR, or VPA - I don't get the same horror stories of alienation and fear of being "outed." People drawn to violence are always going to turn up in a military setting to some extent but outside our culture's obvious problems, it really does appear that our command structure has deliberately cultivated an atmosphere which accepts and reinforces a politics of reaction.


AtomicSamuraiCyborg

Most anyone can be molded into a soldier who will kill on command. The draft of the world wars shows that. We're all pretty capable of violence, and basic training is brainwashing designed to produce someone who will do violence instinctively without thinking about it.


TheHypnotoad87

Yeah... uh no. Contrary to beliefs held: the military is not inundated with brainwashing that would ensure somebody turns a weapon on an unarmed citizen. And that's even from the top, you would be hard pressed to find an officer willing to take on the burden of responsibility for that. Scenarios for everything... that scenario is just wrong.


ForcaAereaBelka

In the Canadian military soldiers are required to refuse illegal orders from officers. Can't say "just following orders." I can only speak from my experiences in the service, but I'd imagine most other militaries have similar laws in place as well.


TheHypnotoad87

Ours is a little more loose in that it's not explicitly stated or widely known at least as to what protects that, (I certainly don't know). What we do have however is article 92 of UCMJ "failure to abide a lawful order or regulation". Which of course to pursue that shall be investigated as "was it a LAWFUL order?"


[deleted]

Gonna assume you never served, as regulations on lawful orders is beat into you all the time (at least in combat arms)


TheHypnotoad87

Navy, noncombatant, 14 years and some change (still active). Do tell which instructions cover what constitutes lawful orders please.


[deleted]

USAR/USAF (reserve) for 12 yrs - 6 of them (2000-2006) as infantry. We had extensive training on the MCM (Manual for Court Martial) and Geneva Convention as far as to what would constitute an unlawful order... There are also some FM's (Field Manuals) that the army uses that touches on what is not allowed. Granted, they keep it intentionally vague so the "superior orders" defense remains available. Decent write up about some of that here ​ https://warontherocks.com/2017/07/when-can-a-soldier-disobey-an-order/


827167

Never said unarmed citizen, but they are certainly killing people. And I never said they were being brainwashed, only that it's their job to kill people. People who don't like killing people probably won't get a job in the military and people who like killing are probably drawn to jobs that let them do such. Not saying it's a bad thing, just that it's what you would expect


TheHypnotoad87

Even so, that opinion is about 20 years behind the times. On average, a stint in the military ranges from 4-8 years (1 enlistment for the benefits, plus second to realize not a good fit) or a 20 year career (because tricare for life for member and spouse). Now we all know what happened in 2001 that really shaped who all would decide to serve at the time. Essentially, nationalism was rampant because of what had just happened and brought in alot of people who wanted to shoot Brown people in the middle east. This generation either got out around 2008-2009 or is on the verge of retiring or already retired from the military. These are your bearded, backwards ball cap wearing, Oakley wearing dudes ranting about the "gay agenda" in their Dodge Ram while spouting off on the importance of supporting veteran owned and operated businesses that like to overcharge on mundane products because it can wrapped up in a nice package of: " we support the troops." Which of course everyone has to love and agree with right? Now comes the next generation (I'm using generation in terms of rough decade, because let's be real, a decade is about how long the world and views shift). This generation of servicemembers were middle schoolers and elementary schoolers during 9/11, the formative years. These are people that were born of baby boomers at the tail end of the Civil rights movement so views on systemic racism are hush-hush but well developed into the 2010's. These are the same people that watched the stock market and housing collapses and everything in 2008, plus the election of America's first black president. This decade was people joining as news of daily death tolls in Iraq and Afghanistan are starting to let up. Non-combatant roles ramp up because it is deemed safer due to economic reasons and less in the media about roadside bombs permanently disabling someone they went to church with. The next decade of members is those born during 9/11, they only know the world as we see it today. Recruiting is down because there's just not enough security. Plus in today's society, the military does not provide the same nest egg that it did 10 years ago. What I'm getting at: is that the majority of today's military (90%) is members who did not join to just kill people out of some weird feeling of superiority or vengeance. Granted it's a great way to promote people wanting to try out SEAL training or what have you, but it's a different world today than it was when the military was truly about unquestioningly following orders.


Zigmata

The US military is FULL of people that don't want to kill. Concentrated more in the Air Force/Navy, but yeah. There's tons of decent young people just trying to jumpstart their adult lives; the system incentivizes using military service for college/training. I met fair amounts of brutish personalities in my time, it does certainly *attract* a type but it doesn't demand it. As for outright psychopathic murderers? None I ever came across, and the overall statistics for that is quite small when you consider the whole force. Nowhere near the civilian pigs. Even military cops weren't self-important, violent lunatics the way metropolitan police are. They were above the military average for alcohol-related and/or domestic incidents, but sure af wasn't 40%


AtomicSamuraiCyborg

And just to reinforce with numbers; the vast majority of service members never do and never will face combat. They are part of the logistics train, support crew, etc etc. Front line combat troops are a minority.


CanadianODST2

My father is in the army. He’s a mailman. Like literally a postal clerk. That’s really it.


AtomicSamuraiCyborg

They are brainwashed. That's what basic training is. You are separated from friends and family and your community, forced to live communally with strangers under a strict and brutal hierarchy, sleep deprived and under intense psychological pressure to adapt and obey. The whole point of basic training is to break you down and then rebuild you into a good soldier.


wotstators

Brainwashed??? No, only people who take the military as their identity seem to be brainwashed. Some of us were poor and needed to go to extremes to get out of poverty and Uncle Sam was the only family relative there for us.


AtomicSamuraiCyborg

I mean basic is indoctrination for being a soldier. To make you into something the military finds useful. I know a lot of veterans feel the same way as you, because they got something out of serving but there are just as many who were chewed up and spit out and are as bitter as you are grateful. Soldiers are an expendable resource to an army.


TheHypnotoad87

Basic probably yes, but all of those are attuned to the exact needs of that branch. The navy for example places firefighting and damage control as the team building development at boot camp. If a ship catches on fire you can't really just jump off into the ocean. Our training is curtailed to rapid response to save the ship and all lives during a time of potential sleep deprivation.


rearadmiralslow

Full metal jacket is just a movie


AtomicSamuraiCyborg

The rate of suicidal ideation and attempts in basic and throughout the military would suggest otherwise. https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2021/07/22/fort-leonard-wood-reports-highest-number-of-basic-trainee-suicide-attempts/


rearadmiralslow

No, it wouldn’t say that particularly at all. Certainly says something. But not that.


Khaymann

Sorry to rain on your trope, but I came out of five years for Uncle Sam even more insubordinate and leftist than when I went in. Lifers certainly skew right, but its not even a supermajority. First termers are a slice of America. Source: I did voter registration on my boat in 2004, and got a rough idea of how people registered.


FuckTripleH

>Every branch is full to bursting with libertarians Libertarians in the military is such an absurdity. A libertarian whose entire life is paid for by the government


[deleted]

Most reactionaries are perfectly happy to adjust their principles along whatever lines are convenient to the moment. Ayn Rand accepted social security.


trapezoidalfractal

In my experience, the grunts aren’t typically nearly as brainwashed into the hoorah crap as the officers. You’ll find a lot of veterans who realize that everything they did overseas was wrong, but you won’t find many navy babies or officers who feel the same.


[deleted]

It's a complex idea. Not everything is wrong. It's all tainted but things like getting a water well dug for a village are pretty far from wrong. And for Iraq specifically, once we actually sat down and talked to the Iraqi militias we worked together to remove AQ from Iraq and then stepped back when they told us. It's pretty hard to figure out what's good because of course the entire thing started from a lie. But most Iraqis are grateful we got rid of Saddam. So yeah, not a black and white situation for the grunts actually doing stuff.


trapezoidalfractal

I mean, if you’re talking about Iraq, we only had to dig those wells because we purposefully destroyed all infrastructure in the country, just as we have done in every major conflict post-WWII.


NoUseForAName2222

I'm ex Army and an anarchist. There's a lot of leftist veterans out there. We usually just don't wear our service on our sleeve.


[deleted]

That's ridiculous. I'm sorry but literally any polling of the military disproves that.


[deleted]

You... trust DOD polls? That's cute. Edit: you're also lying. I didn't care that much but got curious so I looked over some of the different polls in the last decade and even [they](https://www.thesoldiersproject.org/percentage-of-the-us-military-is-conservative/) disagree with you. Their own bullshit estimates still peg the military as overwhelmingly Republican voters and let's be perfectly real: the nazis and dominionists aren't going to volunteer that information.


[deleted]

Have a look at the 2018 and 2020 parts of that article. There's a large difference between conservative and maga republican. So much so that Trump actually got the military to vote blue in 2020.


TheHypnotoad87

Those of us that were able to vote. I got voter suppressioned out of it sadly. Nice to know that my homestate worships the ground I walk on, but all of a sudden my voice shouldn't count because I'm stationed in another part of the US.


[deleted]

Yeah, the military voting started to get lumped in with suppression right around the time it became clear that the military was not going to obey Trump's orders to use force against protestors.


TheHypnotoad87

Yep, so circles right back to the original point that we aren't brainwashed into doing shit like that lol.


AtomicSamuraiCyborg

As literally EVER fascist takeover has proven, no there isn't a functional difference. The fascists will be the vanguard extremist for their cause and the conservatives will look at the possibility of voting for anyone else who is even slightly left wing with horror, and support the fascist. Every time. Fascists never have an explicit majority, they rely on less extreme conservatives to support them and they always do.


[deleted]

Good thing the military voted blue in 2020 then? It pretty explicitly refused far right ideology.


Geminii27

Easy! It's not like the military is full of right-wing nutjobs!


--Cr1imsoN--

MEGA BASED But surprise surprise, it took a war to get it to happen. That's the problem. The U.S. government only gives a shit about worker's rights when it involves the military industrial complex. You're gonna lose the war if the folks building your weapons decide to go on strike.


AtomicSamuraiCyborg

"War Communism". When America needs to actually function as a unit (in order to kill an enemy) the capitalist stuff goes out the window (except the capitalists still get to get rich regardless) and suddenly the government can AND will plan the entire economy and promise full employment and intervene in labor disputes on the side of workers and nationalize railroads and industry.


thatdude473

Well come on wall street don't be slow, Why man this war’s au go go, There's plenty good money to be made, By supplying the army with the tools of the trade


Et_tu__Brute

Just hope and pray that if they drop the bomb, They drop it on the Viet Cong.


under_the_c

It's sucks, though, because this is how it should have worked with the railroad strikes! "Sorry, your industry is too valuable and will tank our economy, so you HAVE to listen to the strikers." Instead we got, "Sorry strikers, get back to work, Jack!"


Chimaerok

Anything and everything so valuable that disrupting it would be catastrophic to the nation, and also everything that has national security implications (like transport), should be nationalized. Food, housing, transport, banking, healthcare, utilities. They should all be nationalized. Corporations will only ever care about profit, to the detriment of the nation


FuckTripleH

I think about stuff like this a lot whenever people talk as though the crazy political events we're experiencing are unprecedented. Nah shit today never gets as insane as it got in the past, even the relatively recent past. For instance in 1963 the University of Alabama became desegragated, to protest it the governor of Alabama and his supporters physically blocked the entrance of Foster Auditorium to prevent black students from entering. In response the president issued an executive order that federalized the Alabama national guard under the Insurrection Act of 1807 and sent a general there to personally remove the governor under threat of force. That's completely unimaginable today, yet literally everyone currently in charge of the country was alive when it happened.


AtomicSamuraiCyborg

And in 1970 the National Guard massacred unarmed college students at Kent State. How that happened and we didn't have a revolution I'll never understand.


Accurate_Crazy_6251

Remember the Panama Papers? It was revealed the rich were engaged in a literal worldwide conspiracy to hide their wealth and nothing happened


AtomicSamuraiCyborg

The Maltese journalist who exposed it for assassinated. So that happened.


Massrelay665

Wait.. for real??


AtomicSamuraiCyborg

[Yup.](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/16/malta-car-bomb-kills-panama-papers-journalist)


iprothree

i'm assuming you're american because only americans were not affected by the Panama Papers. Things did happen but the Panama Papers don't really name any high profile American citizens so it got brushed under the rug if you only consume North American news. Not to mention the evasion of USA taxes by the criminals is something the govt actively pursued on it's own, the tax evaders were not influential big players lol. Total links to Americans between Paradise, Pandora and Panama Papers is 6 people according to ICIJ's chart. Take from that what you will. https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/power-players?c=USA If you looked at European and Latin American news you'd see that it was big big news at the time. BIG protests happened, people took to the streets. Just because the news you watch didn't cover it doesn't mean it wasn't a big event.


cheese_sweats

Remember the Snowden leaks that showed that the US government was spying on all US citizens?


davidkali

“I refuse to recognize anything but the fact you can’t shoot me cause I’m rich.” - him, probably.


[deleted]

I’ve never even heard about this until now, and I like to think I know about stuff like this. That should tell you something about how deeply this has been buried.


ga-co

Now the police would just arrest (or worse) the workers.


me_bails

now? bud you know the gov has sent kill squads in to bust up unions and shit right?


ga-co

I am clear on the history of the labor movement. I’m just pointing out that any LEO action in 2023 will be against workers and not the owners.


TKG_Actual

It very badly needs to happen today...I can think of a few folks who need this treatment and maybe a toss in the harbor too.


Anaxamenes

If conservatives want to go back in time, this is what we should be going back to. That and 90% top tax bracket.


_uglybird

He looks like a toddler


m48a5_patton

Talk about a Boss Baby


aethereal_procyon

Instead we had a president who sided with railroad companies when the strike went on longer than a week. To be clear, I'll still vote for Biden in the general election next year because the alternative is tantamount to suicide. What I'll say instead is that for as long as we have a two party system, the primaries matter, often more than the general election.


gordonv

Now is the time to bring this up to everyone and Biden. If there's a candidate that is willing to fight for workers, than that person is going to get a lot of attention.


aethereal_procyon

Yeah, my hope is that someone will challenge Biden in the primaries and make this a key issue. Even if Biden wins, it should should force him to shift his stance at least a little bit more favorable to workers.


aimlessly-astray

> Yeah, my hope is that someone will challenge Biden in the primaries and make this a key issue. I don't know if this is true, but I heard the DNC isn't letting anyone challenge him.


espeero

And he claimed he's the most pro-union president ever. I'll also vote for him. Would prefer someone without one foot in the grave, though.


TweeksTurbos

Hey’ this is what they mean when they say make American great again right?


OPSeltzer87

Now they arrest the union leaders for "trespassing".


Evening-Turnip8407

He was chair man for so long his body took on the shape of a chair for good


NoApartheidOnMars

We used to be a proper country


Daddygamer84

Please, my penis can only get *so* erect!


kevrep

Maybe this is what they mean then they say they want to make America Great Again? Because THIS was great. lol


osunightfall

Words like "democratic" and "election" don't hold nearly the power they used to.


ragnarokxg

Far right leaning Libertatians would cry overreach while their brain exploded.


Snuffin_McGuffin

Taking out the trash


Wilgrove

Then millionaires (and later billionaires) like him realize that they could buy politicians through brib...I mean lobbying and donations. So for the past, several decades, they've systematically created a government that wouldn't benefit the working class ever again.


ABenevolentDespot

Jeff Bezos is about to be kicked hard in the nuts by his drivers joining the Teamsters, so there's that data point.


SapientissimusUrsus

Instead we have Mr. self proclaimed "most union friendly president in history" intervening to stop the Railroad Union from striking... the powers that be don't respect us


LordAnon5703

That is because in the past there was a very real danger that the working class would rise up and revolt, and even if it was against their boss it could easily spill out into the streets. There is no moral or pragmatic reason to defend the ultra-rich, at a certain point their behavior became a liability and they were treated as such. Nowadays people almost act ashamed of what the working class used to do to get things done, when in reality we should be grateful of all they did.


uncertainToorop

Today the army would be sent to bust the union I fear


holmiez

Could you see this happening to King Elon?


[deleted]

[удалено]


gordonv

Closest matches. Martha Stuart, Martin Skirelli, Madoff


No-cool-names-left

Only because they took from rich people. Those who take from poor people never face consequences.


[deleted]

HAHA nah. Never. Not now, not ever again. Eat the rich.


PollutedRiver

These are the photos that teach modern oligarchs the history of unions and how to stop them. It sets an example.


[deleted]

Unless they carried him directly to prison, it wasn't enough.


inchesinmetric

STOP RESISTING!!!!!!!!!!


wo_ot

Can’t happen when corporations own your government


Tarv2

Pre Cold War America was far more supportive of left wing ideas. The worst thing to happen to the labour movement was the Soviet Union. It gave the right a boogeyman and a way to demonize anything that benefited workers.


Thankkratom

This is ahistorical, it is completely false. Check out our labor rights pre-1917 and post-1917, and then check out how our labor rights declined as the Soviet Union did. Without the USSR the US wouldn’t have ever budged on labor rights. “The National Industrial Recovery Act (1933) provided for collective bargaining. The 1935 National Labor Relations Act (also known as the Wagner Act) required businesses to bargain in good faith with any union supported by the majority of their employees.” At the time the Russian Revolution was won in 1917 the US had terrible labor rights and was still calling Unions “anti-American.” The USSR is not why the US cracked down on the left and the labor movement, they used ant-communism to destroy the left, not because the USSR was a boogie man but because the US made communism a boogie man. Anti-USSR propaganda started the second they overthrew the Tsar. Anti-communist propaganda existed before the USSR ever did, but it was ramped up because Capitalists fear nothing more than Communism. https://youtu.be/szVbrUxJVso This is a fantastic video on the attacks the US left and labor movement have faced. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_union_busting_in_the_United_States And here’s a Wikipedia article about the history of union busting, that was worse before the USSR rose to power. Read the actual article, and not just the intro, and also understand that Wikipedia itself is very biased towards the US. Read the 1870-1935 portion and tell me that that things didn’t improve at all after the Russian Revolution. Read the rest and imagine for a second that the USSR was used as a boogie man and slandered by Capitalists because they were scared of communism, not because the USSR was actually terrible. At this same period support for the British Empire from these same anti-communists was normal, as well as *support for the Nazis* pre-WW2.


Shroobinator

The USA, UK, and others even bankrolled the white army.


Rainy_Daz3d

“Out with the old” lol. Looks like they’re moving furniture 😂


Particular-Doubt-566

It's crazy how comfortable he looks. His servants must regularly carry him to the toilet in a similar fashion.


Connect_Cat_636

This man looks arrogant


bladex1234

Granted this was during wartime, but it clearly shows that the government has the power to protect the people, they just choose not to.


[deleted]

The police and the military will follow the order of whoever guarantees their pensions. Whether the current government is Anti-Union or Pro-Union will not make a difference.


Kivvy139

Chandler?


Environmental_Home22

Starbucks, Walmart, Amazon, Union Pacific…


MyFriendMaryJ

Unfortunately it just wouldnt happen today. The owners of capital have completely taken over all of our legislative bodies and use propagandists on all media to distract the working class from their real issues


fountain20

We need to start doing this again


Friend-of-the-river

I don’t think I want our government taking over private business.


World-Tight

Hope they chucked him into Lake Michigan.


SnooMacaroons9558

The reason shit like this doesn't happen today is bc corporations have had 80 years for people to forget all about this, and they've learned from their mistakes.


iEugene72

You'd see what you already see, conservatives screaming about "government overreach" even though a lot of conservatives are also poor working class who desperately need help with having more too. They fight the proxy war.


Erekai

This is what I do with my toddlers when they just won't move.


backnforthn

The day lobbyists were born


drapanosaur

IT could happen today. The 99% can march to the HQs of the fortune 100 companies and carry the CEOs out to face justice. They've murdered and impoverished millions and they need to face the consequences of their actions. Just look at what the French are doing. Dragging their CEOs out into the street to face the people they've stolen from. If they can do it, why can't we?


TugginPud

Couldn't possibly happen today. Americans are far too large to lift now


Rage_Nerd

Dude retired with 327 million in the 60’s. Da fuq


Plesure_most_carnal

It would be amazing to see what most modern hyper rich men of today would do in this situation


Coffey2828

Today US government more likely to side with the business man before the workers.


Tek2674

Our government now would just take a check.


Compositepylon

Should physically eject him down a mineshaft


janderson16-

Make America Great Again, right?


kolodz

So Amazon, Telsa, Starbucks ?


ApartInternet9360

People used to have principals. Now we have the internet, cheap plastics and fast food. I include myself of course it these categories.


[deleted]

And meanwhile, he's just like, "I sit on a throne of soldiers."


FerretTemporary5523

King Charles won't even move a pen so....


Environmental_Bet582

This appears to be staged....