Dimmer06

Imo it's a marginally better system in the abstract but if it or any sort of electoral reform was dropped on the US tomorrow it wouldn't help. Elections are superstructural elements and don't alter the economic/legal relations between classes. We see plenty of parliamentary systems that permit unpopular governments, party duopolies, etc. The bourgeois state, and its elections, are not for working people and their other instruments like the media enforce that as well.

Check your local laws. In a lot of places infestations are the responsibility of the landlord and if you want it dealt with you might not be on the hook.

The enemy are cruel and unrepentant murderers and we must bring them down by any means because this is war but also it's bad to kill them and if they are killed it signals a dark turn for the character.

My friend at work got a new job. I'm happy for her but she's the last of a group of people I really vibed with and now I'm scared I'm going to be alone. This keeps happening with coworkers and I think I'm realizing that's just how life works but I've had lot of those moments lately and it's not fun.

Blowback is the best resource for the answer to this question but in short

1. Kuwait was purposely overproducing oil to undermine the Iraqi economy. The Kuwaiti contribution to the war effort ended up costing about $32 billion USD, Iraq had only requested renumeration of $10 billion prior to the invasion. The conflict was never about money or democracy it was about destroying Iraq.

2. The US government turned Iraq into the state it was in support of them during the Iran-Iraq conflict (including making it the fourth largest military in the world in 1990), and US diplomats expressed at minimum that they had no position on inter-Arab conflict (many have interpreted US statements as tacit endorsement of the Iraqi invasion).

3. The US invasion was in defense of an autocratic petro-state to prevent an emerging successful Arab Republic and to keep most of the Middle East crushed under the boot of imperialism. The bloodshed (including numerous war crimes) and subsequent sanctions that occurred due to US intervention were far worse than anything that might have happened had they not intervend. Furthermore the American public was extensively lied to about the invasion, such as the Kuwaiti ambassador's daughter's lie that she told under oath before Congress that she had witnessed Iraqi soldiers killing babies in incubators. While the lies alone don't justify Iraq's invasion, it should raise the question why Americans had to be lied to in order to gain their support. All the lies about democracy and freedom fall hilariously flat faced when you remember Kuwait is literally a brutal autocratic monarchy.

In all reality it probably isn't even true either. When Trump took office membership and activity of left wing organizations exploded. It was so much easier to organize people into a state of rebellion when they couldn't pretend things were fine under Trump than it has been under Biden.

Funny, my Democratic governor has been the primary roadblock to indigenous sovereignty in my state and continues to fuck them over at every turn she gets. I'm sure they're glad she's there thinking of them though.

I got in two fist fights when I was in elementary school provoked by this kid that had a lot of issues. The other kid ended up getting the worst of it in both fights but even when it happened I kinda felt bad for him because he obviously wasn't okay mentally and I didn't enjoy hitting him. I don't remember how my parents handled it but I would like to imagine they demanded a safe environment for me and an effort to address this other kid's problems rather than just worrying about me and demonizing him.

Teach your child how and when to fight, when to flee, and when to talk to an authority, because those are important lessons to learn and they'll probably need all of them one day, but dont be afraid to request the necessary care for this other kid either. Maybe the kid just needs to be talked to or maybe they need a serious intervention but either way it's gonna be more likely to happen if you ask for it than if you don't.

The conflict between the media and the Democratic party is one in which the Democrats have to overstate the actual effects of the policies they want to implement to appeal to the masses while the media doesn't want the masses to get too hopeful about things like price controls or abolishing student debt because then the people might start to demand things.

Actually it's kind of an apt comparison. They just don't realize that Lincoln was never really anti-slavery and was only really forced into that position because the Republicans in the Northern states demanded it.

While I think the members of Red Star mean well and their faction generally has good positions, I've gotta push back on the idea that they've significantly pushed DSA's international work broadly or their anti-zionist work specifically in a better direction. The recent gutting of the anti-zionist resolution by the NPC and the retraction of the statements on the Venezuelan election and the Israeli assassination in Iran show that at the highest level DSA is firmly in control of chauvinist social democrats on these issues (I had to scoff when I heard of the "left" NPC getting elected last year, as if Bread and Roses are left lol)

Furthermore, DSA's position on the presidential election has always been firmly invested in working within the Democratic party as seen by their focus on the "uncommitted" movement and their recent statement about Harris picking Walz as her VP. They still hide in their dirty break/party surrogate position which functionally ends up the same as the CP's line.

There are a lot of good people in DSA and I learned a lot when I was a member but the organization is fundamentally repelled by any sort of discipline and the social fascists on it's right wing maintain their power through that disorder and have demonstated that they do not care if their opportunism harms the organization or anyone else for that matter. Changing it into something viable would take an immense amount of work that would be sabotaged by SMC/Groundwork/B&R every step of the way, or you could just join an actual Leninist org.

Sounds like the UFCW won't step in to help on that front unless the union is voted on? Should we just find a labor lawyer instead? Or is this just a risk we have to take once we start advocating in the open?

UFCW would most likely help you file ULP charges and navigate that process before an election (especially if you had already signed a card) but American labor law is basically pointless and you'd still be out of a job until you could prove to the board that you were fired for protected activity which can take months or even years if you can prove it at all whether or not you have a large union helping you. Also usually labor lawyers offer services cheaply or freely to working people. Sometimes UFCW will hire workers that get fired but from what I've heard working for UFCW is horrific so not sure I would recommend.

If you have a worker center or maybe a labor education center near you they might be able to help guide you and put you in touch with a lawyer.

As for organizing independently you're going to be doing the same thing for the most part that you would with a large union (assuming you work through the NLRB). Build a committee, map the store, get people to sign cards, petition the NLRB, win an election, and negotiate a contract. I think you'd need to have some sort of charter and officers at some point and if you're handling more than a few hundred dollars as the union you'll need to incorporate as a 501c(5) but those things aren't as complex as they might seem.