What do you think a national strike would accomplish? Who are you negotiating with? What are your demands? How are you going to convince the half of the country that elected Trump that striking is in their best interest?
Agreed, you don’t solve a problem with a strike without enumerating your revendications and objectives, there has to be a goal to meet. Otherwise you just get an angry mob that throws oil on the dumpster fire.
Those really ought to be simple questions to answer, whether you deem me worthy or not (whatever the fuck that means). Any successful movement should be able to answer them in just a few words. It took you more time to be dismissive and snarky than it would have to simply answer them. If you could, you wouldn’t need a civics lesson.
You are not an ally. It was obvious from the get go. Your, stupid, plan is to fustrate and exhaust anyone you disagree with. I cant stand this way of being. See you later.
How can I disagree with you when you cannot articulate what you want or how you’re going to get it? You can’t have allies if you don’t have a goal. And if you bothered to check my comment history here or on any social media site, you’d know where I stand on pretty much any issue. But go ahead and enjoy your tantrum. The world is a mess, and I won’t begrudge anyone a coping mechanism.
You didn’t ask because you presumed to know, and decided to dismiss my very basic and straightforward questions because you decided that I’m your enemy. If you feel “confronted” with questions like, “what do you hope to achieve?” and, “how will you know when you have achieved it?” then I suppose it’s a good thing you’d rather run from a discussion than engage in it. Imagine what would happen if I had actually disagreed with your cause.
At no point did you here me out. Even now you ignore my main contention. The problem with answering those questions in good faith is I will give people operating in bad faith an attack vector when the answer to those questions are entirely inconsequential. No one post will start the revolution. No one person will change the hearts and minds of people, like yourself, that need to be convinced. The only people I find interesting are people ready to act and if you could look beyond your own keyboard you could see it’s written in the very definition of the word strike - “to take a course” - GO.
I’m not here to get your mind right. It’s an impossible task. I need you to self identify so I can block your ass and be done with your type once and for all.
Ah, you seem to think people asking questions is some sort of opposition. You also seem to think that we should be onboard with your ideas (without you sharing details) otherwise we are stupid and holding you and progress back somehow.
You’re asking the wrong questions. You need to ask, “how am I going to mobilize the populace.” It’s so fucking obvious you have to be here in bad faith.
You want a strike? Let’s hear your plan to convince the 50% of people who have the government and conditions they want.
Edit: it’s so clear you’re stirring the pot as you point the finger at us because we want to know the answer to a question that is a major issue for your desire.
The major issue isn’t trump supporters. The major issue is people like yourself who are so far up their own ass they can’t see that economic unrest pierces all political classes.
There you go, making assumptions. We aren’t against the idea of a strike if it could be done effectively. Which requires the*** VAST MAJORITY*** of a population. So what’s your plan to get, say 35%, of those who voted for Drumpf to join the cause? Because the major issue to getting a nationwide strike to be effective is having a majority of the population on side.
If you have any idea about it why aren’t you “yes anding” me and instead forcing me to ad hoc a bunch of policy disallowing any organic conversation which helps grow support. This is all bad faith bullshit.
So what’s your plan? IS “yes anding”. We are asking what your ideas are about having the strike, while addressing specific concerns that we see as hurdles. What we are looking for is a new idea to deal with these specific problems. Do you have any new ideas to get these people onboard with something that is currently in opposition to their stated desires? Don’t be swinging on those who you seek to ally with.
What do you think a national strike would accomplish? Who are you negotiating with? What are your demands? How are you going to convince the half of the country that elected Trump that striking is in their best interest?
Agreed, you don’t solve a problem with a strike without enumerating your revendications and objectives, there has to be a goal to meet. Otherwise you just get an angry mob that throws oil on the dumpster fire.
That’s why the Occupy Wall Street movement fizzled out. That, and some good ol’ fascism.
What’s stopping you from enumerating your personal revendications?
You don’t really care about any of these questions, do you? You think you’re going to teach me a civics lesson, don’t you?
I’ll hold my tongue, but it’s more than you deserve.
Those really ought to be simple questions to answer, whether you deem me worthy or not (whatever the fuck that means). Any successful movement should be able to answer them in just a few words. It took you more time to be dismissive and snarky than it would have to simply answer them. If you could, you wouldn’t need a civics lesson.
You are not an ally. It was obvious from the get go. Your, stupid, plan is to fustrate and exhaust anyone you disagree with. I cant stand this way of being. See you later.
An ally for WHAT?
My ally you dip shit.
Doing great so far, finding allies.
You managed to even bring a thread full of Trump-hating Lemmy users up against you.
I don’t assume anything about lemmy dipshits. They successfully put the Harris campaigns dick in the dirt for 100 days doing the same shit you are.
How can I disagree with you when you cannot articulate what you want or how you’re going to get it? You can’t have allies if you don’t have a goal. And if you bothered to check my comment history here or on any social media site, you’d know where I stand on pretty much any issue. But go ahead and enjoy your tantrum. The world is a mess, and I won’t begrudge anyone a coping mechanism.
I didn’t ask for your stance on any issue. I’m not concerned in the least about you. You confronted me.
You didn’t ask because you presumed to know, and decided to dismiss my very basic and straightforward questions because you decided that I’m your enemy. If you feel “confronted” with questions like, “what do you hope to achieve?” and, “how will you know when you have achieved it?” then I suppose it’s a good thing you’d rather run from a discussion than engage in it. Imagine what would happen if I had actually disagreed with your cause.
At no point did you here me out. Even now you ignore my main contention. The problem with answering those questions in good faith is I will give people operating in bad faith an attack vector when the answer to those questions are entirely inconsequential. No one post will start the revolution. No one person will change the hearts and minds of people, like yourself, that need to be convinced. The only people I find interesting are people ready to act and if you could look beyond your own keyboard you could see it’s written in the very definition of the word strike - “to take a course” - GO.
I’m not here to get your mind right. It’s an impossible task. I need you to self identify so I can block your ass and be done with your type once and for all.
And you aren’t the only person who has ideas.
Sorry, did my idea prohibit yours? I’m so ashamed.
Ah, you seem to think people asking questions is some sort of opposition. You also seem to think that we should be onboard with your ideas (without you sharing details) otherwise we are stupid and holding you and progress back somehow.
I see bad faith actors as bad faith actors.
You put forth an idea, people asked for your opinion on an issue to achieve your goal, now you are calling us bad faith actors. Grow the fuck up.
No, these are vaild questions. How are you going to mobilise the American populace when about half of them like Drumpf?
You’re asking the wrong questions. You need to ask, “how am I going to mobilize the populace.” It’s so fucking obvious you have to be here in bad faith.
Mobilize in which direction?
You still haven’t answered what your goal would even be. When would you end the strike again? When you’ve achieved what?
Mobilize in which direction? How does that even make sense? What is the other direction?
You want a strike? Let’s hear your plan to convince the 50% of people who have the government and conditions they want.
Edit: it’s so clear you’re stirring the pot as you point the finger at us because we want to know the answer to a question that is a major issue for your desire.
The major issue isn’t trump supporters. The major issue is people like yourself who are so far up their own ass they can’t see that economic unrest pierces all political classes.
Also, you would rather do nothing instead.
There you go, making assumptions. We aren’t against the idea of a strike if it could be done effectively. Which requires the*** VAST MAJORITY*** of a population. So what’s your plan to get, say 35%, of those who voted for Drumpf to join the cause? Because the major issue to getting a nationwide strike to be effective is having a majority of the population on side.
If you have any idea about it why aren’t you “yes anding” me and instead forcing me to ad hoc a bunch of policy disallowing any organic conversation which helps grow support. This is all bad faith bullshit.
So what’s your plan? IS “yes anding”. We are asking what your ideas are about having the strike, while addressing specific concerns that we see as hurdles. What we are looking for is a new idea to deal with these specific problems. Do you have any new ideas to get these people onboard with something that is currently in opposition to their stated desires? Don’t be swinging on those who you seek to ally with.