Old Fucking Punk @lwriemen@librem.one

Want To Build the Labor Movement? Get a Job at a Union Workplace.

Only workers themselves have the power to transform society, and workers must organize themselves to do so. Union staff and elected leadership can play important and sometimes pivotal roles, but in the fight against capital to win substantive, lasting gains, workers must be in the driver’s seat.

When workers are sidelined, at best we get staff-driven mobilizing, which Jane McAlevey describes as “dedicated activists who show up over and over … but [lack] the full mass of their coworkers or community behind them.” With an organized rank-and-file base, by contrast, ordinary workers themselves are the change agents, deeply involved in developing an analysis of what’s wrong in the workplace and a strategy for how to fight the boss (and, ultimately, capitalism). Their power comes from building majorities large enough to leverage militant action. Wins are less likely to be rolled back when a majority puts its own sweat into the process and stands ready to defend its gains.

The widespread teachers’ strikes of 2018 and 2019 and the Chicago Teachers Union strike of 2012 illuminate the potential power of worker-led organizing, as they were primarily led and initiated by rank-and-file union members.

This deep organizing, however, does not yet exist in most industries. To build it, unionists and labor movement activists can look to the “rank-and-file strategy” (RFS). The phrase was coined by Kim Moody in 2000 but takes inspiration from 20th-century labor upheavals like those led by the Minnesota Teamsters in the 1930s and black workers at a Chrysler assembly plant in Detroit in the 1970s, when radical unionists and socialists were at the heart of big gains.

What socialist rank-and-file activists such as Moody identified was a gulf between the Left and the organized working class, developed under McCarthyism. The class character of this gulf—with leftists more often in the middle class and disconnected from the day-to-day struggles of the working class—has weakened the Left and the labor movement.

When class conflict and labor struggles arise, as they inevitably do under capitalism, they can expose underlying capitalist ideology—an opportunity for people in these struggles to actively raise working-class consciousness. RFS proponents have sought to close the Left-labor gulf by building a layer of workplace organizers—including socialists joining the labor movement and respected workplace leaders of all political persuasions—to heighten class conflict and develop this consciousness.

Part of the answer to overcoming the inertia that ails the labor movement may lie in a new, young and energetic Left—which already shows signs of being closer to the broader working class than other recent generations of leftists. However, this Left remains largely divorced from the organized working class, where RFS suggests young leftists would best be able to exercise real power alongside coworkers. (While young workers are fast joining unions, 2017 data shows only 7.7% of workers between the ages 16 and 34 were union members.)

Evidence suggests that young leftists are already playing key roles in labor struggles that produce wins and raise class consciousness. As Eric Blanc notes, “Though few in number, young socialists inspired by the Bernie Sanders campaign played an outsized role [in the teachers’ strikes].”

But radical unionists acting by themselves aren’t enough to win.

At the core of any success are rank-and-file leaders, the ones coworkers respect and come to for advice. What’s necessary is a mix, working in coordination: organic, workplace leaders—able to move coworkers and fellow union members to action—and socialists, who can bring a broader analysis and organizing experience, and who are sometimes workplace leaders themselves. This layer of activists and rank-and-file leaders is sometimes called the “militant minority.”

The militant minority organizes and wins campaigns around workplace issues to grow its ranks and raise class consciousness through these practical struggles, and it fights for the demands of the broader working class by creating an ever-larger group of worker-organizers with a shared vision of class-struggle unionism.

The militant minority seeks to build supermajorities in the workplace. And supermajorities are necessary to raise class consciousness, fight capital, strike and win.

For alternate perspectives on the rank-and-file strategy, see "90% of Workers Aren't in a Union. Labor's Future Depends on Them." and "Labor Needs To Embrace Social Justice Unionism."

90% of Workers Aren’t in a Union. Labor’s Future Depends on Them.

My comrade Laura Gabby says that “supermajorities are necessary to raise class consciousness, fight capital, strike and win,” and I agree. But we diverge on how to get there.

She and other rank-and-file strategy (RFS) supporters suggest realigning internal union politics from the inside out through a “militant minority.” As Kim Moody argues in his seminal pamphlet about RFS, unions have to “take a central role … by virtue of their size and their place at the heart of capitalist accumulation.”But, in practice, attempts at union realignment through RFS have mixed results, while most workers remain without a union. What’s needed, instead, is a broad “yes, and” approach with an emphasis on new organizing.

Many unionists were first exposed to RFS in August through a series of unfortunate articles in Politico and the New York Times, detailing activities from the Labor Branch of New York City’s chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America. (Laura is a member.) These DSAers called for socialists to get union jobs in specific “strategic industries” to form a “militant minority” and change unions internally. This strategy was reiterated in the national RFS DSA resolution and in a pamphlet, put out by Young Democratic Socialists of America and Democratic Socialist Labor Commission, titled, “Why Socialists Should Become Teachers.”

While the news articles unfairly portray RFS as a devious plot, they highlight real failures in political strategy. NYC-DSA is, anecdotally, disproportionately white; the optics aren’t good for them to take over unions with membership that is mostly people of color.

Organic worker-leaders built our movement; if socialists want to lead, they must become organic leaders, not tack themselves on like some gaudy ideological accessory. Laura says organic leaders and socialists must work together, but the problem remains: The union realignment strategy treats union members as constituencies to be managed, rather than organic partners. 

The strategy also leads to a militant minority divorced from the larger union, leaving the efforts of RFS reform caucuses decidedly mixed. While the rank-and-file caucus in the Chicago Teachers Union has seen success, New York’s Movement of Rank and File Educators (MORE) has seen less. MORE is a favorite of NYC-DSA Labor Branch members, yet its vote share in the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) presidential election dropped from roughly 10,000 in 2016 to less than 2,500 in 2019, and the incumbent UFT Unity Caucus captured all 102 seats on the executive board.

If leftists want to transform the labor movement, there’s a much easier route: Unionize the unorganized. Surveys show that at least 48% of workers would like a union, but 90% do not have one. Unions enjoy high levels of public support, and millennials are joining in disproportionately large numbers.There is no better time for the Left to organize new unions or add new bargaining units. Leftists should focus on developing organizing committees before a union steps in, ensuring unions will actually commit resources to finish the job and that the workers joining do so on their own terms.

A partnership between the progressive International Longshore and Warehouse Workers (ILWU) and DSA San Francisco shows how this organizing can be done. DSA members spent months with Anchor Brewing workers developing the organizing committee, researching unions and writing the campaign plan, and only then reached out to the ILWU, chosen because of its democratic practices and militant politics. Together, they won.

As Moody himself admits, the conservative craft unionism of the Teamsters, for example, only changed because leftists organized huge swathes of new workers. These leftists weren’t outsiders, but organized their neighbors and coworkers. As the Anchor group put it, “We can’t be outsiders helping the labor movement; we have to be organic partners.”

The nature of new organizing reveals why this works: Because workers must take huge risks to form unions, newly organized unionists are likely to be active, politically astute and militant. The bonds forged in this struggle, between leftists and their coworkers, build the relationships necessary to transform the labor movement.

If we want to change the labor movement, our goal shouldn’t be internal realignment, but new unions for the 90%.

For alternate perspectives on the rank-and-file strategy, see "Want To Build the Labor Movement? Get a Job at a Union Workplace." and "Labor Needs To Embrace Social Justice Unionism."

Put on a Happy Face

Facebook has a PR problem. Enter: FACEBOOK.

Started generating little QR code stickers for my 3D prints, which connects them to a database with all kinds of metadata: the printer it was printed on, the filament that was used, as well as the specific print settings. May even add the actual gcode eventually.

#3dprinting

The Buck Staps Here

Don Jr. says the Democrats are using “Gestapo tactics.”

Opt-out by default would be huge:

"Under the terms of the OPA, individuals would have the right to obtain, correct, and delete data collected about them by covered entities, as well as to request "a human review" of automated decisions. Users would also have to opt-in to having their personal data used for training machine learning algorithms." https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/11/new-bill-would-create-digital-privacy-agency-to-enforce-privacy-rights/

#IFS: #UK's #richest people exploiting #loophole to cut #tax rate | #Business | The Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/nov/05/thousands-of-uks-richest-people-exploiting-loophole-to-cut-tax-rate

#TaxAvoidance

The Climate Strikers Walked Out of School. Next, Let’s Walk Off the Job.

This September, the world erupted when over 7 million people — young and old—poured into the streets for the Global Climate Strike. The mass action, which made a Green New Deal a top demand, was sparked in the lead-up to Sweden’s 2018 general election, when teen activist Greta Thunberg began ditching school to protest Sweden’s inaction on climate change. Greta, who was already inspiring more student strikes through social media, catalyzed the Fridays for Future movement when she decided to continue striking on Fridays after the general election. Over the past year, young leaders —particularly youth of color—have been on the forefront of building Friday Climate Strikes into a worldwide student civil disobedience movement, taking aim at the political failure to address the climate emergency.

What we can learn from Indigenous land management

First Nations peoples' world view and connection to Country provide a rich source of knowledge and innovations for better land and water management policies when Indigenous decision-making is enacted, Australian researchers say. Incorporating the spirit and principles of Aboriginal people's appreciation and deep understanding of the landscape and its features has been overlooked or sidelined in the past - to the detriment of the environment, the report says.

Fish oil supplements have no effect on anxiety and depression

Omega-3 fats have little or no effect on anxiety and depression according to new research. Increased consumption of omega-3 fats is widely promoted globally because of a common belief that it will protect against, or even reverse, conditions such as anxiety and depression. But a systematic review finds that omega-3 supplements offer no benefit.

In Bad Faith

AG Barr recently gave a fiery speech blasting the non-religious.

Walled Off

Smugglers are sawing through the border wall but officials say it's not an issue.

Impeachment Talk

Who even understands this impeachment stuff?

Beast version 0.15.0 is released.

#Beast is an LGPLv2+ music synthesizer and composer (#DAW), for #Linux.
This release supports Jack as PCM driver and the experimental Ebeast frontened got many style updates, play position pointers and supports the Space key.

Full news:
https://beast.testbit.org/#news
#linuxaudio

Adhesive which debonds in magnetic field could reduce landfill waste

Researchers have developed a glue which can unstick when placed in a magnetic field, meaning products otherwise destined for landfill, could now be dismantled and recycled at the end of their life.

How Ranked Choice Voting Could Make the 2020 Election More Democratic

In September, Rep. Jamie Raskin introduced the Ranked Choice Voting Act in Congress. If adopted, the legislation would mandate the use of ranked choice voting (RCV) for House and Senate elections. 

The bill doesn’t currently have the votes to pass through the House, but the lack of establishment support obscures an exciting truth: Outside the beltway, RCV is on a track to becoming the next major widespread democracy reform. And, ahead of the 2020 elections, reformers have an unprecedented opportunity to take this formerly fringe idea mainstream.

RCV allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference on the ballot. If no candidate receives a majority of first place votes, the last place vote-getter is eliminated and their voters are reallocated according to second place preferences. This process continues until one candidate surpasses 50%. 

RCV better guarantees that every vote counts, eliminates the “spoiler” effect that occurs when third party candidates run for office, and ensures that, in a crowded field, no one wins with merely a fraction of the vote. It also decreases negative campaigning.

The road to mainstream appeal begins in New York. Tomorrow—Tuesday, November 5th—New York City will vote on a ballot initiative to bring RCV to primary and special municipal elections. 

According to data provided to In These Times by electoral reform group FairVote, over 4 million Americans currently live in a jurisdiction that uses or will use ranked choice voting. A victory in NYC—a city with over 8 million residents—would triple that number. It would also expose the reform to the many journalists and pundits who live in the city, which could better prime them to cover it moving forward. 

Widespread competency in reporting about RCV will become critical. Following the NYC ballot initiative, up to five Democratic presidential caucuses—Nevada, Alaska, Hawaii, Kansas and Wyoming—will likely use RCV to determine convention delegate allocation. (In the presidential primary, votes would be re-allocated until all remaining candidates garner above the delegate threshold set by a political party.)  

Though not all voters in these states would use an RCV ballot in 2020 (Nevada intends to restrict RCV to those who vote early), seamless implementation will greatly increase familiarity with the reform. After its first usage in Maine last year, almost three quarters of the electorate found the process relatively easy to navigate. All the while, media coverage will educate those out-of-state.

While the state Democratic parties have approved the use of RCV in these states, there is still some uncertainty about where it will ultimately be implemented. The Democratic National Committee (DNC) has yet to give final approval to each plan.

“Iowa and Nevada had proposed allowing virtual caucuses via the telephone. The proposal raised security concerns about hacking and the DNC rejected it,” FairVote CEO Rob Richie said to In These Times. “Nevada Democrats, though, still plan to have early voting with what amounts to ranked choice ballots. We expect the party to accept this new plan

The DNC has recently approved RCV in Hawaii and Kansas, which are moving forward on plans to hold vote-by-mail primaries and use a traditional RCV tally in each congressional district. According to Richie, Wyoming and Alaska Democrats have formally notified the DNC of their intent to use RCV in a similar way and expect approval for use in 2020. And because of the use of vote-by-mail, FairVote’s Richie also projects caucus participation will greatly exceed that of 2016, which he says saw approximately 175,000 caucus-goers.

If the DNC and state parties work together to ensure the usage of RCV in these caucuses, it would ensure a more democratic allocation of delegates—after all, the DNC requires candidates to surpass 15% of the vote to receive any delegates, inevitably leading to many wasted votes in a crowded field. 

Accompanying efforts to reform the primary, a handful of presidential candidates—Bernie Sanders, Andrew Yang, Tulsi Gabbard, Bill Weld, Michael Bennet and Marianne Williamson—have gone on record supporting RCV. By doing so, these politicians have signaled to their millions of supporters that the reform is worth pursuing.

In August, Maine Gov. Janet Mills allowed a presidential election ranked choice voting bill to become law without her signature, delaying its implementation until mid-2020. This precludes the adoption of RCV in the upcoming presidential primary, but permits it in the general election. As a result, the 2020 election will mark the first time in U.S. history a state will use RCV to elect the president. 

This—in addition to the 2018 Maine law requiring RCV for federal elections, including for Sen. Susan Collins’ contested re-election race—will generate historic attention for the reform.

Election day 2020 may also see two ballot initiatives to adopt RCV statewide in Massachusetts and Alaska. The Attorney General in Massachusetts has certified the language of the RCV initiative, and Bay Staters are now collecting signatures to qualify for the ballot.

The effort in Alaska has been delayed, as Lieutenant Governor Kevin Meyer rejected the campaign’s proposed initiative on the grounds that it violated the state’s single issue requirement for initiatives (RCV was included alongside other democracy reforms in their proposed ballot language). Nevertheless, a Superior Court Judge ruled that signature gathering can begin. The state is expected to appeal this ruling to the Alaskan Supreme Court.

In both Alaska and Massachusetts, should they make it to the ballot, advocates’ biggest obstacle is the lack of popular knowledge about RCV. But with New York City, potentially five caucus states, and Maine using the reform in high-profile contests over the next 12 months—and presidential candidates endorsing it—momentum is on their side. 

By 2021, if reformers hit their mark, approximately 20 million Americans could live in a jurisdiction that uses some form of RCV. Millions more will have been exposed to the reform through the presidential election. All of this, in turn, would lay the groundwork for future state-based mobilizations to advance RCV in states such as Colorado, New Hampshire, Connecticut and Vermont where activists are currently building campaigns, as well as for federal legislation. 

Ranked choice voting is not the panacea to our democracy crisis. And state-based reform has its limits—federal reform is needed to bring our democracy into the 21st century. But ranked choice voting will undoubtedly solve many of the undemocratic tendencies rooted in our current electoral system.

The path towards a better democracy is now open. The only question is if we will take it.