I don't want one of these "precious lives" to just end up as some interchangeable cog of meat in an uncaring and unfair economic system that serves to exist the pleasures of billionaires, and nobody wants that, right?
So this is a very rough draft that I'm just spitting out here so please bear with me:
* Paying 100% of your employees well over the minimum wage (150% maybe?)
* Giving robust and generous benefits (Healthcare, vacation, sick leave, maternity leave, bereavement, tuition reimbursement, commuting reimbursement, etc.)
* Providing 100% of your employees with opportunities for growth in terms of wage, position, and personal development
Then you are simply not entitled to:
* Tax cuts
* Government contracts
* Non-compete clauses
* Putting up job ads in government job assistance portals
* And more
And we don't need to wait for a bill to pass, this doesn't need to be a far off dream, we don't need to say "But we don't have the votes", we can start on some of these things today.
Can I show you something?
This a job description that simply should not exist IMHO, it's down to half a dozen now, it used to be a hundred on any given day. You want to know the reason why it's down to half a dozen now?
So don't tell me there's nothing we can do, because that would be lying to my face and denying my personal experiences.
No more "cheap labor"
No more "unskilled labor"
I don't want to hear these things and "greatest economy", "billionaires", "superpower", etc. in the same sentence or in the same paragraph for that matter. I didn't want to hear it yesterday, not today, and definitely not tomorrow.
I'm done with these contradictions. You should be too.
compare that to what they said about the SCOTUS in the past...
Their respect for the judicial branch and proclaiming it to be a sacred institution is what we in sociology call an "invented tradition", I'm old enough to remember when the "other side of the aisle" considered them to be "nine black-robed tyrants", let's look at the footage, shall we?
James was among a chorus of far-right and Christian nationalist activists looking forward to using the SCOTUS decision to implement their theocratic agenda. Not satisfied with simply removing the right to abortion protected in Roe, theyre eager to pass a total abortion ban, dismantle the right to same-sex marriage, and institute their ultraconservative version of Christianity on others. They see an ally in the Supreme Court, and theres reason to believe that theyre right.
And conservatives in the past:
First of all, we have to understand how the Constitution works, the president is required to carry out the laws of the land, the laws of the land come from the legislative branch, Carson said. So if the legislative branch creates a law or changes a law, the executive branch has a responsibly to carry it out. It doesnt say they have the responsibility to carry out a judicial law.
The recent leak was an attempt to publicly intimidate justices and undermine the integrity of the Courtall while putting lives at risk, the main sponsor, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, said in a statement.
My bill holds leakers accountable and takes away any hopes of profiting off their crimes.
Marco Rubio, a co-sponsor, said: You shouldnt receive a badge of honor or financial reward for leaking confidential documents from one of our nations most sacred institutions - you should face serious penalties.
And conservatives in the past:
DeLay lamented that people dont understand the constitution. We havent taught our children now for three or four generations what the Constitution is, and the separation of powers, and what our Founding Fathers had in mind as this brilliant understanding of how you can limit government and limit the tyranny put on us through people or oligarchies.
Because of this supposed constitutional ignorance, DeLay claimed, right now, the American people dont understand that the Supreme Court, when it makes a ruling, its just an opinion if no one enforces that ruling. The Supreme Court doesnt have a police force; the Supreme Court doesnt have an army; the Supreme Court doesnt have people that can enforce their ruling. Therefore, if conservatives stand up to them and invoke the Constitution, then we dont have to accept a ruling on marriage that redefines marriage. And thats basically what this ad is all about. Were sending a message to the Supreme Court that, number one, its illegal that they have this case before them; its not in their jurisdiction.
Proving his Constitutional prowess, DeLay argued that its not in their authority to write law by ten unelected, unaccountable people, lawyers, and if this is a red line that were drawing. If they rule against marriage, we will all defy them.
And conservatives in the past:
Congress needs to resist this judicial activism. One way to constitutionally check the courts is with measures like the Pledge Protection Act sponsored by Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) and another way is Cong. John Hostettlers (R-IN) Public Expression of Religion Act (PERA). Finally, we can give a fair up or down vote to judicial nominees like William J. Haynes.
Now, even as the House vote on the anti-gay marriage amendment looks to fail, Human Events endorses a court-stripping bill to circumvent the Constitution on the issue of marriage:
Unfortunately, the (marriage) amendment failed in the Senate last month, receiving only 49 votes. It is also destined to fail in the House: In the last Congress, it received only 227 votes, more than 60 shy of the super-majority needed. But there is a way Congress can act this year to protect state marriage laws from activist liberal judges. Rep. John Hostettler (R.-Ind.) has proposed a bill that would strip all federal courts, including the Supreme Court, of jurisdiction to hear any challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
A story in 5 chapters:
I want the SCOTUS to have protection from the right-wing bent that Republicans have forced onto it and have made it a political court.
I don't think that is extremism to want the SCOTUS to have protection from the right-wing.
A Twitter TWTR, 0.33% thread about a woman who recently died at 39 from colorectal cancer has spotlighted awareness about the proper age to begin screening for the often-fatal disease. It has also raised questions about how seriously the medical system takes health concerns among women.
Caitlin Gibson, a reporter at the Washington Post, shared the story Monday about the woman, a friend of hers, on the social-media platform. The thread has since received thousands of retweets.
And those who have responded to Gibsons thread have shared stories of being misdiagnosed or ignored by doctors, only to face severe consequences, such as eventually finding out they had skin, breast or colon cancer.
After suffering from what she thought was a stroke, a Maple Ridge woman had to go through four years of tests and scans before being diagnosed with a disease that affects one per cent of the Canadian population.
Sonia Pereira was eventually diagnosed with celiac disease, a condition, according to the Canadian Celiac Association, where the absorptive surface of the small intestine is damaged by a substance called gluten.
Kim Grau was prescribed Xanax by a psychiatrist who thought her symptoms were due to anxiety and panic disorders. The real cause was much more serious.
But I'm sure this will never happen from the who people report on women for a 10,000 dollar bounty... or to the police for prosecution.
Too much effort, it's already over, don't try, blah, blah, blah.
So, in a US with AR-15-led carnage, the 5 of the SCOTUS losing their frickin' minds, and Republicans gaming the election process and the years 2020-2022 are just a road-bump to fascism, what are we supposed to do about it? Vote? OK, sure, but what else? What happens in the meantime, outside of November? What happens in the odd-numbered years?
Well, I've compiled a list from Gene Sharp's 198 nonviolent actions, of which doing the OPPOSITE requires effort, money, and energy.
Enjoy... and now nobody has an excuse.
Withdrawal and renunciation
Ostracism of persons
55. Social boycott
56. Selective social boycott
57. Lysistratic nonaction
Noncooperation with social events, customs, and institutions
61. Boycott of social affairs
64. Withdrawal from social institutions
Withdrawal from the social system
66. Total personal noncooperation
Action by consumers
71. Consumers boycott
72. Nonconsumption of boycotted goods
73. Policy of austerity
74. Rent withholding
76. National consumers boycott
77. International consumers boycott
Action by workers and producers
78. Workmens boycott
79. Producers boycott
Action by middlemen
80. Suppliers and handlers boycott
Action by holders of financial resources
87. Refusal to pay fees, dues, and assessments
88. Refusal to pay debts or interest
90. Revenue refusal
91. Refusal of a governments money
Action by owners and management
81. Traders boycott
82. Refusal to let or sell property
84. Refusal of industrial assistance
85. Merchants general strike
Combinations of strikes and economic closures
118. Hartal (total shutdown of workplaces, offices, shops, and courts of law)
119. Economic shutdown
Rejection of authority
120. Withholding or withdrawal of allegiance
121. Refusal of public support
Citizens alternatives to obedience
133. Reluctant and slow compliance
134. Nonobedience in absence of direct supervision
135. Popular nonobedience
136. Disguised disobedience
139. Noncooperation with conscription and deportation
Action by government personnel
142. Selective refusal of assistance by government aides
144. Stalling and obstruction
145. General administrative noncooperation
146. Judicial noncooperation
147. Deliberate inefficiency and selective noncooperation by
159. The fast
(a) Fast of moral pressure
(b) Hunger strike
182. Stay-in strike
And as long as Republicans are part of the two-party system and as long as "but we need 60 votes to do anything", then yes, I will say "government", thanks.
Starting to make me think though, there have to be other things they won't/can't stop that aren't carnage-based.
Like a movement to just stop paying medical bills or student loans for example? A movement against the very idea of cheap labor?
Maybe it's time to start treating the five of the SCOTUS, anti-choicers, the Republican Party, the "shall not be infringed" crowd, right-wing media, the Trump family, etc. as a regime of tyranny.
The things in this book could be applied to ANY government, but I've been told the game is over, Republicans have already won, the elections are rigged for Republicans, that nothing will work, why bother, why try, and that we're just a bump on the road to decline and fascism.
I, for one, refuse to believe that.
But we should have a backup plan if voting isn't enough, and the first ones espousing this should be the folks who think it's already over.
From Dictatorship to Democracy: A Conceptual Framework for Liberation:
A book that is banned in repressive regimes like Iran and Russia and its mere presence in someone's belongings is included as evidence that people planned violent uprisings despite the book stressing nonviolent solutions and rejecting violence.
This is from the section on "necessary sources of political power":
Authority, the belief among the people that the regime is legitimate, and that they have a moral duty to obey it;
Human resources, the number and importance of the persons and groups which are obeying, cooperating, or providing assistance to the rulers;
Skills and knowledge, needed by the regime to perform specific actions and supplied by the cooperating persons and groups;
Intangible factors, psychological and ideological factors that may induce people to obey and assist the rulers;
These groups rely on these same sources of power, no? They have the same potential weaknesses and they can be affected the same mechanisms of non-cooperation and defiance.
Time to start doing it.
Profile InformationMember since: Sat Mar 20, 2004, 10:37 AM
Number of posts: 34,680
- 2023 (19)
- 2022 (52)
- 2021 (43)
- 2020 (41)
- 2019 (80)
- 2018 (37)
- 2017 (53)
- 2016 (7)
- 2015 (3)
- 2014 (6)
- 2013 (17)
- 2012 (28)
- 2011 (2)
- December (2)