For a general political sit-down wildcat STRIKE against the war!

REDWAVE

Urban Jungle Dweller
Joined
Aug 26, 2001
Posts
6,013
A U.S. attack on Iraq soon seems almost inevitable. The only question is when: will it occur before the upcoming elections, just after, or sometime next spring? Whenever it does come, the U.S. and international working classes should respond with a general, political, sit-down, wildcat STRIKE against the war. That is the most effective tactic available to the oppressed masses.

For those who may not understand all the terminology above, I will explain the terms used. A general strike is a strike of all the workers in a given locality, or at least enough of the key workers to effectively shut the system down. The power of the working class lies in the fact that collectively they produce all the world's goods and services. They provide the labor from which the capitalists derive obscene profits, and grow rich. By withholding their labor, they bring the capitalist system to a halt, and shut off the flow of profits.

A political strike is a strike which has objectives going beyond the narrow personal concerns of the strikers. Most strikes are economic strikes: workers striking for better wages and/or working conditions for themselves. A strike demanding an end to U.S. aggression against Iraq would be a political strike.

Sit-down strikes, or plant occupations, are the working class' most powerful weapon. There was a big wave of sit-down strikes in the U.S. in 1936-37, at the height of the Great Depression. Labor needs to rediscover this militant tactic, in which workers take over the workplace, kicking the managers out. This has two advantages over an ordinary strike: (1) it makes it impossible to continue the business with scab labor; (2) it makes the bosses and their flunky government more reluctant to use violence against the strikers. They don't mind killing workers, but they sure hate damaging all that valuable plant and equipment . . . Finally, a sit-down strike directly poses the question of who will rule, the bosses or the workers, and thus helps pave the way toward revolution.

A wildcat strike is one in which the union rank and file goes out on strike without being told to by the "leaders," the sell-out union bureaucracy. The radical tactics embraced here will never be agreed to by the labor fakers who run the unions today, whose real job is to betray their members and sacrifice them to the interests of capital.

The minute the U.S. dares to attack Iraq, the toiling and exploited masses should respond immediately with a general political sit-down wildcat strike against the war! Then onward to worldwide socialist revolution!
 
Last edited:
REDWAVE said:

The minute the U.S. dares to attack Iraq, the toiling and exploited masses should respond immediately with a general political sit-down wildcat strike against the war! Then onward to worldwide socialist revolution!

100 bucks and a blowjob from your sister says that don't happen.
 
Irrelevant

That's not the point, DCL. The point is raising the consciousness of the working class. Many Americans are not even aware of these militant labor tactics. If I succeed in influencing the thinking of just one person, then I will not have posted in vain.
 
I labor, though with a computer.

I support our military, our safety and security and prefer to work for political change within our free system of government. Why would I strike?
 
Re: Irrelevant

REDWAVE said:
That's not the point, DCL. The point is raising the consciousness of the working class. Many Americans are not even aware of these militant labor tactics. If I succeed in influencing the thinking of just one person, then I will not have posted in vain.

If you succeed in persuading "just one person" to strike, then you managed to get one of your precious "workers" fired.
 
Re: Re: For a general political sit-down wildcat STRIKE against the war!

Dixon Carter Lee said:


100 bucks and a blowjob from your sister says that don't happen.
I have to agree with that statement.....:D
 
Broke your promise!

You said you were going to put me on ignore, Roses. Obviously, you haven't done so! You just couldn't resist seeing what I had to say, could you?
 
REDWAVE said:
If I succeed in influencing the thinking of just one person, then I will not have posted in vain.

Then you are posting in vain. NOT that I don't have problems with Bush's position, or the U.S.'s agressive interntational policies, or understand Iraq's claim of sovereignty, or Palenstine's right to exist, or the media's inabilty to present a wide spectrum, or any of the hundred of worthy concerns you illumintate, but I swear to fucking God not you, Jesse Jackson, Ralph Nader, Jessie Ventura, Howard Stern, Woody Harrelson, Lennon or Lenin have a single workable, realistic solution that doesn't smell of either simple-minded platitudes about "getting along" or moldy socialist worker ideology that promises to spread wealth without having the first idea what wealth is.

By the way, did you know we now have a "Czar" on the board? He's posting decadent photos. Go kill him, and let's split up his thread amongst the proLITariates.

Red Party on.
 
Last edited:
Bullying McCarthyite

That's exactly the kind of bullying statement I'd expect from a vile McCarthyite witchhunter like Texan.
 
Be careful what you wish for, STG

Cool, STG-- that would mean I would take over Lit., lock out Laurel and Manu, and devote the site to revolutionary propaganda!

You fuckin' moron.
 
I should expect that if we launch a massive, surprise nuclear strike, the war would last about 15 minutes.

I can handle a strike that lasts that long.
 
Re: Broke your promise!

REDWAVE said:
You said you were going to put me on ignore, Roses. Obviously, you haven't done so! You just couldn't resist seeing what I had to say, could you?

It's a slow day.
 
Re: Bullying McCarthyite

REDWAVE said:
That's exactly the kind of bullying statement I'd expect from a vile McCarthyite witchhunter like Texan.

"yawn" REDWAVE...... are YOU going to strike???....

and a follow-up question..... do you work for a capitalist company or are you self-employeed or unemployed?

(I'm not asking for personal information. I just want to understand your level of hypocracy.)
 
DCL

You don't know that. You have no way of knowing that. Right now, someone may be reading my initial post, and the light bulb going on inside that person's head. "Ohhh! We DON'T have to live this way! We have a way to fight back!"

I've done this before, but you always weasel out. But I'll try one last time. What is your "realistic, workable solution"? Please tell us. You're supposed to be such a big intellect on the board. Don't just carp at me-- set forth a positive program of your own!
 
Back at ya

Texan, do you work for the CIA, the NSA, or the FBI?
 
Re: DCL

REDWAVE said:
You don't know that. You have no way of knowing that. Right now, someone may be reading my initial post, and the light bulb going on inside that person's head. "Ohhh! We DON'T have to live this way! We have a way to fight back!"

I've done this before, but you always weasel out. But I'll try one last time. What is your "realistic, workable solution"? Please tell us. You're supposed to be such a big intellect on the board. Don't just carp at me-- set forth a positive program of your own!
Realistic and workable to you or to the rest of us?
 
Re: Back at ya

REDWAVE said:
Texan, do you work for the CIA, the NSA, or the FBI?


If I worked for one of those agencies, I wouldn't be wasting time with a pissant little socialist propaganda regurgitater.
 
REDWAVE said:
Right now, someone may be reading my initial post, and the light bulb going on inside that person's head.

And then he reads the rest of the thread where everyone treats you like a retarded step-cousin and thinks, "maybe I need to rethink that position".

REDWAVE said:
I've done this before, but you always weasel out. But I'll try one last time. What is your "realistic, workable solution"?

LOL You keep thinking it's about the issues, and not about YOU. I can't seriously discuss anything with someone who 1) uses arguments I rejected in high school, like everyone else and 2) has no real interest in debating anything, and only wants a platform to piss agenda from.


REDWAVE said:
You're supposed to be such a big intellect on the board. Don't just carp at me-- set forth a positive program of your own!

I am, and I do. I run a media organization that forwards education. I have marched on the Capital steps for alternative media. My plays, which get produced, are chock full of anti-policy monologues and statements. When I come here it's to lighten up. It's a porn board, not a John Reed literary society. I don't care that you want to play with me. Please feel free to read that as "weasling out".

But, if you'd like it a nutshell, it's this...

I believe that if Bush decides to attack Iraq he should (and must) present an ironclad case to the world which includes irrefuatble proof that Hussein has been and still is producing weapons of mass destruction including nuclear aspirations. Russian has to be convinced. Jordan has to be convinced. The American people have to be convinced. I have no worries that Bush will not proceed without that level of support. At this point I am not convinced. I expect to be, but I'm not yet. And I do not see this war as inevitable. Your call to Revolution against the imperialistic blood-thirsty Bush off to kill Saddam because he's just a big baby who wants to is silly, trite, and alarmist in the extreme, and that's why you are regarded as silly, trite, and inconsequential in the extreme.

My solution is to continue to remove all ambiguity surrounding the U.S.'s intentions for Iraq and start the machinery for change within, which is what that godddamned silly "Axis of Evil" speech was about, inspired by the just as goofy "Evil Empire" speech of Reagan's which gave the moderates in the Soviet Union the unequivocable message that we have no intention of ever living with the communists in some sort of Portuguese/Spanish halving of the world, and that they had better think further along than another 5 year plan if they expect to survive in the 21st Century.

This is the Arab world we're dealing with. This is a culture which admires, respects and acts upon cermony and saber-rattling. If Bush were to shoot a rifle in the air he'd been in litigation for years for endangering the lives of people and spotted owls, Hussein does it and they make bubble-gum cards of the brave leader who scares away the Great Satan with his Boom-Boom stick. The Art of the Possible cannot compete with Bread and Circuses in the Middle East, and eliminating all ambiguity about policy is key.

And it's working. The day after that stupid "Axis of Evil" speech moderates in Iraq started doving the hardliners. Iraqi rebels have recently started saying that if the U.S. helps they will be a part of any invasion, something they didn't say even during the Gulf War. It was fully expected that Hussein would bring up the "possibility" of bringing back the U.N. inspectors as a delaying tactic, but it also brings the issue back to the international stage where the U.S. wanted it. Remove ambiguity about position, and the wheels of change start spinning, without one goddammned U.S. solider stepping foot into Iraq.

After removing ambiguity about position I'd allow the world some time to dialgue and get upset about U.S. agressiveness. I'd expect Saudi Arabia and Jordan to reassure their people that they will not help the U.S. attack Iraq (despite the fact that most of their citizens support the removal of Hussein via a limited incursion, which will come into play in the future). Let the world scream about the United States for a while, because when the screaming is done the inevitable "What if they're right" questions will begin to arise, and people will start to think of a Europe with a nuclear agreesor to the south, and they will see that that cannot be tolerated. Proof will be demanded. Suddenly the dialogue shifts from "America thinks it's the boss of everybody" to "Who the fuck says Iraq gets to have the bomb?"

As for actual invasion, I still don't think it's inevitable, if Hussein can be contained, which is entirely possible. If the current tension, brought about by lack of ambiguity reargding our policy, continues to put pressure on the Iraqi hardliners and continues to foster international support for the moderates, then you will see a return of inspections, less No Fly Zone attacks, a greater policing of the food for oil program, and the continued containment of Hussein's aspirations for middle east leadership via expansion.

I predicted months ago that all the policies Bush has forwarded eight months ago would be challenged and tested by the checks and balances in our system, and they are. Congress is demanding more information on war plans. The people are demanding proof of Iraq's threat. And everyone from the ACLU to Joe the Bartender is questioning the powers of the Patriot Act.

Checks and balances, built into the political system, built into the economic system, built into the culture, with the ability to be tested and improved before being abolished, is why the Republic works. Socialism doesn't have checks and balances, it has policy, which is power unchecked, and that's why it's been abandoned by any decent political scientist over the age of 19.

There's more, but I have to go post something smart ass on the Porn Czar's thread.
 
Last edited:
Nice pics

I checked out the Porn Czar's thread. Looking at those pictures is unquestionably more pleasant than thinking about the deaths of huge numbers of people.
:(

I don't agree with your analysis, DCL, but I appreciate your proposing a constructive alternative here. It's a big step forward from your usual sniping.
:D
 
REDWAVE said:
I checked out the Porn Czar's thread. Looking at those pictures is unquestionably more pleasant than thinking about the deaths of huge numbers of people.

Agreed.

REDWAVE said:
I don't agree with your analysis, DCL, but I appreciate your proposing a constructive alternative here. It's a big step forward from your usual sniping.

If you continue to cry "Fire!" in an igloo and spray new car smell on Marx, expect more sniping.
 
Fire in an igloo?

Well, that's an interesting image. I prefer to think of what I'm doing as providing the tiny spark which will eventually ignite an enormous powder keg.

Metaphorically speaking, of course.
 
Back
Top