Brad and the Future of Occupy Wall Street

A very dear person to me linked me to a post by The Infamous Brad. In this post he examines the history of political protests and what that history may show for the future of Occupy Wall Street. A lot of good points were raised about the differences between the protests that worked in the past and what the focus is of the current Occupy Wall Street protests. And while I readily acknowledge the validity of the points raised, I have to disagree with the overall sentiment that the Occupiers are going about things the wrong way and that they're going to fail because of it.

This conclusion is drawn from the history of the Wobblies, better known as the Industrial Workers of the World. The IWW was most active around the Industrial Revolution though they are still an organized active union. The way that the Wobblies got the right to strike was by busing around to protest sites and giving so many numbers to the protests there that the cops couldn't jail them all. Without dedication and sacrifice like that, the article says, OWS is going to fail. Unless all the protestors support the main OWS body in New York by donating time, money or more protestors and not being so spread out over the USA that the numbers are easily dealt with, OWS will fail. That is the part I disagree with.

The protests over in Greece started around the 5th of May in 2010 for many of the same reasons that OWS has sprung up and, to my surprise, they're still going on, over a year later. When I first heard about the riots, I supported them in their cause but beyond that, it was just something going on far, far away. When I hear about protests going on in New York, be it OWS or the various antiwar protests from Bush's era, I'd support them too, but it was still this far removed thing so none of it was actually real to me. Even when OWS protests sprung up in Boston and Philly, I was surprised, but it was still this thing happening in distant lands.

What changed that was when I found out that OWS had finally reached the bastion of conservative ideology known as Oklahoma City. Suddenly, the protests weren't some far removed thing in distant lands; they had landed right into my backyard. I got to see people so disgruntled, so upset with the status quo that they were going to camp out in protest through bitter cold nights, rain, hail and a very near miss with a Tornado cell-cloud. They want change that badly.

Something that wasn't around back in the days of the Industrial Revolution was, obviously, the internet. The internet is a wonderful thing and something we largely take for granted, as evidenced by the article Infamous Brad wrote. The internet makes instant, wireless communication possible; not just text and voice communication, but also images and video. Ever see a movie set in the '40's or '50's, a big news story would break and you'd see reporters beating each other with severed limbs to be the first into the row of phone booths to call their editor?

It's funny, but transported to the 2000's and those same reporters won't be clawing their way to the phone booths; they'll be on their laptops, iPhones or Blackberries to let their editor know the scoop, the only determining factor in how fast the story gets out is by who has the quickest fingers. But with the advent of social networking, such as Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Skype and whatever else you can think up, you won't even need reporters anymore. Anyone with a camera phone can break a story happening anywhere in the world. We now have phones with 12-megapixel digital cameras built into them. It is now within the power of every John Q out there to be the first to report a revolutionary protest or post topless photos of himself on Craigslist so his can cheat on his wife.

One of the ideas behind the Wobblies' strategy was to gain public awareness for their cause to bring about change. But while they had to rely on the good graces of the Old Media to get their message out to the masses, we now have the internet.

So far, instead of dwindling, we've seen OWS spread to Europe, the Tundra and Antarctica. There are stirs being felt in India and Putin has Russia scrambling to stave off protests there while China has put a gag order on it's media regarding OWS content.

I'm not sure how far OWS will go when all is said and done, but even if it does fade out, it will have made people and governments take notice that the status quo is on shaky ground. It has spread to levels the IWW of the Industrial Revolution could have only dreamed of and over a third of America supports them.

Unions and Why We Need Them

Trade Guild, Collective Bargaining Association; a Union by any other name. Whatever you want to call it, we still need them even in this day and age, regardless of what anyone says.

In 1970, President Richard Nixon signed the Occupational Safety and Health Act, which led to the formation of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). OSHA has been around for 41 years now and it was tasked with a simple premise; ensure health and safety rules are followed in the workplace. If businesses don't follow these rules, OSHA can seek criminal penalties against the CEO's. So how has this worked out? Frankly, it's laughable.

OSHA has come under considerable criticism for the ineffectiveness of its penalties, particularly its criminal penalties. OSHA is only able to pursue a criminal penalty when a willful violation of an OSHA standard results in the death of a worker. The maximum penalty is a misdemeanor with a maximum of 6-months in jail. In response to the criticism, OSHA, in conjunction with the Department of Justice, has pursued several high-profile criminal prosecutions for violations under the Act, and has announced a joint enforcement initiative between OSHA and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) which has the ability to issue much higher fines than OSHA. Meanwhile, Congressional Democrats, labor unions and community safety and health advocates are attempting to revise the OSH Act to make it a felony with much higher penalties to commit a willful violation that results in the death of a worker. Some local prosecutors are charging company executives with manslaughter and other felonies when criminal negligence leads to the death of a worker.

During its more than 30 years of existence, OSHA has secured only 12 criminal convictions.

Some people believe that OSHA's all we need to protect worker rights. Those people are dead wrong. Others think that Unions had a place back during the Industrial Revolution, but those times are behind us so Unions are obsolete/outdated. Those people aren't just wrong, they're dangerously wrong.

Corporations are not people; they do not learn from their mistakes or feel empathy for those they wronged. They are entities with one goal: Make More Money. That is it, all things are second to the pursuit of the Almighty Dollar and they are very often run by psychopaths. If you think Unions aren't needed and that corporations have empathy then ask yourself why Dead Peasant Insurance Policies exist.

In the corporate practice dubbed "Dead Peasants" life insurance, companies wager on employees' lives, expecting to make money when they die.

And it's pervasive, said Mike Myers, an attorney who has uncovered many of these cases and helped angry relatives sue.

"Life insurance is traditionally used to guard against the death of breadwinners. This is an investment scheme," he said.

Dozens of blue chip companies have these policies, according to Myers. But only banks are forced to reveal them, and several have billions of dollars worth of policies.

"The driving force behind it is the tax deductions," he said.

In the corporate practice dubbed "Dead Peasants" life insurance, companies wager on employees' lives, expecting to make money when they die.

The life insurance policies were designed to allow companies to insure a few crucial executives. Savvy companies then realized they could also get a tax break by insuring many lower-level employees.

The financial scheme doesn't actually cost the employees anything, except, some say, their trust.

Still don't think Unions are needed in this day and age? What is the differences between these photos:








And these pictures:









Any ideas? If you said "Time and distance" then you're right. If you said "The fact that we'd NEVER let that happen here in THIS day and age like it does overseas!" then congratulations; you're dangerously wrong.

Republicans are working to weaken or abolish child labor laws in at least two states, one of which is Missouri.

Cunningham views Missouri’s laws, which limit the number of hours young people can work and ban them from working past 9 p.m., as an intrusion on parent’s rights.

Actually, they are a help to parents. Without those restrictions, you have a scenario in which Susie, 13, is working at a sub shop. She has homework and she’s supposed to get off at 8 p.m., but the shift manager needs her to stay and close up because Fred didn’t show up for work. Susie calls her mom, who protests, but the boss is adamant and Susie really wants to keep her job so mom agrees, just this once. And pretty soon “just this once” becomes the routine.

I have watched this happen with a 16-year-old, and only the labor laws keep employers from demanding unreasonable service from the under-16 workforce.

Oh, but that Missouri loony's bill is just an isolated incident, isn't it? Haha, no.

Maine State Rep. David Burns is the latest of many Republican lawmakers concerned that employers aren’t allowed to do enough to exploit child workers:

LD 1346 suggests several significant changes to Maine’s child labor law, most notably a 180-day period during which workers under age 20 would earn $5.25 an hour.

The state’s current minimum wage is $7.50 an hour.

Rep. David Burns, R-Whiting, is sponsoring the bill, which also would eliminate the maximum number of hours a minor over 16 can work during school days.

Burns’ bill is particularly insidious, because it directly encourages employers to hire children or teenagers instead of adult workers. Because workers under 20 could be paid less than adults under this GOP proposal, minimum wage workers throughout Maine would likely receive a pink slip as their twentieth birthday present so that their boss could replace them with someone younger and cheaper.

And Burns is just one of many prominent Republicans who believe that America’s robust protections against the exploitation of children are wrongheaded:

• Maine State Sen. Debra Plowman (R) introduced a separate bill that would extend the number of hours employers can require a minor to work. Maine Gov. Paul LePage (R) backs this proposal.
• Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) delivered a lengthy lecture where he claimed that federal child labor laws violate the Constitution. His Republican colleagues in the Senate rewarded him with a seat on the Senate Judiciary Committee — the committee with jurisdiction over constitutional questions.
• Missouri State Sen. Jane Cunningham (R) introduced a bill which would “eliminate[] the prohibition on employment of children under age fourteen. Restrictions on the number of hours and restrictions on when a child may work during the day are also removed.”
• Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s (R) most recent brief attacking the Affordable Care Act relies heavily on a discredited Supreme Court decision striking down a federal child labor law that was overruled decades ago.
• Judges Roger Vinson and Henry Hudson, the two outlier judges who struck down the ACA, also relied heavily on this discredited anti-child labor decision in their decisions.

The only reason why these things are (mostly) in the past for the USA is because of strong Labor Unions fighting for better pay and conditions. You want to eliminate Unions? Don't be surprised to see rows of 12 year old kids working for below minimum wage in abhorrent environments.

Don't think it can happen in the USA? It can and it will without Unions.