• Gorilladrums@lemmy.world
    0·
    10 months ago

    This won’t actually do anything.

    In order for a strike to be a strike, it need to be organized and it needs to achieve a specific goal. If there’s no demands then it’s not a strike, it’s a boycott or a walkout.

    Currently there is no movement, just a national level reaction. A movement requires leadership, a significant level of coordination and mobilization, very specific set of demands and goals, and an underlying message/philosophy that is backed by the general public. We currently have non of this.

    In order to get to the point of a national level general strike, there needs to be a series of much smaller strikes that do all of the above, and have those localized strikes merge with each other to eventually have the size to pull of a national strike.

    • blueryth@lemmy.world
      02·
      10 months ago

      You’re right. We should do nothing until a self-organizing, grassroots, independently funded organization gets enough signatures to get enough permits and consent to formally complain.

      You didn’t have to write anything. Instead, you argued semantics. Then you argued that progress needs to be made on your terms. (Also what is the difference between a national reaction and movement if not just time and effort? Most movements are reactions). This is exactly how you counter-message and push people away from the concept of activism.

      I do agree that effective long-term change likely comes through critical and organized methods. But that is not to dissuade anyone from participating in resistance or activism. Change is rarely graceful, and does not need to conform to anyone’s prescription.