So sad seeing people hurt others who’re just trying to get their fair share and make a slightly better life for themselves and their family
propaganda is a hell of a drug.
Again with the motherfucking passive voice! Yet again, car violence gets minimized by the piece of shit headline writers.
No, strikers were not “hit by vehicle,” you sniveling sorry excuse for a “journalist!” A driver propelled his two-ton piece of heavy machinery into them. Quit minimizing the perpetrator’s agency just because he used a car as his attempted-murder weapon!
I am sick and tired of this car-supremacist propaganda.
deleted by creator
Hit and run too.
You just know this asshole was driving a car manufactured by UAW members.
Don’t forget that we have 8 hour workdays, weekends off, payed time off and other benefits all thanks to union efforts. All of them we take granted for. They were not granted because of the kindness of employers.
And for a view into what jobs could look like without unions “interfering” with the owners’ wishes, look at the
. That factory had long hours, horrible working conditions, doors locked to prevent workers from leaving (the owners claimed it was to keep employees from stealing scraps of fabric), and more. When a fire broke out, nobody could open the doors to escape and close to 150 workers died. Many fell to their deaths because they got to high windows and jumped out - hoping to survive the fall rather than be burned alive.
Several likely knew it would kill them and took the quick death. I know I would… I don’t care if it would take several minutes or 10 seconds to kill me, fuck that I ain’t burning alive.
The shirtwaist factory incident definitely needs to be taught from like third grade onwards as an example of why unionization and labor laws are in fact necessary in a capitalist society.
The jury acquitted the two men of first- and second-degree manslaughter, but they were found liable of wrongful death during a subsequent civil suit in 1913 in which plaintiffs were awarded compensation in the amount of $75 per deceased victim. The insurance company paid Blanck and Harris about $60,000 more than the reported losses, or about $400 per casualty.
Jesus fucking Christ not only did they get off, they ended up making money off the whole thing. It really feels like not much has changed in 112 years
And $75 in 1913 is the equivalent of $2,325.95 today. Imagine if a factory was wildly unsafe, caused the deaths of a hundred workers, and then the courts said “their lives are only worth about $2,300 each.” There would be marches like crazy and calls to hold the owners liable for much, much more.
*paid, since it sounds like you speak American English
They’ll be back, and they’ll be arrested.
deleted by creator
Several injured after UAW strikers hit by vehicleMotorist hit-and-run striking workers with vehicle, causing injuriesfixed it
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
I think they should block more roads
Effective protests are disruptive.
Removed by mod
BLM did not just loot Philly you fucking liar. I know because I live around there and I’ve been reading about the story you’re referring to all day. Fuck off with that bullshit, the cops themselves say that the looting was by opportunists that were unconnected to the peaceful protests that were going on the same night.
Block early, block often.
Leave the disinfo peddlers, bigots, and trumpers with no one but each other to talk to.
No. Report them constantly, shit all over them and the mods that allow them. It’s wayyyyy past time that conservatives are just straight up excluded from common spaces. Admins and mods that allow right wingers to congregate are complicit.
OK, I can get behind that also.
It may not have been BLM specifically but the pattern and motives are exactly the same. I’m not the only person making that connection.
LOL ANDY NGO??? That’s your rebuttal??? HAHAHAHHAHAHAHA
What fucking racist publication told you it was BLM, and why did you believe it so readily even though it doesn’t make any sense?
Do you understand hiw picket lines and striking work or are you just missing the fundamental knowledge base?
Do you understand that breaking the law while protesting could be more detrimental to the people that are protesting for better pay and a better life?
I’m not defending the corporations in any fashion. I’m simply noting that it could risk their numbers in doing so.
Edit: added a missing “s”
Depends on the law.
In other countries hitting someone in a vehicle is considered assault regardless of the circumstances and is enforced as such.
I would condemn the driver, the one with the responsibility to drive a tonne of steel around safely, over the pedestrian being an nucence(?) on the road.
If the law is the other way around. The law needs to be changed.
I absolutely feel the drivers actions should be condemned, as it is surely illegal for him to do what he did. However the people blocking the road are also very likely doing something illegal as well.
The situation here is just like reddit. People are justifying one group doing something illegal, while condemning the other person.
Yes, one is much worse than the other, but the world isn’t black and white. People fail to understand that at the most basic level. Commiting a crime that ends in you getting hurt often times means you have no recorse.
What if the people that got hit, have no protection because they were blocking the road?
The guy goes to jail and they are SOL. Now, not only are they out of the protest to fight for basic human rights that we should all have, they are in the hospital, making no money, with even more bills stacking up, and potentially (it doesn’t seem like it in this case but it’s not impossible) looking at charges.
Justifying something that is deemed illegal is how laws change.
It is true that the world isn’t in black and white. But laws are and we must respond in kind.
If it isn’t justified, you should be able to come up with a rational argument against me, of which I’m amicable. The argument being about the driver having more responsibility.
To me, a person in a lesser position of control of a situation should be given more leeway in terms of outcomes. This is because with control comes responsibility and failure of that responsibility comes justice.
You would have to argue that the driver had less control over this situation.
I agree with your first point on how laws change. Why should we justify blocking traffic though?
The protest is about corporations giving people peanuts while the investors and C level employees take in millions. Not the ability to stand in the way of oncoming traffic. Those are two very different things.
The driver is absolutely responsible for his actions, but a group of people intentionally placing themselves in a road, be it entry/exit or just a main road are also partly responsible for their actions that led to their injuries. They know and understand what they are doing.
Hundreds or thousands of people walking out of these factories effectively stopping production speaks volumes, and definitely has an effect. Why tarnish that effect by acting irrationally and taking yourself out of the fight because you want to stand in the road?
This isn’t a single person with less control of a situation. This is a group of organized protesters trying to send a message, and knowingly obstructing traffic when the walk out itself is more effective.
I 100% support the UAW but I can’t openly justify either party doing what they did, the driver who is absolutely more responsible nor the protesters that were knowingly putting themselves in a position to get physically hurt. It does nothing aside from potentially hurt your message when you do that.
We are not going through a civil war, we are not at the point of people fighting with their lives (yet) over the necessity of basic survival. Both parties were wrong in this situation.
It sounds like we agree on principle.
The difference is you’re actively trying to both sides it.
To me, there is a substantial difference in optics and consequence between hitting someone in a car and standing on a road.
The latter is barely worth talking about when the former is the topic of discussion, especially when the justification seems to be - they were in the way.
Oh my fuck, blocking an exit to a property with a bunch of scabs working on it is not equivalent to blocking a major highway where the closest exit is to the only hospital in the area. You are absolutely defending the corps when you continue to make the style of arguments you make. Get real.
Doesn’t matter if it’s a main road or an exit to done. It is still likely illegal.
You are confusing my logic in thinking that these UAW protesters should be protecting themselves with your logic of thinking I’m defending the corporations.
Fuck off. Your inconvenience is not worth more than their livelihoods.
And you are putting words in my mouth.
I never said it was an inconvenience.
The UAW protesters should be protecting themselves. They are already putting themselves on the line with the protest. They shouldn’t put themselves in more danger just so they can be taken out of the fight.
Try to think rationally, educate yourself on the real world and how it works.
You are taking out of both sides of your mouth. “They didn’t have been run over but they had it coming!”
More putting words in my mouth.
Good job.
Explain yourself differently then?
And before you say “JuSt UndErsTand bEtteR” “it’s nOt my fAuLt they aRe dUmB” consider who’s the one making a case here and who’s responsibility it is to speak your own points clearly as possible.
I’m fucking awful at wording how I feel sometimes about a viewpoint I have, but just giving up on conveying what you’re trying to get at…. I mean what’s even the point in speaking your mind in the first place then you know? Obviously the way you worded it wasn’t clear enough to convey what you mean, just try again.
BOTH ARE WRONG, BOTH ARE TO BLAME.
Don’t stand in front of oncoming cars if you don’t want to get hit. Don’t be a dick and run people over.
Is that simple enough for you?
Or is reading comprehension not your strong point?
Edit: I apologize for that last line but It’s quite frustrating trying to express a valid and correct point accurately and concisely while consistently being shit on and insulted. Even after going back and reading the several different comments I made, it is pretty clear what I have been saying. Both parties are at fault. I don’t see how it could be misinterpreted to me just straight up blaming the protestors.
while consistently being shit on and insulted.
I suppose it makes sense that you’re less likely to listen to people if you feel like you are being shit on and insulted.
Is that simple enough for you?
Or is reading comprehension not your strong point?
…
Maybe if you weren’t shitting on and insulting people they wouldn’t come at you with a similar attitude.
Learn how to control your outbursts and your life will be infinitely easier my friend. I’m right there with you, look at my post history too.
You’ll catch more flies with honey than vinegar. There’s all kinds of gadfly’s swarming about on this platform, keep in mind you might appear like one to others. Everyone should be ignoring them or calmly and concisely squashing them anyway. Don’t wanna get squirshed _
Be well
Where are you getting this presupposition that striking means putting oneself in danger?
What real world factor involves this bizarre assumption?
Removed by mod
Oh god won’t someone think of the mildly inconvenienced?
If this isn’t an okay reason to run someone down, why even bring it up in this context, fuckwit?
You should try using your education (if you have one) to think out a reasonable thought process like I did rather than just hurling insults that show ignorance.
Commit a crime, get injured in the process of said crime, have no recorse because you were in the wrong also.
Now you’re out of the protest, in the hospital, more bills stacking up, with the potential for facing criminal charges (not saying that part is or would happen but it’s not impossible) when all you had to do was stay out of the way of traffic.
One is much worse than the other. However you should use rational thoughts to understand how the world works before just randomly throwing insults.
Wow that’s so convenient that your opinions are always reasonable and well thought out and those of your ideological opponents are always unhinged and ignorant
Fuck off bootlicking corpo fucker
Wow,
You are really showing a lack of intelligence. I never said anything about being unhinged. You are definitely showing your ignorance and lack of mental stability though.
Please go see a doctor before you actually hurt yourself or someone else.
Ill join you on the downvote boat. Protest all you want, but they were blocking a exit, not an entrance. They were not blocking people from working, they were blocking them from going home. Protests should not impede traffic.
“Protest all you want, just don’t do anything effective.” Gotcha.
The refrain of piece of shit pearl-clutching reactionaries everywhere.
Protest without civil disruption is impossible. There’s many many examples of this throughout history. I wish it weren’t necessary, because yes I know things have become so bad under the current capitalistic economy that even a few hours or a day can make/break livelihoods, but it is necessary if we as a society want to have any hope of reclaiming power from our corporate and governmental overlords. They’re simply too entrenched and empowered in comparison to those they abuse at this point to fight with mere words alone.
What other kinds of people do you believe you have a right to hit with your car?
At least it’s your average frustrated person trying to get though and not a terrorist?
If you think that running people over is a valid response to a minor inconvenience, you might be a terrorist.
No, they’re not. Quit watering down what terrorism means.
Terrorism is someone who specifically is trying to kill, maim, destroy, or significantly hurt people due to very narrow ideologies which are usually VERY political now.
Running people over because you can’t get to work isn’t one of them. That is attempted manslaughter if you hurt them bad enough, not a fucking terrorist.
Either you guys know way more about the incident than I do since you’re close to the police and already know it’s a Trumper who hates strikes and thought they were all gay black democrats, who potentially showed up specifically to hurt these people, or it was some asshole trying to get to work and got so manic he decided it’s better to maim or kill people than to get to work.
THEY, ARE NOT, THE SAME.
Crossing a picket line is an inherently political act. Terrorism is the use of violence for political ends. Connect the fucking dots.
How do you know why they were run over when the person who did it hasn’t been caught?
Exactly. Thank you.
I am fully willing to change my thought on the matter at the drop of a hat with new information. But the way the article reads is VERY different from every terrorist car attack we’ve seen in the USA in previous years.
The strikers were blocking an exit to the processing center on West Bristol Road, Bade said, when the incident took place.
The driver, who drove off after the incident, has not been located, Bade said.
UAW Region 1-D President Steve Dawes told MLive-The Flint Journal that the vehicle involved in the incident was dark in color, possibly an HHR or PT Cruiser.
He added that two of the five people hit were taken to a local hospital.
“It was uncalled for,” Dawes said. “These people are out here, you know these are my membership, and they’re out here doing a peaceful, legal demonstration.
“This is very serious and we’re going to be pushing this issue.”
Who are they? Op meant you. They’re referencing your validation of terrorizing striking workers from exercising their constitutional rights. You’re validating it by minimizing its importance.
and already know it’s a Trumper who hates strikes and thought they were all gay black democrats
I mean, this is entirely plausible.
Yep, and yet the article says nothing close to it, and is described the same way every frustrated person dealing with blocked roads does when they panic and flee and eventually get hit with significant battery or accidental manslaughter charges. Unless their car started to get beat on and they tried breaking in, in which case, it ends up being self defense. Isn’t that how the charges against the dude who ran down a bunch of motorcyclicsts got free? He had his whole family with him too though iirc. I think it was this? but I swear it was denser and more in a city.
I had no point other than the actual words I wrote, FYI.
Where are you getting your definition? I would like to be able to compare them.
I get frustrated by average things, like the kids not closing cupboard doors or leaving their stuff everywhere. I have yet to run over anyone due to these average frustrations.
The person at the UAW picket was not dealing with average frustrations, they were a terrorist.
https://kbin.social/m/news@lemmy.world/t/492456/Several-injured-after-UAW-strikers-hit-by-vehicle#entry-comment-2620907
Terrorist? Really? That word has just lost all meaning huh
I dunno, the OED definition is: “a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.” The Unlawful violence was the act of running people over, they’re car factory workers, so non military, ergo civilians, and they did it to against people expressing their opinion, which could be argued to be political as it regards the politics of CEOs compensation and the growing inequality of the world.
So yeah, terrorist.
He’s talking about the secret meaning where conservative politics aren’t politics so conservative terrorists can’t be terrorists.
Jesus Christ. I often wonder why I’m still on Lemmy when I hear nonsense like this.
It’s not an airport, you don’t need to announce your departure
They’re just kids. Kids are stupid sometimes.
Lol don’t hurt yourself with that stretch
deleted by creator
Which is not even close to “one driver was incredibly frustrated at the people blocking him from going home”
