Musk’s X revokes paid blue check from United Auto Workers after strike called
arstechnica.com
After a report called out Musk's union-busting, UAW's blue check got reinstated.

X revokes paid blue check from United Auto Workers after strike called::After a report called out Musk’s union-busting, UAW’s blue check got reinstated.

    • NotOverSeether@lemmy.worldEnglish
      24·
      1 year ago

      lol, literally schizo posting.

      This article was updated to include information about a Twitter policy to temporarily remove checkmarks from verified accounts that change their profile pictures.

        • aidan@lemmy.worldEnglish
          29·
          1 year ago

          Only after elected they absorb the union into the state. Before elections the Nazis backed many of the unions.

          • orrk@lemmy.worldEnglish
            7·
            1 year ago

            well no, the Nazis paid lip service to “workers” in general but literally got into bloody (as in armed paramilitary) conflicts with unions (Iron Front vs. SA) for years before the complete takeover of the government, after the takeover of the government almost all union organizers got sent to the concentration camps as political prisoners because “they were all Marxists”, the Nazis then replaced the unions with the German Labor Front (DAF), an organization that existed to keep the worker in his place, going as far as to literally take money from the workers to pay for building new production lines.

            so, no, they did not absorb the unions, and they definitely didn’t back the unions, unless you call strike-breaking with a machine gun “backing”

            • aidan@lemmy.worldEnglish
              12·
              1 year ago

              Yes, they had a ton of conflict with the more liberal unions, but they also organized Nazi aligned unions. They were not very successful at recruiting members to them but they tried to. Also, occasionally they cooperated with communist unions.

              the Nazis then replaced the unions with the German Labor Front (DAF)

              Yes, absorption? As in unions used to be allowed to exist as independent entities, then workers were forced to join the state “union”

              unless you call strike-breaking with a machine gun “backing”

              Source on Nazi strike breaking before 1932/3?

            • aidan@lemmy.worldEnglish
              15·
              1 year ago

              No? I don’t generally agree with how a lot of people group the right, the Nazis were a lot closer to the Soviets than they were capitalists. Furthermore, I didn’t say they were pro every Union, I said they supported unions that supported them.

          • teuast@lemmy.caEnglish
            21·
            1 year ago

            This is blatantly ahistorical and you’d almost have to deliberately keep yourself ignorant to think this.

            • aidan@lemmy.worldEnglish
              13·
              1 year ago

              The KPD leadership initially first criticised but then supported the 1931 Prussian Landtag referendum, an unsuccessful attempt launched by the far-right Stahlhelm to bring down the social democrat state government of Prussia by means of a plebiscite; the KPD referred to the SA as “working people’s comrades” during this campaign.

              In November 1932, the KPD and the Nazis worked together in the Berlin transport workers’ strike.

              They had an entire organization for infiltrating unions to try to get support

              The NSBO had overall little success among German organized workers, except in certain regions where they supported strikes, such as the 1932 Berlin transport strike.

              Almost like exactly what I said.

              • teuast@lemmy.caEnglish
                11·
                1 year ago

                My guy, your source proves my point, not yours, even by your own summary of it. If you were capable of feeling ashamed of yourself, now would be a great time to do so.

        • orangebussycat@lemmy.worldEnglish
          19·
          1 year ago

          No, it’s part of the capitalist agenda and its a good thing. If you don’t want to do your job then quit. That goes for cops, UAW workers, teachers, and more.

          • teuast@lemmy.caEnglish
            5·
            1 year ago

            Union-busting is absolutely part of the fascist agenda.

            No, it’s part of the capitalist agenda

            That’s what they just said.

            and its a good thing.

            If you’re an obscenely wealthy ghoul who profits off the suffering of everyone who has less money than you, then yes. In all other cases, absolutely the fuck not.

            If you don’t want to do your job then quit. That goes for cops, UAW workers, teachers, and more.

            So you’d be happy if all the cops, auto workers, teachers, nurses, firefighters, etc. quit? You’d rather have massive and continuous societal upheaval than workers collectively bargaining for the right to make a decent living doing their jobs? I’d rather have a functioning society, personally, and that’s why I support unions and you should too.

              • teuast@lemmy.caEnglish
                1·
                1 year ago

                Then why does a Big Mac cost almost the same at a unionized McDonald’s in Denmark as it does at a non-unionized one in Tennessee? I mean, I guess anything is possible when you just lie, but a lot of things become a lot clearer once you acknowledge reality.

        • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafeEnglish
          262·
          1 year ago

          Like, unironically. Fascists are extremely anti-union.

          There’s obviously a lot more to it, and this is a relatively minor example even after Elon made paid accounts have more visibility, but this is very much one of their things.

          • aidan@lemmy.worldEnglish
            46·
            1 year ago

            The Nazis and Soviets did the same thing about unions. Picked unions that had a lot of their backers in them and backed those, then once elected they created state ran unions and banned all others.

            • orrk@lemmy.worldEnglish
              4·
              1 year ago

              for the fascist please refer to my previous comment, for the Communists, the Bolsheviks didn’t have much to do with the small and numerous Russian unions (Russia had a very beurocratically decentralized industry at that point in time) and later fought against them as they mostly joined the white Russian faction (the bolsheviks being backed by the Entente), and ironically the term Tankie comes from an event where the soviet unions crushed mainly union uprisings against the soviets in Hungary, with tanks, because the soviets also couldn’t stand unions (like ever fascist ever)

              please stop repeating American Cold War era misinformation.

              • aidan@lemmy.worldEnglish
                13·
                1 year ago

                the Bolsheviks didn’t have much to do with the small and numerous Russian unions (Russia had a very beurocratically decentralized industry at that point in time) and later fought against them as they mostly joined the white Russian faction

                Source for this? Everything I find contradicts that, but most of those are Marxist sources.

                the bolsheviks being backed by the Entente

                You mean central powers

                and ironically the term Tankie comes from an event where the soviet unions crushed mainly union uprisings against the soviets in Hungary

                I clearly stated they opposed unions not reporting to the state. Also the Hungarian revolution was a bit more than a strike. Both the Nazis and the Soviets constructed unions that were organs of the state.