| |
|
Basic claim: the driving force of the socialist movement in the 19th and 20th centuries was the possibility to control the means of production, mainly in a destructive fashion. This means that if the bosses refused to give you what you needed (later on: what you wanted) you would refuse to work the machines that produced. You would picket and threathen anyone else who did this. You would threathen to destroy or take control over the means of production, the great big machines. You lost some in the strike, but the bosses lost more, so you won and the bosses gave in.
This force of strikes (in conjunction with other developments) gave us todays workplace which is heavily into the service-industry, entertainment, communication, care. A strike in these fields hurts the customer, perhaps even more that they hurt the worker or the boss.
My question is: if you went on strike today, who would it affect? How?
If you striking has no negative effects on anyone, are you deprived of a power regarding your own labour conditions that workers had a hundred years ago?
If you striking has no effect, are there other ways you can attempt to change society? Are they better or worse than the strike as a tool for social change?
Me, if I did go on strike, nobody would notice. |
|
|
