Progressive Politics

4324 readers

283 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world

128

‘ICE Out!’ No Work, School, or Shopping on Jan. 23 in Minnesota (world-outlook.com)

submitted 1 month ago by pete_link@lemmy.ml to c/progressivepolitics@lemmy.world

10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/41890395

January 18, 2026

[contains 3 parts: an editorial by World-Outlook; an article from In These Times and Workday Magazine; and a press release from the Minneapolis Regional Federation of #Labor, AFL-CIO.]

MINNEAPOLIS — #Unions and community groups gathered in front of the Hennepin County Government Center in downtown Minneapolis, Minnesota, this morning to announce a day of “no work, no school, no shopping” on January 23 to oppose the ferocious assault on the state by federal #immigration authorities.

“We are facing a tsunami of hate from our own federal government,” Abdikarim Khasim, a Minnesota rideshare driver, told the crowd. “We’re going to shut it down on the 23rd. We’re going to overcome this.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[+] aaaa@piefed.world -16 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Do people expect this to make any difference?

Don't get me wrong, we need to take action, and a strike would do it (and be hard on the participants) . But a strike for one day? What would this do?

I'm supportive, but not particularly optimistic about this

[+] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[+] aaaa@piefed.world -6 points 1 month ago (3 children)

The money doesn't care till you fuck with the money, and this does in a way that they can't exactly lash out in retaliation.

This is true, but this doesn't fuck with the money. A one-day strike just moves the spending to a different adjacent day. People still need their food and stuff.

Data-wise, this would come up as a tiny blip in an otherwise unchanged pattern of spending. Easily rejected by most analysts as an outlier.

I guess I have more faith in a massive crowd demonstrating than I do in a one-day strike. At least one of them puts on a public spectacle

[–] osaerisxero@kbin.melroy.org 9 points 1 month ago

It's a warning shot fired at the money. If spending on that day drops 80%, it shows the money that the strike threat has teeth. It also puts that population on the street that day, and i would bet AFL-CIO in Minneapolis outnumbers the jackboots on the ground 10:1

[–] yonderbarn@lazysoci.al 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Sounds like you enjoy the politics of strongly worded letters then.

It might be a one day strike and then they do it again with an even bigger crowd spanning two days. Then the next time the crowd size doubles and it's a three day strike. Then...

[–] aaaa@piefed.world -3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Compared to "Fuck you, I'm not buying my groceries until tomorrow"?

Yeah, the words have more impact than that

[–] yonderbarn@lazysoci.al 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

See my edit

[–] yonderbarn@lazysoci.al 5 points 1 month ago

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/dec/25/protests-effective-history-impact

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

"Do Not Split"

Learned about it from this episode of the Team Human podcast

But what is happening in Hong Kong is they come up with a slogan, which is translated as Do Not Split, which is, we know that some people are willing to be confrontational with riot police.

And when they are, that's going to cost the state in terms of not only resources, but it's going to cost the state in terms of political capital and support. And we know that there are some people who are not willing to do that. And we are going to abide by the protocol of Do Not Split, which means that we're not going to criticize them openly, and they're not going to criticize us openly.

If we're the pacifists, we're not going to have them criticize us for being sort of like, I don't know, limpid or flaccid or not courageous or whatever. And we're not going to criticize them for being more confrontational. And the thing is that the support is also tacit.

It's not like they have to come out and tell the media, oh, we approve of our more sort of confrontational colleagues. They just keep quiet. They just keep quiet.

Understanding that a range of tactics is probably going to be necessary. Nobody really knows what's going to work. But if everybody's pushing back against a particularly violent state, then everybody's really on the same side.

[–] aaaa@piefed.world 1 points 1 month ago

I don't think it's inappropriate to discuss how effective a protest will be. If anything, it should inspire more ideas and action.

I already said I support doing something at all, but if you're saying we shouldn't try to make protests more effective, then you have lost me