Hey, how is Sweden doing? Right, worker’s rights are in free-fall, the “socialist” welfare is getting torn to shreds, healthcare getting dismantled and more expensive. And just as capitalism starts to retract, fascism starts to go into rise, and pretty fast too!
And how did Europe initially get stronger worker protections than even china? By voting in Democratic Socialists who made coalitions with social democrats and Christian centrists. No revolution no autocrat.
Sadly the gains and welfare improvements moved enough boomers into retirement growth mentality. The trigger for capital to centralise and maintain through media ownership further increased by the smartphone.
Not quite accurate. Those protections were concessions given to blunt the momentum of the Soviets and to keep the homebase of Europeans happy while they looted the global south. Effectively paying a slight portion of the loot to pacify possible unrest. In effect the autocracy was there simply offshored onto the global south, now that the global south is liberating itself and the contradictions of capital are heightening the autocracy is returning home to Europe as the bourgeoisie needs to tighten the belt at home to make up for it.
I’m responding to European countries initial worker protections that you mentioned. These weren’t received from voting but given as concessions in the face of the socialist block to keep stability at home for a tiny fraction of the imperial and colonial loot.
“Comité van Actie tegen het Arbeidscontract” tot stand waarvan de SDAP, ANWV en NVV deel uitmaken. Samen met de SDAP heeft deze commissie invloed kunnen uitoefenen op de uiteindelijke wet die in 1907 werd aangenomen en in 1909 inging. De cao had vanaf dat moment een wettelijke basis.
SDAP (Sociaal Democratische Arbeiders Partij) is the old PVDA and the ANWV and NVV are workers unions.
You’re really not engaging with what I’m saying. I’m not saying it was ml parties within the country but that the momentum of the socialist block and risk of spreading worker resentment and solidarity forced the ruling class in Europe and America into providing some basic concessions to workers at home in the form of welfare benefits etc alongside a healthy dose of McCarthyism such that the home situation would remain stable and extraction from the global south could continue. Then once the Socialist block hit the major setback of the Soviet collapse they began repealing said benefits as is plainly seen right through to the modern day.
Of the 3 major parties which of them had to risk resentment? No, This was the strength of unions voting in union leadership to enact workers rights. The socialist influence is fallacy of the red scare on its head, had socialism been popular the Socialist party wouldn’t have lost thier only seats in parliament but would have been the most popular party.
If you’re not going to engage even with academic papers provided and continue to bang your head on an idiotic strawman of internal parties as opposed to the outside pressure which lead investing the spoils of plunder in buying off the proletariat at home such that socialism would remain fringe I think it’s best we leave this here. I thought Europeans were supposed to be more politically competent and capable of reasonable debate than Americans but perhaps that was simply a rumour.
First I’m not American or European. Second since the end of WW2 Europe has been a client state of the US. Third Europeans and American are equally contemptuous of the global south. Fourth you have provided “data and links” to back your claims against a strawman you constructed in your mind, you have yet to even once engage with anything I’ve said so you might as well have not provided any.
Hey, how is Sweden doing? Right, worker’s rights are in free-fall, the “socialist” welfare is getting torn to shreds, healthcare getting dismantled and more expensive. And just as capitalism starts to retract, fascism starts to go into rise, and pretty fast too!
And how did Europe initially get stronger worker protections than even china? By voting in Democratic Socialists who made coalitions with social democrats and Christian centrists. No revolution no autocrat.
Sadly the gains and welfare improvements moved enough boomers into retirement growth mentality. The trigger for capital to centralise and maintain through media ownership further increased by the smartphone.
Not quite accurate. Those protections were concessions given to blunt the momentum of the Soviets and to keep the homebase of Europeans happy while they looted the global south. Effectively paying a slight portion of the loot to pacify possible unrest. In effect the autocracy was there simply offshored onto the global south, now that the global south is liberating itself and the contradictions of capital are heightening the autocracy is returning home to Europe as the bourgeoisie needs to tighten the belt at home to make up for it.
What Soviet’s? I’m talking about 00s. I can only speak for my country: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Dutch_general_election
I’m responding to European countries initial worker protections that you mentioned. These weren’t received from voting but given as concessions in the face of the socialist block to keep stability at home for a tiny fraction of the imperial and colonial loot.
Cool let’s have a look:
SDAP (Sociaal Democratische Arbeiders Partij) is the old PVDA and the ANWV and NVV are workers unions.
https://vakbondshistorie.nl/dossiers/de-geschiedenis-van-de-cao/
The ruling party did not contain any ML in fact the pressure come from Christian unions not ussr socialists.
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tweede_Kamerverkiezingen_1909
You’re really not engaging with what I’m saying. I’m not saying it was ml parties within the country but that the momentum of the socialist block and risk of spreading worker resentment and solidarity forced the ruling class in Europe and America into providing some basic concessions to workers at home in the form of welfare benefits etc alongside a healthy dose of McCarthyism such that the home situation would remain stable and extraction from the global south could continue. Then once the Socialist block hit the major setback of the Soviet collapse they began repealing said benefits as is plainly seen right through to the modern day.
Of the 3 major parties which of them had to risk resentment? No, This was the strength of unions voting in union leadership to enact workers rights. The socialist influence is fallacy of the red scare on its head, had socialism been popular the Socialist party wouldn’t have lost thier only seats in parliament but would have been the most popular party.
If you’re not going to engage even with academic papers provided and continue to bang your head on an idiotic strawman of internal parties as opposed to the outside pressure which lead investing the spoils of plunder in buying off the proletariat at home such that socialism would remain fringe I think it’s best we leave this here. I thought Europeans were supposed to be more politically competent and capable of reasonable debate than Americans but perhaps that was simply a rumour.
You are equating us pol to European pol, I’m providing data and links to back my claim you are providing American tanky feels. Do better
First I’m not American or European. Second since the end of WW2 Europe has been a client state of the US. Third Europeans and American are equally contemptuous of the global south. Fourth you have provided “data and links” to back your claims against a strawman you constructed in your mind, you have yet to even once engage with anything I’ve said so you might as well have not provided any.