Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝
Contacting Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝
Federation handle:
@richpuchalsky@mastodon.social
Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝'s Information
Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝'s Bio
freelance librarian
Federation handle:
@richpuchalsky@mastodon.social
freelance librarian
Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝'s Posts
Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝ has 10 posts.
Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝
In response to this post@waitworry
They haven't had time yet
Mentions: @waitworry@sakurajima.moe
Likes: 0
Replies: 0
Boosts: 0
Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝
In response to this post@SallyStrange
I think that the part that I'm in, the Freelance Journalist's Union, is useful because it's organized on industrial lines. The "Industrial" part of Industrial Workers of the World doesn't mean heavy industry, it means that workers are supposed to be organized by industry. That makes it more than one workplace somewhere.
Mentions: @SallyStrange@eldritch.cafe
Likes: 0
Replies: 0
Boosts: 0
Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝
In response to this postBut for the part of it that is a union to function as a union in the US, it has to finally aim at goals that US law proscribes for unions. Its activity does not work otherwise.
/fin
@richpuchalsky This does not leave IWW looking like a useful org?
by Sally Strange ;
Likes: 0
Replies: 1
Boosts: 0
Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝
In response to this postThere are two main tendencies in response to this that have recurred throughout the organization's history:
1) let's get serious and just become a union
2) let's give up on actual unionization and become a leftist group
Neither one works. I've written about this before: the IWW has only survived because it's a union, and the only reason for it to exist is as a leftist group. A mixed existence is the only existence it can have.
But for the part of it that is a union to function as a union in the US, it has to finally aim at goals that US law proscribes for unions. Its activity does not work otherwise.
/fin
by Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝ ;
Likes: 0
Replies: 1
Boosts: 0
Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝
In response to this postSo eager volunteers from the IWW sometimes succeed in helping a union form, the workers involved generally don't join the IWW, and then the union folds or if it lasts it breaks away.
This really does not matter, functionally, to the IWW. It's full of people who pay dues whether they have a workplace union or not. The IWW gains nothing if a union push succeeds and loses nothing if it fails, because the same money to pay staff is coming in.
There are two main tendencies in response to this that have recurred throughout the organization's history:
1) let's get serious and just become a union
2) let's give up on actual unionization and become a leftist group
Neither one works. I've written about this before: the IWW has only survived because it's a union, and the only reason for it to exist is as a leftist group. A mixed existence is the only existence it can have.
by Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝ ;
Likes: 0
Replies: 1
Boosts: 0
Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝
In response to this postThe IWW has a theory about unionization in the US that no one else holds. Like the Army's old slogan "An Army of One" that people made fun of, it's basically "A Union of Two." People getting together in the workplace to do anything are considered to be a union, whether they are a majority and/or have recognition or not.
It's a form of unionization that no one really wants and doesn't accomplish anything except continuous struggle, which is deemed to be good.
So eager volunteers from the IWW sometimes succeed in helping a union form, the workers involved generally don't join the IWW, and then the union folds or if it lasts it breaks away.
This really does not matter, functionally, to the IWW. It's full of people who pay dues whether they have a workplace union or not. The IWW gains nothing if a union push succeeds and loses nothing if it fails, because the same money to pay staff is coming in.
by Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝ ;
Likes: 0
Replies: 1
Boosts: 0
Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝
Saw someone else asking why not organize with the contemporary #IWW in the US instead of some business union.
The answer is simple: the IWW is not an illegalist organization, and anyone doing legal union organizing in the US is going to be in a system where having more resources at the outset matters and in which you have to push for legal outcomes that the IWW does not want to support, like having a contract.
1/n
The IWW has a theory about unionization in the US that no one else holds. Like the Army's old slogan "An Army of One" that people made fun of, it's basically "A Union of Two." People getting together in the workplace to do anything are considered to be a union, whether they are a majority and/or have recognition or not.
It's a form of unionization that no one really wants and doesn't accomplish anything except continuous struggle, which is deemed to be good.
by Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝ ;
Tags: #iww
Likes: 0
Replies: 1
Boosts: 0
Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝
@waitworry
Assuming you meant M:tG, I was around for the brief and magical time when you actually won a physical card from someone else each time you played, which discouraged people from jamming their deck full of every good card.
Likes: 0
Replies: 0
Boosts: 0
Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝
@waitworry
Other than toys like Rock 'em Sock 'Em Robots and actual military ventures, there is a pretty distinct line of homemade robot fighting that goes from Survival Labs through Robot Wars to BattleBots.
Likes: 0
Replies: 0
Boosts: 0
Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝
@waitworry
Is this from BattleBots? Used to really like that show: people would build their own bots and then remotely operate them from outside of the stadium. Total DIY ethos, human intelligence, the complete opposite of ChatGPT.
@HeavenlyPossum
Likes: 0
Replies: 0
Boosts: 0