One of the primary purposes of the police is to be able to break labor uprisings. This is so wrong and should be prevented in the strongest way possible. What do you all think? Is the U.S. constitution able to restrict police?

People from outside the U.S., what do you think of this type of idea?

  • sj_zero@lotide.fbxl.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s probably a good thing that the rest of the world doesn’t think in this way.

    Imagine if you hired a contractor to work on your kitchen, and the money ran out, and they left all your taps on with the drain plug in because they knew that that would damage your house. If a contractor did that, and cause damage to your house, of course they would be liable for what they just did. “We didn’t damage your house, we just chose to stop working at the moment that would have maximum impact!”

    Under virtually any other circumstance, nobody would have accepted that logic. Its probably unlawful, and it’s definitely immoral.

    • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Contractors can and do leave people with their water shut off and their electrical ripped out if they are not compensated sufficiently for their work. What the unions did is no different. All the business had to do is sufficiently compensate the workers to avoid the problem.

      • sj_zero@lotide.fbxl.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s a difference between leaving a job undone and leaving a job in a situation that’s going to cause damage. Contractor might leave the water off, they’re not going to leave the water on filling up a basement that doesn’t have any drainage.