Scratch anything without first being given permission by a liberal, and two fascists bleed 🤔

Yes I did find out about this place from reddit (although not new to politics) and everything you say about people not reading articles is right! And not even just redditors either, that's kinda just how most people are. That's part of why I think burying facts like "most actors and writers actually don't make that much money" in the sixth paragraph of a story that 90% of people will only read one paragraph of that is functionally a tiny little lie even if they say it straight up. But I definitely take your point.

Reading is good 🙏 even lib news is good to read like you said earlier! I just think someone asking "should communists support striking workers" - I guess I get why someone else might see that and think maybe they're a plant or something even though I don't think it matters - I really think it's someone who completely, honestly lacks class consciousnesses. The do not 'get' the point of solidarity I'm that way. And I think that's the frame that the supposedly less partisan media like ap or the big broadcast stations produces by design, so that's why it feels self defeating to me. Especially when they come asking for elaboration from a left wing perspective.

Even looking up NBC and seeing graffs like this:

The Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, which represents employers including Disney, Netflix, Amazon and others, has lamented the walkout, saying it will hurt thousands of workers in industries that support film and television production.

Ten years ago I would have read that and came away feeling like everyone needs to sit down and hash it out because this is a no win situation. It's everyone's fault, billionaires and millionaires haggling over bags while the little guy hurts, etc.

Besides, this convo has diverged on plenty of other stuff that you would never find in lib news pertaining to strike coordination, craft unions, class divides within unions, etc., I think it's a good outcome.

You're right, they don't lie blatantly. The non-blatant, subtle lies (frequently by omission, or even by placement) you get from these sources leaves the average reader with the exact lens of this original comment.

All I'm saying is it makes no sense to have a community dedicated to propagandizing people if you are just going to send them back to those sources if their question isn't sufficiently advanced. But hey that's just my take, idk what else to say about it. Capitalist media is not an effective propaganda tool against capitalism.

I'm not correcting everyone else's behavior I'm calling out some bullshit and standing by it, stay disgusted

The giant lib media companies are literally intermingled with the exact same capitalists that run the studios and streaming services that the actors are striking against. I cannot understand why anyone would think it's a good idea to send obviously newbie people to go read what they have to say about it, even if one article you have found doesn't exhibit obvious lies.

Maybe it's because I'm a big sports person too, and often see how people react whenever those unions act? The average American has no concept of this. People literally see this and think 'oh wow tom cruise thinks he should make even more money, screw him give me back my shows'. That's a real thing lots of people think in America! That's the kind of thought pattern you get after uncritically living within the mainstream media ecosystem in America. It's not the person deceptively framing the question, it's the person relating the question through the lens they have been made to have by living in that ecosystem.

When I say 'mainstream' I don't mean it in the qannon conspiracy way, I mean these companies are literally owned and operated by the capitalists you are fighting against. They are absolutely not apolitical actors. Why would you expect them to report on this fairly? Is it even fair to put that info in the sixth paragraph instead of the second?

It's an own goal to send people there instead of explaining to them why the common perception of these 'rich people unions' is complete bunk.

Defending leftism by driving off everyone interested in leftism, doing your part 🫡

"Hey there fledgling leftist who is asking to be propagandized, unfortunately I do not deem your question worthy of my time, please go read CNN instead"

Is the painfully dumb to me sorry. Simply saying nothing would be a significant improvement. In a normal discussion, sure. This is not a normal discussion, it's 101 for a reason I feel like I am taking crazy pills here it's like some people are actively hostile to the idea of growing leftism, which has always been true, but also they decide to hang out in a place called 'communism 101' for some fking reason

The people who own these companies ARE THE BOSSES that the actors are striking against!

Lib news is fine if you know what you are looking for. If you are asking "is the actor strike good" you don't know what to look for.

You're gonna get "both sides make good points" from lib news on that. So why tell newbies they should go read that instead of us? It's pointlessly hostile, spiting ourselves for no reason

The whole point of a 101 community is to propagandize to people who are interested in leftist politics.

If you are sending people to the sixth paragraph of an NBC news article instead of just answering the question with leftist spin (i.e. extra truth that nbc leaves out), you have totally missed the point.

Especially when you have a big issue that's hot in the news that has generates more interest than normal.

Ok great yeah please go listen to the mainstream media to get your understanding of labor action 😵‍💫

This is a question that a lot of less politically conscious people have, the answer is obvious if you know it, this place should be for sharing that information with people who are seeking it. Introductory info, 101, no??

Please do the bare minimum of research

What do you think they're doing by posting in communism 101?

Plenty of labor org's have wealthier people running them

This part merits plenty of discussion more broadly imo.

This doesn't change the fact that this labor action is good, striking now is a great move for sag aftra. Creating a class divide between union leadership and union rank and file is one of the most effective capitalist tools to undermine union solidarity. Cohesion is the only thing keeping any union standing; leftists should get and remain vigilant about this in the coming months and years as labor action becomes more and more prominent in America.

Big ups to the UAW for unseating incumbent leadership earlier this year, for example

Is it "some" of those striking actors or "almost all" of those striking actors that aren't tom cruise level wealthy?

Just one (highly publicized) front in a larger battle from my standpoint. Nevermind that they're also in solidarity with the writers, which both is great for the writers (who are usually paid like shit) but also more than that because the idea of multiple strikes in solidarity is completely alien to modern American political imagination

I have been without power in Springfield IL since Thursday afternoon, I am ready to burn down the entire state lol. I imagine publicly owned utilities work a lot better when they're properly funded and staffed 🙃

Agree with this as well - lots of people way smarter than the dem consultants running the white house have been saying they should use the HEA from the beginning. Especially because part of that legal path is a comments period that will take a long time. A long time that runs directly into the election, just another instance of Dems causing more political problems for themselves.

In reality though, laws are just words on paper. Standing, limits on judicial review, all this stuff only means anything if we all agree that it does. If (when) the court completely violates these previously held rules (nobody can stop them truly, see this completely fake gay discrimination case they ruled on if the student loans doesn't convince you), Biden has to either meet the challenge head on or save face while taking the L. He's already pre-empted today's ruling by saying that he would never "politicize the court" lol, so we know what his take is, and that is shared near universally among the people with pull inside the pary.

Political power springs from the ba...err from the bang of a gavel? Way less scary than growing from a gun, we hate those here

Yeah agree, but they intentionally chose a long and winding path to get it done, one which allowed republicans to file an inevitable legal challenge. Undoubtedly this wasn't literally purely to sell out student debtors (i.e. me) for just pure malice, but instead they were thinking this is a nice middle path where we're not too radical but also standing by our commitment (a commitment that itself was a climb down from his previous commitments).

The effect, however, is the same. The best path was to immediately forgive the debt and force the court to claw it back, rather than to just nullify something that didn't truly exist yet. They chose this path knowing this was the likely outcome, but preferred it to something more radical that had a higher chance of success. I am not clear on the legal (let alone extra legal) paths available if the court is truly determined to even claw back the money, but they haven't been playing to win from the start.

Because when you have a bourgeois class of elected officials, consultants, lobbyists, and various other hangers on, they lose 100% of whatever genuine enthusiasm and connection they had to the rank and file of the party. It's no different than the SPD in 1915, only even less radical and more doomed to fail

You should check out the podcast 'blowback', their last season was all about the Korean war. Over ten hours of great, us-critical (i.e. fair) history and unlike their other two seasons I was shocked by how little of this stuff I remembered/was taught in school