logo
Is America Pissed Off Enough at Trump and Musk for a General Strike?

Is America Pissed Off Enough at Trump and Musk for a General Strike?

Yahoo24-04-2025

It's mid-April in Missoula, Montana, and Sara Nelson is asking a packed room of 8,000 people to visualize the obscenity of corporate greed and oligarchic wealth in America. 'Income inequality today is worse than it was just before the Great Depression. So picture this…' said Nelson, the president of the Association of Flight Attendants, a 50,000-member union. 'If you stack hundred-dollar bills high enough to reach one of our flights at 35,000 feet—that's nearly seven miles in the air—it would only be enough 100 dollar bills to equal just three percent of Elon Musk's worth. That's after he took the hit from the Takedown Tesla action.' The crowd howled with laughter.
But the ultimate point of Nelson's speech at the University of Montana, delivered during a stop on Senator Bernie Sanders's 'Fight Oligarchy' tour, wasn't simply to rip the richest man in the world—as easy and amusing as that can be. Rather, she drew the connection between Musk's attempted wreckage of the federal government and the critical role of labor solidarity in stopping him. More than that, she has a specific plan to accomplish this.
'Nothing, nothing, NOTHING can move without our labor, and it's time to exercise our power in a united working class,' she said. 'We need to get ready for a general strike.'
Nelson's call for a general strike, a tactic associated more with European nations, was audacious. But as the awesome popularity of Sanders's tour has shown, a broad rage against the oligarchic class is stirring in America, and labor leaders see this as a time to bring workers all across the country, including red states, to thwart a new Gilded Age and to protect healthcare and retirement benefits.
A general strike—where masses of people across the country, unionized or not, walk off the job—is risky in the United States, where workers are largely at-will and stand to lose their jobs for striking. But Nelson, whose push for such a work stoppage was critical to ending the 2019 government shutdown, thinks it's time for dramatic action.
'People fight when they have something to fight with, or they fight when there's nothing left, and they have to fight,' Nelson told me. 'We're in the middle of those two things … It's going to be terrifying to anyone in charge that there would be that kind of solidarity, breaking through all of the tactics that have kept people down for centuries.'
There are at least two specific movements for a general strike (neither of which Nelson has endorsed or rejected). One is a grassroots effort to get three million people to sign general strike cards—so far, more than 336,000 have done so—and then raise the goal to eight million, after which organizers will create a slate of demands and prepare to strike on a specific, and for now undetermined, date. It's a steep challenge, and there will surely be a competing list of priorities among left-leaning groups, but 'where we are now, we need to withhold our labor for things to get better,' said one of the organizers, Eliza Blum, who worked on the successful Fight For $15 movement in California to raise the state's minimum wage.
The second effort also bills itself as a general strike, but it threads a legal needle to avoid violating federal law. The Taft-Hartley Act bans 'secondary boycotts'—actions where one union strikes in support of another union. But United Auto Workers president Shawn Fain has a way of getting around it. He's calling for unions to follow UAW's lead in aligning their contracts to expire at midnight on April 30, 2028. That sets the scene for a massive, entirely legal strike on May Day, 2028. The American Federation of Teachers has already approved a resolution calling on their local unions to set their contracts to expire on April 30, 2028.
'There's been talk about a 'general strike' for as long as I've been alive. But that's all it has been: talk,' Fain wrote in a column for In These Times calling for the action. And what better way to show corporations and elected officials who really runs the show? 'The fact is: without workers, the world stops running,' Fain wrote.
Union membership in the United States has been in steady decline since the late 1950s; less than 10 percent of American workers are unionized, a number that sinks to less than six percent when public-sector unions are taken out of the equation. But public support for unions is near a 60-year high, according to Gallup. Last year, the polling firm found that 70 percent of Americans approve of labor unions. In the past few years, the country has witnessed successful strikes by a wide range of unions, including those representing auto workers, dock workers, communications workers in the South and actors and writers in Hollywood.
It would take that kind of broad base of support to make a national general strike work, experts say. That doesn't mean everyone would have to stop working in America for a day or a longer period of time; Harvard Kennedy School of Government professor Erica Chenoweth's theory is that it takes 3.5 percent of the population (or 11 million Americans) for a non-violent social movement to succeed. But it needs to include an economically and occupationally diverse group to send a singular message to the Trump administration that the country is mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.
'I think it's important to look at the entire workforce and see what efforts could be made to demonstrate to the administration, more importantly to America, that people are not alone. There is a very large majority who don't want to lose their Social Security or Medicare, Medicaid or their democracy,' Robert Reich, who served as President Bill Clinton's Labor Secretary, told me. 'The point would be not to try to intimidate the Trump regime. The point would be to let the vast majority of Americans know that they are part of the vast majority.'
Mass demonstrations might serve as a national venting session for aggrieved Americans, and might even help mobilize people in a more organized way, advocates for a general strike say. But Trump is impervious to opposition (and in fact appears to delight in it), so protests don't change his behavior. The 'write your congressman' approach just isn't working. What will work, general strike planners argue, is an action where workers stand together and show the power they have.
Unlike a labor stoppage at one company or in one industry, a general strike is broader, involving workers in multiple industries and across an entire community, region or country. The grievances could be broad as well, such as general economic inequality, or preservation of popular programs such as Social Security and Medicare. It's something we're used to seeing in Europe (laborers in both the public and private sectors went on strike in Belgium recently to protest government austerity measures), but not in the U.S.
There are some good reasons for that, notes Lane Windham, associate director of Georgetown University's Kalmanovitz Initiative for Labor and the Working Poor. European workers have more job protections than their American counterparts; in France (where the 'Yellow Vests' protestors of 2018-19 succeeded in getting the government to scrap a fuel tax), the right to strike is in the constitution. In the U.S., most contracts have no-strike clauses, Windham said, and in an economic strike, companies can replace striking workers. Federal workers do not have the right to strike. And without a national healthcare system, American workers stand to lose health insurance along with their jobs if they strike.
'The U.S. system is more harsh than in some other countries. Workers can easily be fired, and there's no safety net. The risks of striking are very high,' said Stephanie Luce, professor of Labor Studies at the City University of New York's School of Labor and Urban Studies. A general strike is not 'off the table, but it's a developing muscle. It will take a little bit of work,' she said.
America has had some notable general strikes in its history, demonstrating both the potential for unified action and the deadly response by authorities. The Great Railroad Strike of 1877 started in Martinsburg, W.V., and spread to Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and Buffalo, Windham said. People rallied in support in San Francisco and throughout the South. 'People weren't used to working for wages. They came from farms, and were not used to corporations,' she said. 'When strikes happened, entire communities got involved.' But they got beaten back, literally: The railroad company and elected officials sent in militias to quell the labor uprising, resulting in an estimated 1,000 arrests and 100 deaths.
A 1919 Seattle general strike, primarily in support of shipyard workers and endorsed by 110 unions, paralyzed then port city for six days (though workers organized to deliver milk for children, pick up trash and serve 30,000 meals a day). A wave of general strikes in 1934 culminated with the creation of the National Labor Relations Act the following year.
The last time American workers mounted a general strike, legislative retribution was swift. After 100,000 workers in Oakland joined in solidarity with 400 department store workers in 1946 as part of a series of post-war labor uprisings, Congress responded by passing the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act limiting union power.
What would lead American workers to take the chance again on a national general strike? It comes down to the very real threat, Nelson said, of losing the very things unions built up, such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and basic worker rights. A general strike could be a short, she added, and perhaps—as in 2019—the mere threat of a massive walkout could do the trick. 'The more we're talking about what we're willing to do, the less likely that an actual action would have to take place. The power of this is the idea and the notion that we can do this together,' she said.
Even still, it's a big ask. 'What they are really asking for is for unions and their community allies to be working together on a coordinated level that is ahistorical,' said Eugene Carroll, a longtime labor educator and organizer and a Worker Institute Fellow at Cornell University's School of Industrial and Labor Relations. But if 'there's continuing economic disruption on a big scale'—attacks on Social Security, erosion of workers' rights, more mass firings, persistent inflation—then that's 'going to allow this spark to expand,' he said.
Reich used a similar analogy—and was also unsure of what will come of the smoldering fury across America.
'The tinder is there,' Reich told me. 'The material that will catch fire is certainly there. I can't tell you what specific form it will take. But I do have a feeling it will happen quite soon.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Graham proposes carveout in Russia sanctions bill for countries that back Ukraine
Graham proposes carveout in Russia sanctions bill for countries that back Ukraine

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Graham proposes carveout in Russia sanctions bill for countries that back Ukraine

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) is proposing a carveout for his Russia sanctions bill to exempt countries that help Ukraine's defense, protecting them from a 500 percent tariff on countries trading with Russia. The carveout could help insulate countries in Europe that still import Russian gas and have provided military support for Ukraine, as well as other U.S. partners that have straddled the line between maintaining ties with Moscow and providing assistance to Kyiv. 'A lot of countries still buy Russian oil and gas but less. Some European countries still have relationships with Russia, but they've been very helpful to Ukraine. So I want to carve them out,' Graham told reporters Wednesday. 'I tell China, if you don't want to have a 500 percent tariff, help Ukraine.' Semafor first reported Graham's proposed carveout. Graham's sanctions bill on Russia would impose a 500 percent tariff on imports from any country that buys Russian oil, gas, uranium and other products. The legislation has more than 80 co-sponsors in the Senate, potentially making it veto-proof. Graham said he is in constant contact with President Trump about the bill. Republican lawmakers have signaled they are anxious to move but are waiting for a green light from Trump before bringing the bill to the floor. 'We are separate entities coordinating with each other,' Graham said about whether Trump is dictating when the bill will come to the floor. Graham said the carveout would apply to countries that have 'meaningfully' assisted Ukraine. 'There's some of our allies who've really helped Ukraine but would be affected by the bill, they've earned their way to get a carveout. Those who have helped Ukraine, meaningfully, will get a carveout. In other words you'll incentivize people to help Ukraine.' The move could have big implications for India, a close ally of the U.S. that has maintained deep ties with Russia. India is a top purchaser of Russian oil, but has provided Ukraine humanitarian support. While India has not provided direct military support to Ukraine, it has allowed European countries to purchase Indian munitions bound for Kyiv. Al Weaver contributed reporting. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Late-night social media and surprise tariffs complicate Trump's two biggest trade talks
Late-night social media and surprise tariffs complicate Trump's two biggest trade talks

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Late-night social media and surprise tariffs complicate Trump's two biggest trade talks

President Trump is complicating negotiations with China and the European Union, making two moves Wednesday to call out Chinese President Xi Jinping on social media and boost tariffs on steel and aluminum. Talks with China are on hold, waiting for a call between the two leaders, which the White House maintains will happen soon. But a 2:17 a.m. ET Truth Social missive from the president charged that dealing with Xi is "extremely hard." It was a message that immediately raised questions about the timing of a chat that Beijing says it's in no rush to have — and how much will be accomplished when it eventually takes place. There are parallels in the situation with the European Union, a bloc that is the top trading partner of the US. Trump offered his own surprise there last week with a plan to increase existing tariffs on steel and aluminum imports to 50% from 25%. They went into effect at 12:01 a.m. ET on Wednesday. It's a move that hits a variety of trading partners, with Europe in particular outraged by the move and promising additional countermeasures as the two sides meet for talks in Paris this week. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer traveled to Paris this week for a meeting with European Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič. He described those talks in a statement Wednesday as "advancing quickly" and "very constructive" but appears set to be heading home with few concrete signs of a deal anytime soon. All in all, the developments this week across three continents are a sign that trade tensions could perhaps be in for a rise this summer after weeks of talk around the notion that markets may be calmed by a TACO ("Trump Always Chickens Out") trade. Read more: The latest news and updates on Trump's tariffs As Terry Haines of Pangaea Policy put it in a recent note, "TACO is the latest triumph of misplaced markets... as quickly as TACO rose, events rose up to smite it." Days of promises for a call between Trump and Xi — who apparently have not spoken since before Trump's inauguration — have passed without a conversation even being scheduled. The frustration appeared to boil over for Trump overnight when he posted that "I like President XI of China, always have, and always will, but he is VERY TOUGH, AND EXTREMELY HARD TO MAKE A DEAL WITH!!!" It raised questions about the forthcoming call as well as the status of a trade truce between the US and China that was reached in May to delay tariffs by 115 percentage points for 90 days. Read more: What Trump's tariffs mean for the economy and your wallet That's a pact that has looked increasingly fragile, with both sides charging that the other is cheating in recent days and significant unresolved issues looming, from critical minerals to semiconductors. Trump and his team are charging that China has already violated the 90-day truce by not loosening trade restrictions for critical minerals, which are the building blocks in everything from computers to electric vehicle batteries to jet engines to medical devices. The Chinese Ministry of Commerce has denied the claims and accused the US of its own actions to undermine the deal. For now, top Trump aides say their communication with the Chinese is on hold until the two leaders speak, but Beijing appears to be in no hurry to schedule the call. Chinese state media focused Wednesday on other trade talks with "true friends and good partners," such as a meeting Wednesday between Xi and the president of Belarus. Asked about a potential call with the US Tuesday, a spokesperson for China's Foreign Ministry offered only, "I have no information to share on that." The European talks this week also got underway with plenty of fanfare but appear to have ended with little clarity on how the array of issues on the table will be resolved. Greer's statement on Wednesday offered only that "I look forward to continued constructive engagement in the coming days and weeks." Negotiators are confronting issues on everything from Europe's value-added tax (VAT) to restrictions on US tech companies and agriculture purchases, in addition to the overall tariff issues. That's in addition to the new steel duties that went into effect Wednesday and doubled rate on the European Union, but with a last-minute exemption for the United Kingdom, where duties will remain at 25%. All in all, few see a path toward even a limited deal between the US and Europe before a deadline of July 8, when Trump is pledging to implement his delayed reciprocal tariffs, including promised 50% duties on the European Union. And Trump's two fronts — Europe and China — could even end up working against him, especially with Bloomberg reporting Wednesday that China is considering placing an order for hundreds of aircraft from the French-owned Airbus, perhaps tied to a visit next month of European leaders to Beijing. If that deal comes to pass, it could be a major blow to Trump — not to mention Boeing (BA). Meanwhile, the Trump administration continued to tout his tariff plans, with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick boasting to the Senate during an appearance Wednesday that "the Trump administration is imposing tariffs and ending loopholes." Lutnick also offered a new nugget during his testimony Wednesday, saying new tariffs on airplane parts could be announced by the end of the month. "The key is to protect our industry," he said. Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices

Argentina's sustained decline in birth rate reflects profound demographic changes
Argentina's sustained decline in birth rate reflects profound demographic changes

Miami Herald

timean hour ago

  • Miami Herald

Argentina's sustained decline in birth rate reflects profound demographic changes

June 4 (UPI) -- Argentina's birth rate has declined by nearly 40% in the last decade, reaching its lowest level in more than 50 years in 2023. Statistics from the Ministry of Health show that 460,902 births were recorded in Argentina in 2023, representing a 7% decrease from the previous year and a 41% drop compared to 2014, when the highest number of births was 777,012. The crude birth rate in 2023 was 9.9 births per 1,000 inhabitants, marking a historic low comparable to that of European countries. A report from the Austral University of Argentina revealed that the national fertility rate has dropped to 1.4 children per woman, well below the generational replacement rate. This implies a trajectory toward population aging and a possible long-term reduction in the total population if the trend is not reversed. The analysis adds that the percentage of households without children younger than 18 years of age increased from 44% in 1991 to 57% in 2022. Furthermore, single-person households increased from 13% to 25% over the same period, and single-parent households, mostly headed by women, also showed a sustained increase. President Javier Milei has expressed concern about the declining birth rate in Argentina, attributing it primarily to the legalization of abortion in 2020 and other progressive policies. During his presidential campaign, Milei expressed his intention to repeal the law and even mentioned the possibility of calling a referendum to do so. So far, this issue has not been part of the government's agenda. However, under the guise of reducing public spending, Milei's administration has reduced the distribution of contraceptives and dismantled sexual health programs, delegating these responsibilities to the provinces. In contrast to the continued decline in births, "voluntary and legal interruptions of pregnancy (IVE/ILE)" have increased from 73,000 in 2021 to more than 107,000 in 2023. Statistics for 2024 and 2025 are expected to continue to rise. Although Milei points to abortion as a direct cause, experts attribute the decline in birth rates to a multitude of sociocultural and economic factors. Among these factors are inflation, job instability and the high cost of living, which lead many couples to postpone or forgo parenthood. The average age for having a first child has shifted to 30-34 years, reflecting a trend toward prioritizing academic training and professional development. Furthermore, among mothers with lower educational levels, births have decreased by 77% since 2005, while among those with higher educational levels, the decrease was 13% and 7%, respectively. Research by the consulting firm "Sentimientos Públicos" in Buenos Aires reveals that 20% of those younger than 30 do not want to have children, prioritizing other aspects of their lives. This percentage is lower among millennials (between 30 and 44 years old), where it drops to 11%, and 10% of them cite economic reasons. The sustained decline in birth and fertility rates in Argentina reflects profound demographic transformations, such as the population aging index, which increased from 29 in 1991 to 60.55 in 2025, and the percentage of people over 85 years of age doubled in 20 years. This change poses challenges for the health care system, education, the pension system, and the economy in general. Copyright 2025 UPI News Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store