response to bay dialectic regarding the emergency prop

Categories: Discussion, Open Mic

Talk about a chicken-shit attack. “A_small_voice” had an opportunity to attend yesterday’s GA and articulate his/her opposition to the proposal to support the EGT grain ship action, but did not do so. The fact that s/he didn’t suggests to me that s/he understood that his/her attack on it could not withstand scrutiny.

It is total BS to attack the supporters of this proposal as “the ones who talk the loudest and fastest” and then fail to show up to present your (presumably quiet and slowly enunciated) criticisms of it when you have the opportunity to so.

In any case, the proposal to support the EGT grain shipment action in Lonview, Washington passed with 98% votes in favor (120-something yays, 2 nays, and 4 abstentions).


i’m gonna respond to this commentary (currently awaiting moderation) toward one of my posts.

1. yeah, i ranted about the proposal.  BFD.  if i thought that was enough to criticize their proposal before a vote, i would have done so.  the problem with people having too much centralized, shadowy power is beyond that particular proposal and that particular vote at the GA.  it’s a topic for a different space and different time that should be had in the movement.  when will it happen?  i do not know, but trust – i am not the only one who sees it.

2. my biggest objection that was relevant to the vote had to do with money going toward this action.  someone asked if this proposal had anything to do with a certain amount of money, and the proposer said no.  that was good enough for me right there.

3. i already knew it would pass, because that has been the pattern with this kind of proposal for a while in the movement.  maybe that’s what this segment of the movement is about – who knows?  i’m curious and annoyed about it and would like more understanding regarding the huge importance of longview in this movement.

4. regarding my objection to this being deemed an emergency…it’s NOT.  there is no time sensitivity here…the action will happen in about a month’s time at some undetermined point in the future.  i’ve already spoken with the folks i need to speak to regarding my opinion on that matter.


17 Responses to “response to bay dialectic regarding the emergency prop”

  1. fellow worker

    thank you for reading my post and the kind words – im glad it was informative.

    movement police are deadly. and we should all take the idea of boycotting cop culture very seriously
    As true as it was in the 80s it even more applicable now as the surveillance police state has now reached it’s apotheosis. watching law and order or even the news leaves us watching ourselves through the eyes of the police – a totalizing surveillance state (see here graeber’s essay on imaginative identification
    in combination w/ bey’s notion of totalizing cop consciousness) I feel this provides a good frame for understanding how/why people identify w/ and engage in policing and coercive modes of sociality. sorry for the little side rant – just don;t like cop culture as it manifests in self policing and the replication of fundamentally coercive, alienating and violent social relations and i feel you’ve been spot on pointing it out here and vis-a-via the 99% declaration.


    i agree w/ your underlying politics. im all for radical anti-capitalism be it autonomist marxist, anarchistic, or rooted in an indigenous framework like Zapatismo, or even primitivist. i’ve also had my disagreements w/ folks on these forums, specifically w/ a_small_voice as well as others. and i feel for anyone who engages a_s_v in debate, they’re clearly articulate and steadfast, in short someone that im glad to, ostensibly, be on the same side as – even if we disagree on some shit (this is also true of calaveras). i don’t think your position is well served by the way in which you make your arguments. i get it that you think the arguments against stopping the EGT grain shipment are lame, that doesn’t mean the people making them should be the targets of your recrimination.

    I support blocking the grain shipment. I don’t however think it’s an emergency nor do i think funds should be dedicated to it. i think it is something that we should have a working group organizing around so that when we know it’s coming we can mobilize and get those who want to go up to longview up there. i also feel that spending money on this when we have a number of other concerns (legal defense, building occupation specifically) is a bad idea. particularly considering unions got bank – coffman is on the record saying they’ve got millions in the local strike fund – if they want a bus full of OO peeps than they should pay for it. we put up coin last time for other occupations that needed it for the shutdown now we need to save ours to cover expense like Khali’s defense, and for any future legal battles that might arise, and for the needs arising out of taking space.

    @ anyone who spreads conspiratorial whispers through the inter-webs instead of organizing around practical political issues.

    I will also say that the conspiratorial nature of the comments in opposition to this action are divisive and unfortunate. the process is pretty fucking open and the easiest thing to do is block a proposal – those who say NO have the most power in the GA process. in a GA w/ 100 people it only takes 11 no votes to block a proposal. that’s an incredibly low threshold. so if there is some future proposal requesting money form OO to block the grain shipment and people are against it then they need to show up, debate the issue and vote it down if they so choose.

    beyond that it would be cool if people who are complaining about the direction of OO, instead of using the web as a soapbox, actually went out and started organizing and coming to the GA with alternatives that have community support then, a.) this artificial barrier between the movement and the community would be broken down. b.) local concerns would get addressed in a way that local people would feel is adequate. c.) new life and participation would revitalize the movement. d.) the whole of oakland’s struggling masses would be empowered as they become the active agents of change in the community. The failure is not w/ OO it’s a failure of imagination and organization on the part of those who expect OO to do something on their behalf or in their names. and in this regard i think we can look to the Decolonize Oakland and the Tactical Action Committee as two manifestations of locally organized constituencies that are mobilizing around issues that effect their communities and which intersect w/ occupy oakland – as useful alternatives. They’ve identified things that they feel are problematic with the community Occupy and Oakland generally, and are organizing to effect change within these spaces. if you don’t like what OO’s become, don’t mourn organize. if there is large community support for some particular action then a_small_voice, twistedchick, Jeanne, and Simcha and everyone else on the forums indicating their frustration about the lack oakland focus at GAs and OO approved actions or the conspiratorial cabal that runs shit, need to come together as a constituency and write a proposal to address it.

    and finally i think the criticism of OO not being locally focused is miss placed. OO has focused on a number of local issues.
    1. Police Violence – we all know this one. it’s front and center, because it is local issue. Cops in the Bay area have a long history of brutality and racism. this is true elsewhere of course but it is a central issue here because “pigs be crazy.”
    2. Access to Shelter – homelessness is a big issue in the bay area. the lack of services and the coercive statist/private framework that most operate within makes it so lots of people have to sleep on the streets w/ no services no companionship and no care on any organized and sustained basis – other than what they create amongst themselves.
    3. Access to Food – food politics are a huge issue in oakland. when i taught/coached debate at The Emiliano Zapata Street Academy in oakland, i found the best way to get people involved and active was to bring food because most of the students were hungry. once food became a baseline norm in the class people showed up and participated and we had one of the largest debate teams at one of the smallest schools and some the most competitive and successful debaters in all of the Bay Area Urban Debate League. the TAC talked about shutting down a burger king because of the lack of good food on the inner-city w/ the dominance of fast food chains.
    4. Access to Public Space this is a significant issue in a community organizing against the gang injunction laws
    5. Criminalization of the Population – oakland is the site of mass police state that prohibits access to common space and marks numerous bodies for violent state repression – Black and Latino youth, White Street Kids, the Homeless, and now any one who might be thinking of setting up another one of those damn tents.
    6. Capitalist Exploitation be it the port that extracts billions in surplus value form this community and leaves a trail of destruction and disease in it’s wake. the children of west oakland are suffering form the constant assault of capital as it uses dirty tucks to ideal at the port to move its “goods” through this community at the lowest cost possible.
    7. Systemic Racism (particularly in the form urban planning that destroys existing communities, and a racialized criminal justice system)
    8. Corrupt City Governance they chose to close schools when money was clearly available… …oh wait …apparently that money could only be allocated for cracking skulls, rupturing spleens, chemical warfare, rioting cops hell bent on robbing the poor, w/ an army of renta-cop reinforcements.
    9. The Longview port battle if lost would negatively impact Longshore works in Local 10 in Oakland by establishing a precedent by which the ILWU could be destroyed one local at a time, and there is ample reason to suspect Oakland would be targeted because of the radical past of Oakland’s rank and file.
    10. Bank Exploitation and Destruction of communities w/ bullshit predatory loans.
    11. Foreclosure and Eviction resistance.
    12. legal aid for those engaging in political resistance, they helped get paco out of jail and away from those creeps in ICE. now we need to FREE KHALI. the corrections department needs to hand over all surveillance footage regarding Khali’s detention so that it can be vetted by lawyers to get him off and to ensure his rights aren’t being violated or if they are to document them and hold the authorities accountable. the more success we have in this regard the more space will be created for everyone to engage in political resistance.

    pick anyone of these local issues and organize around it, or even better come up with more issues that are even more pertinent than these and find out ways of mobilizing the community around them so that the movement grows and becomes what we desire as opposed to some thing we come lament taking away only our smug pride in watching it disintegrate having known all along “it wouldn’t amount to anything anyways.”

  2. baydialectic

    Suggesting that someone who anonymously attacks the Longview action (but gives no reasons why that is so) *might* be a stooge of the corporation that would be targeted by that action is simply calling a spade a spade.

    I believe that you are being disingenuous, if not downright hypocritical, when you say that *I* need to “make peace with the fact” that Occupy “has a multitude of actions” that “we are not going to all be on board for.” That pearl of wisdom would be better directed at those on here who seem intent on undermining the Occupy-initiated and Occupy-endorsed EGT grain shipment action with lame, misinformed, and (latently) anti-radical arguments (regarding the action itself and the process that approved it) that they’re not able to back up when called upon to do so.

  3. calaverasgrandes

    if you spent more time providing information, As Fellow Worker does here, rather than making an ass out of yourself by attacking everyone, you would be doing much more for the movement.
    You need to make peace with the fact that Occupy has a multitude of ideologies. And a multitude of actions. We are not going to all be on board for every action, nor are we going to agree on every point of ideology.
    I think it is a mistake to think that by yelling at people, in person, or online, that you are putting energy into the movement. You are in fact driving people away. I know it feels productive but in reality it is bridge burning, not bridge building.
    I have seen the same phenomenon in the anti-nuclear movement, Earth First, Anti-Apartheid movement, Anti Racist movement and so on. Anywhere there is a movement, there are movement police that are checking you if you “aren’t radical enough”.
    You aren’t even preaching to the choir, you are berating them.
    I also think you need to seriously re-examine your tactics of calling people out. It is one thing to have a difference of opinion. It is quite another to imply that someone is a “paid stooge for EGT” or some kind of spy. Really, that is some divisive kryptonite. Put that shit in a lead lockbox.

    I’m not going to respond to anymore of your taunts or whatever as it is obvious that you get off on trolling.

  4. baydialectic

    Thanks, fellow worker, for the break-down of the EGT battle. The information you provided here backs-up and extends upon what I’ve read and been told about this particular struggle. I agree whole-heartedly that unions can be scab outfits and believe that calaveras’s neutral view on this struggle, while couched in the language of avoiding “divide and rule” tactics, is in fact a capitulation to just such tactics. Additionally, I believe his that his view that the AFL-CIO should settle this constitutes an abject surrender to the union bosses and officialdom, hardly a course that anyone who seeks real working class victories–as opposed to defeats masquerading as victories–should oppose categorically.

    If calaveras fails to respond substantively to your post, I for one am going to conclude that his arguments against the EGT action (and claim that it isn’t “time-sensitive”) aren’t serious and that he’s not operating in good faith (in other words, he’s pretending to be a working class opponent of capital, but in fact is not).

  5. baydialectic

    I take it, calaveras, that your failure to respond indicates that you concede that i do in fact know what “opportunism” means and that your argument that the EGT action isn’t “time-sensitive” was opportunistic on your part.

    As to your objection to the word “radical”–there are a huge number of words that would need to be excised from our vocabulary if your “it has no inherent meaning” analysis was adopted wholesale.

    That isn’t to deny that the word “radical” can’t be contested. For me, it means getting to the root of the issue at hand. But what that exactly means isn’t always apparent on its face. For example, the people who wanted to change the name of “Occupy Oakland” to “Decolonize Oakland” couched their “argument” in the language of “real radicalism,” not understanding that being opposed to colonialism hardly marks a person as a radical (putting aside the fact that colonialism is basically a dead letter).

    I stand by my statement that pitting actions such as eviction defense against action at the sites of production, distribution, and exchange is NOT radical. What it exactly is could be debated (liberal? confused? latently pro-capitalist?), but radical? No.

  6. calaverasgrandes

    thanks for the info, that was all I was really asking for was a justification that goes beyond cartoon characters of labor vs capital.
    I still think that the original proposal did not merit “emergency” status.

  7. calaverasgrandes

    one more time
    I, as well as a few other occupiers, are fed up with proposals being pushed to the top of the queue as emergency proposals when there really is not an emergency.
    It may be time sensitive yes, but it is not an emergency.
    An impending raid on an occupy camp, a court date, Admiral Quan’s arborcide etc are good reasons for an emergency proposal.
    The longview EGT stuff is time sensitive, not an emergency. In that light, I would ask, what has transpired since the last GA to move forward Occupy Oaklands support for ILWU in Longview?
    I assume you must be aiming higher than car pools, which I do not understand why you dismiss. You do want to get people up there right?

  8. fellow worker

    Hi Calaverasgrandes,

    i agree w/ much of what you have to say and your presence on the forums. I’ve been avoiding ’em for a while partly because of the spam and moderation problems, the stupid holidays, and the general lack of decorum and productive dialogue (for which i carry my fair share of blame for being a d-bag at times). I offer this caveat because i think RussD is on point and i hope to be more constructive and dialogical as opposed to destructive and anti-dialogical in my own interactions on these forums from here forward. That said i hope that my response doesn’t come off as counter-productive or condescending it’s not my intention.

    Let me start here by saying that i agree w/ most of your comments and i agree focusing on foreclosure actions, un-evictions, and ill add taking back social space should be our primary focus. i agree that there has been a disparity between the support, organizing, outreach, and turnout vis-a-via Port shutdown/ILWU backed actions and locally focused actions. The port shutdown brought out way more people than the dec. 6th anti-foreclosure action, even though the former has raised a number of questions about utility and intention and focus while the later has received nearly unanimous support at least rhetorically (considering comparatively fewer people showed up).

    That said one way we may be able to resolve these divisions between the “ILWU-Labor Faction”/”Local Faction” (I understand these are not real categories or constituencies) is by seeking support from people in the Labor Solidarity Committee who have done the bulk of organizing for the port shutdown and to get them to help organize and mobilize behind the Jan 28th action as a response to the multiple evictions (Berkeley and San Diego) and escalating state repression made terrifyingly apparent with the threats and brutality being waged against Khali who is facing life in prison for the crime of being a politicized homeless person. it would be good for the labor solidarity committee and/or individuals associated with it to mobilize their connections to support this local action, printing posters and flyers, doing outreach, all of these are ways to bridge this gap. and if people don’t support the idea of taking space then they can try to seek support for the actions that they can get down with.

    Now to where we differ. I think there is such a thing as union scabbing, and i do think that people should take a stand against it, because it divides and undermines organized labor. it appears from your question “Scab union?” that you either don’t know of or believe in union scabbing, either way union scabbing is real and it has historically undermined union strength, and this is a perfect example of it playing in the present.

    I have done some research in the ILWU and EGT/IUOE battle and i have concluded that IUOE fits the description of a scab union. they’ve signed a contract w/ an employer that was in a public and well know conflict w/ the ILWU, which is the union that has had jurisdiction over those jobs since the 1934 General Strike, IUOE workers have crossed ILWU picket lines and have agreed to EGT demands for lower wages, longer hours and presumably the EGT demand that the main crane operator position be part of management and thus not a union employe (i don’t know this for sure but it was a demand in their negotiations w/ ILWU).

    I have no problem picking sides in battles between unions. for example historically from 1905-1919 (the hight of the iww) i would have sided with IWW over the Racist, Sexist, Imperialist, and Colluding AFL. there is a difference between supporting unionism writ large, which would be very dubious, and supporting certain kinds of Unionism, for instance I support Solidarity Unionism over Union Scabbing, Radical Unionism over Legalistic and Political Unionism, Bottom up Rank and File Unionism over Top Down Hierarchical Unionism, etc. I don’t think there is anything problematic about having a conditional relationship to organized labor – I’m not gonna help them get politicians elected but i will help them fight against exploitation and the operation of capital as bosses seek to extract greater and greater value from workers and the commons. I advocate a separation between Occupy and Unionism and for everyone to make their own decision about wether or not to support specific kinds of solidarity actions w/ organized labor, which a blanket support for unionism would make impossible.

    “I have done a bit of research and apparently both ILWU and IUOE are AFL-CIO affiliates. They need to resolve this through AFL-CIO. To do otherwise is to flout the rules of both unions, which in the long run undermines union strength.”

    I’ll start here by responding to the conclusion. I don’t think this is necessarily true and in fact union strength can be undermined by leaving it up to the AFL-CIO and the rules. for instance the Local AFL-CIO representing both unions passed a resolution referring to the IUOE as engaging in a scab labor action ( After the local executive board passed this resolution the international/Trumka annulled the resolution. the problem here is that there are clearly divisions within the AFL-CIO in the Pacific Northwest that are being ignored by the international. additionally this shows the shortcomings of trying to work within the system as it were. when the ILWU local 21 did that the National/International AFL-CIO interfered. there are also couple of reasons why this is problematic considering Trumka’s past organizing a similarly contentious strikes in the 1980’s but which are outside the scope of this dialogue (for those interested the Transport Workers Solidarity Committee’s website has an number of articles w/ information on this issue w/ regard to the current fight in Longview). Hierarchical and distant union bosses often impose marching orders on the rank and file and sacrifice some struggles for others, thus leaving this issue up to “bosses” and the “rules” is depoliticizing and disempowering for real workers who are the strength of organized labor. if the workers aren’t empowered in their own work places than this hurts union strength.

    I think we should be proud of the fighting spirit of Local 21 who despite all the various forces aligned against them (economic, legal, political, bureaucratic, etc) have managed to block EGT’s efforts to bring in this seasons grain harvest w/ scab labor and their efforts to influence/undermine the Pacific Maritime Association’s and ILWU’s contract negotiations effecting all ports on the west coast that took place this fall.

    As for the specifics of this conflict I think it’s pretty clear that IUOE is in the wrong and the ILWU is fighting the “good fight.” here is some the research i compiled and have posted elsewhere (sorry for the redundancy i just feel that this information is applicable to this discussion and having already written once i don’t want to elaborate any more than i already have see the bottom section for the stuff on Union scabbing.)

    Why ILWU Local 21’s Fight Matters


    “This fight is historic. Backing down means we’ve betrayed the workers who died in the 1934 General strike, here’s why “the arbitration decision that ended the bloody 1934 general strike clearly notes that all port work that involves taking a commodity from a boat to its first point of rest falls within the jurisdiction of the longshore workers’ union’”


    “At a time when poverty in America has reached the highest level in 50 years, maritime companies want to eliminate goodpaying union jobs. Last year in Philadelphia, Del Monte Fresh Produce Co. went nonunion, violating its agreement with the East Coast International Longshoremen’s Association. Now Bunge wants to do the same on the West Coast. It’s a threat to all waterfront unions and all workers. Last February and March, labor supporters occupied the Wisconsin capitol and held marches of more than 100,000 to protest an attack on unions. That electrified workers around the country, but the action was derailed after it became a political football for DemocraticParty politicians. So now teachers and other public workers in Wisconsin have no bargaining rights.”


    “As Shelly Porter, a young longshore worker and mother of a young daughter who’s been arrested three times (once at night in her home), put it, “We’ve got no option. Either we defend our jobs or we have nothing.’”



    January 12, 2011 – EGT filed suit against the Port of Longview arguing it’s not subject to the Port’s Working Wage Agreement with ILWU Local 21. The reason? EGT claims it would lose $1 million if it contracted Local 21.

    This suit has been described by David Groves, the Publications Director for the Washington State Labor Council, as “a taxpayer-subsidized international conglomerate, which is operating on public property, is suing the public so it can avoid paying the area’s standard wages and undercut its competitors that do.”


    EGT has routinely called in the cops to “protect” the company and scabs from peaceful union picketers.

    135 ILWU members, leaders and supporters have been arrested since July.

    September 21, 2011 – ILWU Picket Lines were broken up by a, “SWAT team clad in black armored riot gear, including billy clubs and rifles, “ and “An armored riot vehicle with a gun turret at the top, which police call the “Peacekeeper.’”

    ILWU members, leaders and supporters have been physically assaulted, pepper sprayed, and hospitalized in numerous acts of police brutality.


    EGT has hired Special Response Corporation, a private security company, that advertizes itself as “trained to meet the intensity of a crisis,” and as “A Private Army When You Need It Most.”


    July 17, 2011 – EGT signs a Five year operating contract with Federal Way-based General Construction Co. to use members from the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 701.

    July 29, 2011 – In a resolution approved Friday morning, the Oregon AFL-CIO executive board voted to “condemn in the strongest way possible the scab labor actions” of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 701, based in Gladstone, Ore.



    What Is The ILWU Fighting For?

    The 8hr day.

    “The union also objected to an EGT proposal to structure 12-hour shifts over two weeks, eliminating overtime pay for working more than eight hours per day,”

    Union control over the chokepoint of production.

    “Two, the company insisted the master console, the worker who controls the flow of grain, be a management title. The move to take this job out of the bargaining unit is telling: the company doesn’t want the union to have access to critical choke point to production.”

    The future of the ILWU and west coast port communities

    “The union’s working agreement with other grain terminals coastwide is set to expire this fall, and union officials say they are concerned they could lose ground in other parts of the West Coast.”

    Solidarity Unionism vs Union Scabbing

    “In a resolution approved Friday morning, the Oregon AFL-CIO executive board voted to “condemn in the strongest way possible the scab labor actions” of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 701, based in Gladstone, Ore.”

    Existing Contracts

    “The International Longshore & Warehouse Union (ILWU) with a long-standing working agreement with the Port of Longview as well as their long history of working in the Pacific Northwest grain elevators via the Columbia River Grain Handler’s Agreement.” ILWU – EGT (edited 10/4/11) by Brock Lile on Tuesday, September 13, 2011 at 3:16pm

    Union Scabbing Will Not Be Tolerated On Any West Coast Port!

    Let it be clear the IUOE Local 701 are SCABS, their own umbrella group has said so publicly:

    “In a resolution approved Friday morning, the Oregon AFL-CIO executive board voted to “condemn in the strongest way possible the scab labor actions” of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 701, based in Gladstone, Ore.”

    “In Oregon, the [AFL-CIO] represents 34 public and private sector unions, including both the ILWU and the Operating Engineers.”

    “Washington and Oregon state AFL-CIO’s are supporting ILWU, as is the ILA, pledging “full support.”

    The fact is this isn’t first time the IUOE has been called out for this:

    “Initially EGT wanted to operate its facility without a union. But the company settled on a subcontractor that hires through Operating Engineers Local 701, a black sheep organization expelled from the Oregon building trades council for previous raids.”

    Dan Coffman President of ILWU Local 21 is on the record speaking truth to power:

    “The only thing worse than a scab is a union scab,” Coffman said of the replacement workers”

    In Solidarity and Struggle We Say…No to EGT…No to IUOE… LONG LIVE THE ILWU!

    if you’ve made it this far than, wow, you’re awesome. thanks for your time. if you feel like it was a waste, my apologies.

  9. calaverasgrandes

    I suggest that we as a movement ditch the word “radical”. It is a buzz word. It has no inherent meaning (you can be a radical republican just as easily as a radical leftist). And usage such UNradical have even less meaning.

  10. baydialectic

    “I think we should be spending more energy on foreclosure actions, un-evictions and the like.”

    I agree w/ this sentiment. I don’t, however, think that such actions should be pit against struggles at the point of production, distribution, and exchange–and particularly not against actions at *strategic* points of production, distribution, and exchange.

    I disagree with you to the extent that you believe that the struggle doesn’t encompass both types of activity. Such a view strikes me as pronouncedly UNradical.

  11. baydialectic

    “I am not sure you know the meaning of the word “opportunistic” as you seem to use it willy nilly. Whenever there is a word or phrase you don’t like, but do not have a particular counter for.”

    If that’s true, I must have a counter almost all the time by your lights, since I think I’ve used the word only one other time on this board.

    I used the word “opportunistic” to describe your insistence that this isn’t a time-sensitive matter because it appeared that your assertion that this was so flowed more from your misgivings about the action *happening at all* than on a honest appraisal of how to make the action as successful as possible.

    You can disagree with my assessment, but you can’t claim that I don’t know what “opportunism” means.

    My attitude is that if an action is important enough to mobilize for, than the mobilization shouldn’t be done in a half-assed manner. You, on the other hand, inexplicably say the EGT grain shipment action is “worthy” but seem perfectly satisfied if the mobilization for this “worthy” action is half-assed.

    I am inclined to question your sincerity and good-faith when you argue that there is little urgency or time-sensitivity on this matter when the ship *could* be ready for the grain pick-up in twenty days! Indeed, your claim (elsewhere on this board) that some “car-pools” could be organized in the days leading up to the action only bolsters my suspicion that you don’t really give a shit about the action and that it is *this lack of enthusiasm* that causes you to claim that there’s no time-sensitivity–and not (to repeat myself) an honest appraisal from the stand-point of someone who wants the mobilization to be successful.

    I’d prefer that you just said straight-up that the action is fucked and you don’t support anyone spending even a moment under the Occupy banner mobilizing for it. At least then you’d be consistent.

    I said on the other thread addressing this same action that if you have evidence that the struggle in Longview, Washington is little or nothing more than a internecine scrap between two equally pliant competing unions–and NOT a struggle between a conglomerate shipping corporation (that seeks to become the Wall-Mart of its industry) against a relatively weak local of the most powerful, and strategically-placed, progressive union in the country–than it would be a service to the movement if you would present the evidence for that claim.

  12. RussD

    I see more of the adversarialism that has plagued recent GA debates here. We should work to build bridges not walls. Try and take the high road even when it is a little difficult. That too is part of the struggle, not letting things bog down in the personal when we feel as if we have been singled out.
    It seems that people are upset about the “emergency” part of the proposal. Not so much about the union part. Correct me if I am wrong in that regard.
    Of course that is spilt milk now, as it apparently passed.

    I want to speak on the “accessible GA” issue if I can. I hear what you are saying. I think that the proposal for a space is well intentioned. However it may have the unintended consequence of alienating some people. I know that if the proposed space is very far from bart a lot of folks will have a hard time making it there. But the rain season is upon us any day now. At which point OG Plaza will be untenable. The next closest alternatives are the bart station itself and city hall. I am not sure how welcome we would be in either.

  13. calaverasgrandes

    I am not sure you know the meaning of the word “opportunistic” as you seem to use it willy nilly. Whenever there is a word or phrase you don’t like, but do not have a particular counter for.
    Scab union?
    Again, this puts us in the role of picking sides with one union against another, which is kind of the opposite of supporting unionism. I have done a bit of research and apparently both ILWU and IUOE are AFL-CIO affiliates. They need to resolve this through AFL-CIO. To do otherwise is to flout the rules of both unions, which in the long run undermines union strength. I really wish this was a more clear cut case with no other unions involved. But it is what it is. I think we should be spending more energy on foreclosure actions, un-evictions and the like. Rather than being the footsoldiers for an internecine union struggle.

  14. baydialectic

    “I’ve been following this proposal for more than a week…”

    I don’t see how that could be true. The Labor Committee met on the evening of December 18 and decided *then* to make the proposal for support from the GA for the action.

    “GAs should be in a totally accessible location….”

    The GA at which the EGT grain shipment action proposal was presented was held at Oscar Grant Park on Wednesday. I learned that the proposal would be voted on then by looking at this web-site on Tuesday. Your suggestion that this whole process was cloaked in obscurity is plainly false.

    “This is surely not time sensitive if nobody has any idea when the EGT ship rolls in…”

    To say that “nobody has any idea” when this action will occur is a ridiculous overstatement. There is every reason to believe that the ship will come to port (in Longview) in January. Your “it’s not urgent” argument strikes me as opportunistic; I doubt if this were an action that you energetically supported that you’d claim the matter isn’t “time sensitive.”

    “Longview situation is about competing unions not a non-union shop and organized labor….”

    The reason that you “generally support the ILWU” goes a far way toward explaining why the shipping companies WOULD LIKE TO GUT THE ILWU. To characterize this as principally a struggle between “competing unions”–and not between labor and capital–is exactly how the bosses want you to characterize this struggle. Have you ever heard of a “scab union,” calavaras?

    And these “chickenshit” ad hominem attacks are counterproductive”

    I don’t think my use of the word chickenshit was an ad hominem, but I regret the aggressive language.

  15. Jeanne

    Is that what we are talking about? Either way the first bit holds.

  16. Jeanne

    I’ve been following this proposal for more than a week. They keep moving the date around for the vote on this particular topic. I work some nights and I had to send a friend with some objections. It looks like she didn’t make it. It matters that you know what f*cuking day the worst f*cking proposal you have ever heard of is being voted on. If you keep changing the schedule, why have a schedule. Just pick three things to vote on and move on, then the next three, then the next three. That way people know what that assembly is about.. Here is a chickensh*t rant for you you chickensh*t ranter, GAs should be in a totally accessible location – if attending a GA means breaking the law, then it is not accessible for those who cannot risk arrest due to parole status, past conviction, immigration status, health concerns, or other responsibilities such as having children. Not to mention moral qualms, but who f*cking cares about other people’s moral qualms these days. Also, the proposal should have stated whether the building was wheelchair accessible.

  17. calaverasgrandes

    Before the GA we were told it could happen as soon as mid january Which would be about 3 weeks away.
    At the GA one of the union speakers said mid january to mid february.
    This is surely not time sensitive if nobody has any idea when the EGT ship rolls in.
    And again, I generally support ILWU but this particular Longview situation is about competing unions not a non-union shop and organized labor. Which puts us in the positions of picking a side between unions, which I am not sure everyone was cognizant of.
    And these “chickenshit” ad hominem attacks are counterproductive.