Last time I checked the boss would have had someone put a bullet in your head for threatening to burn down the factory in the 20th century.
They didn’t stop doing this because people protested, they stopped doing it because they wanted to. Everyone likes to grossly misrepresent the power of the people.
No I mean you perception that workers using violence lead to their rights. This is not really accurate. If you are looking at the numbers such as workers versus industrialist killed it is not a good ratio.
Violence was sanctioned and used against workers with impunity. When the workers did fight back with violence they were forcibly put down and sent to prison.
Simply put, It is not because they were scared of the workers. This is nonsense. I suppose you could attribute collection action, but more importantly it was lobbying the government for protections and succeeding in convincing the wealthy that it was a better arrangement for all parties.
Ok, fine. It was violence, and negotiations and lobbying. Besides, the moderates can’t get the compromises and workers rights annd asking politely for workers rights without and another group of workers committing violence.
It was not violence as I am explaining to you. The violence was always directed at the workers. If the workers did engage in violence they were either tried and sentenced to death or prison. Most of the time they were just killed.
Last time I checked the boss would have had someone put a bullet in your head for threatening to burn down the factory in the 20th century.
They didn’t stop doing this because people protested, they stopped doing it because they wanted to. Everyone likes to grossly misrepresent the power of the people.
https://www.ditext.com/taft/violence1.html
Laughs in armed workers
You should study the history of this. Your perception and reality don’t coincide.
Violence is always a last resort, an means to a end, if a compromise is not possible, then violence is inevitable
It is always the wealthy, the rich and the powerful who have forced our hands
Besides, what choice do we have? They left us with no choice
No I mean you perception that workers using violence lead to their rights. This is not really accurate. If you are looking at the numbers such as workers versus industrialist killed it is not a good ratio.
Violence was sanctioned and used against workers with impunity. When the workers did fight back with violence they were forcibly put down and sent to prison.
Simply put, It is not because they were scared of the workers. This is nonsense. I suppose you could attribute collection action, but more importantly it was lobbying the government for protections and succeeding in convincing the wealthy that it was a better arrangement for all parties.
Ok, fine. It was violence, and negotiations and lobbying. Besides, the moderates can’t get the compromises and workers rights annd asking politely for workers rights without and another group of workers committing violence.
It was not violence as I am explaining to you. The violence was always directed at the workers. If the workers did engage in violence they were either tried and sentenced to death or prison. Most of the time they were just killed.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/theminewars-labor-wars-us/