This week we invite Labor Reporter Alex Press and UAW member Logan Ausherman on the show to dissect the stand-up strike strategy employed by the union, what's in the tentative agreements, and how it may shape the future of labor organizing. Read Alex's reporting here: https://jacobin.com/2023/10/uaw-big-three-strike-end-ta-contract ALSO: Woke moralists have told Homer he cant strangle Bart anymore. And we wonder why society is crumbling... Sign up at http://patreon.com/miniondeathcult for $5/month and get 2 bonus episodes every week sent to your podcast app or browser Music: MC5 - Motor City Is Burning Chokehold - Regression
The liberals are destroying California and conservative humor gone awry.
Conservative humor gone awry is going to fascist-phonia today.
So stay tuned.
We're going to take a few pictures of the desert and how their policies are actually messing it up.
It's not beautiful when you go across that border.
Stay tuned, guys, and we'll show you exactly what it looks like when you're in the storm deserts.
All their remarkable stuff.
Stay tuned.
Okay, I'm Alexander Edward.
And I'm Tony Boswell.
And we are Minion Death Cult.
The world is ending.
A stunning lack of child abuse on television is responsible.
And we're documenting it.
What's up, everybody?
We got a fun segment to get to.
But first, we had a wonderful interview with UAW worker Logan Usherman and labor reporter for Jacobin Alex and Press on the show to talk about what could arguably arguably be historic deals between the United Auto Workers and the big three auto manufacturers, not just in terms of
Pay and other compensation, but also outlining the perimeters of future fights and changing the actual nature of what it means to have labor power in this country.
And I realize that's like vague and grandiose, but it'll make sense when you listen to the interview.
So here it is.
Well, we're joined by two guests.
We have Alex Press, labor reporter for Jacobin.
Thank you so much, Alex, for joining us.
Yeah, thanks so much for having me, guys.
Yeah, of course.
And then we have Logan Osherman, a UAW worker out of Detroit.
How are you doing, Logan?
Not too bad.
Just finally enjoying a full weekend for the first time, probably, in a little while.
Jesus.
I'll be back to, you know, six days a week again, probably, for at least a couple of weeks.
Goddamn.
Enjoying it while I can, enjoying this Veterans Day, you know.
Well, hey, thanks for joining us today to talk about what appears to be sort of the culmination of an incredible series of worker actions and seems to be some wins here.
I'm going to be reading from Alex's piece in Jacobin.
UAW now has tentative deals with all three automakers and they look to be historic.
Before we get into the tentative agreements themselves, it appears to me that the strike itself, this long labor action, was historic in itself in a couple ways.
From things that I've read, this appears to be the first time the UAW has struck all three big American automakers at the same time.
That's Ford, General Motors and Stellantis, which manufactures Dodge, Ram, Chrysler and Jeep.
I was totally unaware that all three automakers hadn't been struck at the same time.
Alex, do you have it?
Can you maybe give some insight as to why this was employed for the first time this round?
Yeah, I mean, I think what the UAW decided to do, and I would argue mostly effectively pulled off, was sort of using, you know, the companies against each other, right?
There are different terms for this, but often employers kind of pit workers against each other.
And here there were three bargaining tables at the same time.
And by striking all three, they kept being able to kind of forward would agree to something.
There'd be pressure on the other two to also then model themselves pattern after that.
I think there was also just something.
I think, and I'm sure the other, our other guest is probably going to want to talk about the actual stand-up strike strategy, but you know, I think there was all, which there are downsides and I think there are also upsides, but you know, I think also similarly, there was this, you know, new leadership, Sean Faines, the new president won in the first direct election ever in UAW history.
The first time members got to directly vote for the leadership.
Which is kind of crazy to think about.
And so, and his fellow leaders and like new staff, new advisors, I think they all wanted to do something that would be ambitious, that would, I think, reflect faith in the membership, you know, and that a new day in the UAW, you know, you can't just say that when you get elected or when you campaign, you actually have to prove it.
And I do think that going on the aggressive and, and again, trying to put an end to company unionism, actually does make that distinction.
You know, people symbolically point to this moment where usually the start of bargaining in Detroit, you know, historically the president of the UAW who's about to sit down with the executives and their lawyers, he'll shake their hands.
That's sort of the symbolic thing, which for many of us certainly like on the left or like who hate the companies, like this was always so insulting, right?
Like you looked at the guy who was supposed to represent you and he's shaking hands with the bosses.
And Sean Fain refused to do that.
He said, I'm doing a member's handshake.
And he just went to local plants and talked to members.
And that might just be symbolic, but I do think he actually backed it up with strategy too.
Yeah, I mean, combativeness does seem to be a hallmark with this new wave of organizing.
I mean, it's it seems to be a prerequisite for actual effective labor organizing.
Logan is I mean, it seems like now that it's been put to me in this way, it seems like, yeah, striking.
All three big auto workers at the same time is a really big task to do because you're negotiating different contracts, like Alex said, with three different automakers.
So I under I understand maybe why that hasn't been a strategy in the past.
Do you see how effective do you think it was that the UAW took on all three companies at the same time?
Well, I'll say as far as taking on all three companies at the same time goes, that was great.
I was happy to see that.
However, you know, it stunk a bit of Rutherism to me.
Ruther is the guy who started the whole Walter Ruther, started the whole administration caucus and doing this targeted strategy and working with the companies and everything.
And honestly, I was a bit disappointed when on, what was I think the 14th of September when the contracts expired, I was at work thinking I was going to be walking out.
And then I found out we're only targeting three plants.
Now like you were saying, it's a lot to juggle, you know, there's 155,000 of us at all three of these automakers.
And our strike fund was only so much.
And I think I believe the estimates where we would have been able to strike all three, all, everybody out at once, all 155,000 of us for about 11 weeks.
So I think a large part of this strategy was trying to save that strike fund.
And then also, you know, like Alex was saying, put a lot of leverage on the company.
This is one thing that the strategy did do is it did add some additional leverage.
What I liked, what I didn't like was the dis engine, excuse me, The disingenuity and the messaging and the lead up to the strike.
It said, uh, I don't know, uh, people, uh, people got a little, uh, we're, we're, we're taking a, uh, tripping over my words here.
I tried to say people were expecting something different than from what happened.
That's like, you know, that's why I was, I was disappointed the same way.
A lot of other people were because, you know, let me tell you at my plant in the lead up to the strike, we were working 10 hour days, six days 15 months or something like that.
It had been over a year because this had started in May when we launched a new vehicle.
So people just wanted to go on strike to get some time off and, you know, stick it to a company that's been hyper exploiting them for years and years and years now and just dealing with these bad contracts.
So you're you're more critical of the stand up strike strategy, which is like if people that's that's kind of what I wanted to get into next was this stand up strike strategy seems to be another historic Or at least novel to my knowledge aspect of this wave of strikes.
And I did hear criticisms of it, like kind of what you're saying when it was first implemented, because he didn't give warning.
Sean Fain or leadership, to my knowledge, again, didn't give warning that these were going to be And again, we haven't really explained what a standup strike is yet for the listener who may not know.
But from my understanding, these are targeted strikes at individual plants that, you know, if I'm giving a charitable explanation of it, allow the union to focus its energy on more specific targets and I was, yeah.
And so I do understand that initial response of like, well, this isn't a normal strike.
This isn't what I thought we were getting into.
And you know, with the Teamsters, we had a hard deadline of, August 1st, everything after July 31st, if we didn't have a contract, we were supposedly going to strike.
Like I marched with a sign that said unavailable to work after July 31st if we don't have a contract.
I had one of those signs on my front yard.
And then when leadership came up with a tentative agreement with UPS, we kept working.
Now we didn't have a contract but we had a tentative agreement and I understand people getting upset at that but at the same time my opinion of these worker actions is that their goal is to pressure the company and if you can pressure the company And get what you want out of them without actually striking or like a full, you know, industry wide strike or something.
I don't consider that to be a loss.
You know, I would I would say, well, could we have gotten more perhaps?
But also, there's a lot you give up in a full industry wide or company wide strike that I mean, maybe your members in your building were all willing to strike.
I don't know.
I heard a lot of dissenting opinions among Teamsters, and I'm not sure that a strike would have been any more effective or at least a lot more effective than getting a tentative agreement and continuing to work.
Yeah, I just want to speak real quickly on that.
My criticism isn't necessarily that, you know, we all should have went out and struck.
It's just that the way the messaging was done in the lead up to the strike action, I know it was done to keep the companies guessing, but it also kind of kept workers guessing a little too much for my opinion.
But ultimately, like you said, the strike was effective.
We got a good agreement out of it.
I just wish it would have been carried out with a little bit more care for what the workers were thinking and asking for.
But it was a much, much, much better strategy than what we had been doing before, where we're just letting them come to us and take their time and dilly-dally.
I don't know.
I was happy with the response, but I wasn't thrilled.
I'll be honest.
I'm a Marxist, so I wanna see a lot more than just, you know, what they're doing with the strike action, honestly.
That's totally understandable.
Alex, go ahead, what were you gonna say?
Yeah, I'll just say my one, you know, my sort of view on the stand-up strike was, I actually was very skeptical at first.
Like, I wrote a piece the first day, and was very honest about, you know, there are obvious pros here, one being, yes, like, you're not spending down that strike fund so quickly.
The one that really convinced me over time was I actually underestimated how much this would work at keeping the pressure on the company and heightening it.
You have a strike, I work in media and I hate to, it's a bad thing how media is.
There's a headline for the first week, it's a big story, that the auto workers are on strike and then no one pays attention.
Mm hmm.
Now, if there's a new plant every week, there's new escalations.
There's constantly an excuse to keep sort of like bombarding the companies and keep escalating pressure.
You know, they started at smaller parts assembly or parts plants.
And then, you know, the last escalation wave was like the big profitable assembly plants.
And just to make clear for listeners, like, you know, the strike, as was said earlier, you know, immediately when the strike is called, three locals were called up, one from each of the big three companies and told, you know, at 10 a.m. tomorrow, you know, you're walking out.
And then a week later, all right, now local blah, blah, blah, local two, local three, you guys, too, are now called upon to stand up and walk out.
And I do think it's interesting history here that like Sean Fain and everyone kind of putting forward this messaging referenced explicitly the Flint sit down strikes that built the UAW.
And, you know, those sit-down strikes were revolutionary, I would say, for the U.S.
labor movement at the time.
You know, workers at the giant River Rouge plant are refusing to leave.
They're sitting down.
There are these great photos of, like, workers reading the newspaper, drinking coffee in the shop.
And it built the UAW and inspired so many other workers to build unions and use the same tactic.
And Sean would say, you know, this is our generation's answer, which I thought was really interesting in his part of why I was like, OK, let's give it a shot.
You're right that innovation is important.
And so, you know, I think the last thing I'll say on this is that The downsides are, one, exactly to your point, what you were saying, that part of a strike, part of what's so powerful about it, is it's an opportunity to unite the membership.
Everyone is in solidarity with each other.
Everyone is going through it.
It doesn't mean there aren't still disagreements and certainly tempers can get hot because everybody is sacrificing.
But it's this moment of class unity and it can be really inspiring.
And it's also, you know, it's massive.
This is 150,000 members under these three contracts.
That would have been so many places that could have had picket lines that people were converging on that other workers were getting to know them.
And so my fear was really, is this going to isolate the people who are on strike, going to breed resentment by the ones who have to endure a strike, maybe breed resentment by the ones who have to keep working crazy hours who wish they were on strike?
It goes both ways.
And I think the one thing that tempers my take on that, I think that is a real concern.
It's totally possible that in some places that really did happen.
The one thing that no one ever sort of discussed publicly, for understandable reasons, is that the UAW just, the membership just elected new leadership by a very close margin, and the administrative caucus that was referenced.
You know those some of those guys not all them plenty of people supported them and are not like bad people But there's a lot some of them hate the new leadership And they there are certain locals that will not you know if they were told to strike they would try to sabotage Sean Fane and everybody else And I think Sean, of course, would never be publicly, I doubt he would ever say that's part of why they did this.
But it's just true that maybe certain locals couldn't be called upon and couldn't be expected to actually follow through with a serious strike.
I don't know that speculation.
I think it is part of the thinking.
I can give a little bit of context to that because while Sean Fain and a number of executive board members, where the executive board is basically like the highest decision making body in the UAW, or the International Executive Board, excuse me.
Well, there's, I think about half of them are UAWD people.
The other half of them are like Chuck Browning are still administration caucus people.
And from what I understand, Sean Fain did want to take a more radical approach to, you know, this this strike action.
But I mean, this is just speculation on my part.
I think there was some kind of politicking going on on the executive board.
There's lawyers and political advisors and these more conservative members of the executive board influencing decisions.
Because, you know, at the end of the day, Sean Fain isn't like a dictator or anything.
You know, he's not passing decisions down from on high.
He has to work with the executive board and they set the policy.
And then the locals, you know, the locals are even worse.
The locals are still full of administration caucus people I my local is Chock full of them, unfortunately.
I came from Belvedere, actually.
Oh, interesting.
OK.
Logan, you mentioned the UAWD.
Now, that is a reform organization within the UAW who helped get Sean Fain elected.
Is that correct?
That's correct.
He's a member, but he's not necessarily what's the word I'm looking for here?
Not like under control of the organization or anything.
He works very closely with us and we work closely with him.
So, yeah.
And you, I think in one of your DMS, you mentioned that it was akin to like Teamsters for a democratic union, TDU, which is a reform caucus of which I am a rank and file member within the Teamsters who did help get Sean O'Brien elected as, as our new president.
And so I'm, I'm hearing a lot of similarities between your guys struggle and ours.
And I saw something.
What was it?
Sean Fane just spoke at the TDU conference and gave a lot of credit to Teamsters for a Democratic Union for, I think, helping, if I'm interpreting this correctly, helping reform the UAW.
Do either Alex or Logan, do you know about the TDU's efforts within the UAW to assist that?
I was just going to say, yeah, the thing he said at the T.D.U.
convention was like, there wouldn't have been this strike without T.D.U.
and there certainly would have been U.A.W.D.
And I think explicitly both means inspirationally, as well as like nuts and bolts, especially through the Labor Notes organization, actually kind of holding trainings over the course of the past few years of how do you build a reform caucus?
And actually, you know, it's some of the same people and they're all, you know, a lot of them know each other, even if they're members of different unions.
So it's a really close-knit relationship among at least some of the people in both of those groups.
That's great.
It's great to see, like, overlap between two, you know, nominally different unions, because again, one struggle.
Anything to add on that, Logan?
Yeah, I was just going to say that, from my understanding, a lot of the, you know, same people in Labor Notes who helped organize the Team Search for a Democratic Union also helped Organize the UAWD.
I mean, so I'm reading here from your article, Alex and Jacobin, the Stellantis tentative agreement like those at Ford and GM includes pay raises of 25 percent to base wages through life of the four and a half year agreement.
And the reinstatement of cost of living allowance is given up during the Great Recession, as well as a compression of the number of years it takes a worker to reach the top rate, which will shrink from eight to three years.
This is such a huge deal.
This is something that we didn't address in our in our Teamsters in our contract that we got.
But it's definitely something, excuse me, that we should try for next contract because we have a wage progression at UPS as well for full time employees.
But our progression is only four years, which is less than what it used to be for you guys, which was eight years, which is incredible.
Let me speak to that real quick.
It took me six years to get where I am at full pay, and that was with being laid off for 18 months at one point.
Yeah, this is amazing that they got it down to that for me.
I'm just shocked by it.
I got to say.
There is unfortunately kind of a bait and switch when it comes to a lot of union jobs where these union positions are being sold as well.
This this is how you get a living wage.
These these union workers like they're they're paid enough to afford a house and a car and maybe just send their kids to school or whatever.
Like, look at the wages they make.
But there's always this asterisk.
That it's like, that's the wage you make after four years.
And not only that, that's the wage you make after four years after you got a full-time position.
So like me, I was working part-time at UPS for nine years, loading trucks before I even was able to get a full-time position.
And that's just based on seniority.
But it was the Great Recession and they were squeezing as much as they could out of existing drivers and swapping drivers from building to building to avoid bringing up more full timers.
But these these wage progressions, because it's not like, oh, you start off like five dollars below the top rate and then you move up a dollar every year.
It's like, no, you start off at half.
I mean, I don't know how it is at UAW.
I'm describing how it is at Drivers, but you don't actually get that life-changing living wage until after.
So you have to live.
You have to live all those four, five, nine years on a sub-living wage until you actually get that.
So this seems like a huge win for you guys.
Yeah, well, it's that and this temp thing, because what that really ties into, too, is the, well, they call them supplementals under the 2019 language, but these temporary workers we have, like, I have some of them on my team who I've been working alongside basically since I got up here.
It took me six months to get rolled over to full-time out at Belvedere, but now I'm working out here and it took me, I have people I've been working with for almost three years who haven't been rolled over.
Are they citing the economy for that?
Are they saying we can't open up any full-time jobs because of recession or inflation or something like that?
Well, they had flipped some people about a year ago and I think it's much like the Belvedere thing.
These things are being used as We're being used as bargaining chips, I think, because, you know, we have somewhere between 4,000 and 5,000 supplemental employees at Stylianist, I believe, and, you know, we had to negotiate to get a bunch of those flipped upon ratification, and even then we were only able to get, I believe, just under 2,000 with 1,950 or something flipped.
But now, at least, they do have a more clear path to full-time with this new contract language, which is why, ultimately, I'm voting yes to that and the Belvedere stuff, because that stuff's so, so crucially important, and this contract is really setting us up for a good fight in 2028 when it expires.
Can you, can you, I didn't, so I didn't realize you were, you had been at Belvedere.
Can you tell, explain people what the Belvedere thing is?
This was like such a big deal that they got it, this plant reopened that had been idled and, you know, and had been idled because the companies basically were saying like, hey, fuck you to the UAW, I think.
So yeah, tell people about this because you actually worked there.
Well, I don't just, I didn't just work there.
I got in there through my father who has worked for, uh, I guess Atlantis now for 25, over 25, almost 30 years.
So through him, I was able to get a job there.
And, you know, about a year after I got a job there, they started slowing down production.
I got hired on, I don't know, what was it? 2017.
So they started slowing down production as I was in the first group to get laid off.
I was laid off from 2018 till 2020 when they sent me a letter and told me to come out here.
So now my dad, since he had such high seniority, he was working at the plant the whole time, right up until I think it was a year or two ago that they, they didn't technically shut it down.
What they did is they did the thing where it's called idling.
So the plant's still there.
It still could be retooled and product could be placed in it.
But there's nobody working there.
It's not running any production.
It's just sitting there empty, basically waiting.
And what they did at Belvedere is they tore out all the machinery.
They tore everything out of that place.
You know, it's going to have to, even with this new contract, it is still going to take a substantial amount of time to get that place retooled and up and running.
Well, a novel part of these negotiations and a novel win, to my understanding, for the UAW was to get that Stellantis plant unidled or reopened, which is, you know, according to what I've read, something that the UAW hasn't been able to do before or maybe hasn't tried.
To do before, which is force the workers input, force the workers opinion on sort of managerial decisions, like the allocation of work or the running of these plants.
And I mean, there's more on this in your article, Alex.
The Stellantis deal additionally includes not only the right to strike over plant closures, which was also one at Ford, but the right to strike over product and investment, too.
This was really interesting to me.
Alex, maybe can you describe what you mean by product and investment and what the UAW workers would strike for?
The general significance for the average listener who doesn't understand maybe the ins and outs of all of these contracts is that fundamentally sitting down with the company and saying, we don't care what your excuse for idling that plant is.
We say, we are not ending this strike until you agree to figure out how to reopen it.
You know, it is this idea that used to be actually not totally uncommon.
That, like, the capitalist, the boss, while certainly not a friend of the worker, was understood to have to consider workers and the communities, the effects of his, like, investment allocation, his spending, his costs, because he knew that workers would strike, or that people would, you know, there'd be pressure on him.
And so I just want to say, so this, you know, and the shareholders became all powerful, 70s, 80s, suddenly executives, there is no sense that, it's not that they ever cared about the working class, but there's no sense or pressure that they have to even consider the effects of their spending and resources and pay.
And I really think this contract, by one, reopening an idle plant, And also saying workers have the right to strike over plant closures anywhere.
So if they try to close one plant, the whole company can be struck.
And then also product investment saying, you know, we want this product here.
We want you to invest here.
That is a fundamentally, I mean, it'll look different than it used to, but it is fundamentally an end to the idea that a company has all kind of dictatorial power over what they do with their money.
And with their property.
I mean, this really pisses off a lot of the right that this is in this contract.
Because they're saying, who are they to have a say over what we do with our companies?
WUAW is saying, well, we're the ones who make your profits, so actually we get to have a say.
And I think, you know, devil's in the details, but it's philosophically and politically really significant to start having this language to inspire other people as well to try to do the same.
Yeah, it seems like a really big step towards a more worker-directed economy.
It's a baby step for sure, but I'm so happy we're thinking about these things.
Anything else to add to that, Logan?
I just wanted to say something about what you just said.
What's really important to me about this contract, I know you had to deal with the vote no people at UQAS and I've been trying to deal with them out, you know, out here in the UAW as well as, you know, this contract isn't, it is a historic contract.
It's the best contract that they've ever had in my lifetime.
I don't know that I'd call it a record contract because I know people who have, you know, seen better contracts.
I mean, they're very old now, but they've seen them.
But you know, this contract, what it does is it sets us up in a position to fight as hard as possible and really fight for it all next time.
We'll be able to spend time organizing more plans, raising people's consciousness within the union, and building up the strike fund to a level where we could maybe be out for a whole year or something if we really needed to, you know?
We have time to prepare now, because I think one of you had mentioned earlier, you know?
It's another thing a lot of people even in the UAW don't understand.
John Fain got elected less than a year ago.
He had to clean house and get everything back in order at the Solidarity House.
And now he has to go about preparing for a strike strategy.
So this all had to be done very, very quickly.
And, you know, they weren't I just don't think we were able to get ourselves in the best tactical position we could have been to win things like, you know, pensions and the quality of life stuff, which they unfortunately entirely capitulated on.
But, you know, that's it.
Sometimes it is either that or, you know, getting Belvedere back open.
So I'm happy to make that right now and look forward to the future when we have a stronger working class movement and a bigger, broader movement that's hopefully has more connections across industry, you know?
Absolutely.
And I just want to add, as far as looking forward, like what should people expect.
You know, I think there's another thing that you're going to hear about a lot more in the coming weeks and months, which is, you know, at one point Sean Fain said in one of his like recent broadcasts on Facebook, something like, when we go back to the table in four and a half years, Or four years, I guess, before they go back to the table.
This is not going to be the big three.
It's going to be the big five or the big six.
By which he meant, you know, actually, I think an important thing for people to know that maybe a lot of people don't, is that the majority of union work, autoworker, or the majority of autoworkers in the United States are not union members.
The UAW now represents the minority of autoworkers.
There are so many non-union shops in the South, especially.
And this is a huge problem.
Not just because it's wrong and those workers in non-union shops have terrible pay and bad benefits and dangerous conditions.
It also completely undermines the UAW strategy, right?
Because the companies can say, this is going to put us out of business.
And they actually can make the case for that because they can point to places that have such low labor costs.
And so the UAW existentially, actually very similar to how the Teamsters are very focused on Amazon drivers now and Amazon workers, is that if there are non-union competitors it could existentially and literally destroy the union's future.
Yeah.
And I think, you know, there's been some public discussion of this, some comments and stuff, that the UAW right now, shops are so hot, even in really unexpected places, meaning that workers in non-union shops are actually kind of banging down the UAW's doors right now and saying, You know, we're in.
Let's get a union in here.
Let's be UAW, which is really remarkable because the UAW did try to organize some shops in the South in the past and lost very badly.
And everything I hear is that that is changing very, very quickly.
And so as far as going forward and how quick this had to get done, it's like if you manage to organize the competitors by the time of the next contracts or you get a real foothold, that totally changes the amount of leverage you have.
It really improves workers' position.
So just totally to your point, I think the focus will be on organizing now.
Yeah, I think a win is contagious in several respects.
Wins are contagious, just the broader labor movement that we've seen, the organizing of so many different Traditionally unorganized shops like coffee shops and restaurants and things like that People people are getting a taste for it.
It's not an abstract idea anymore It's something your friend is a part of or it's something somebody you follow on this on the internet is is a part of and so not only are these wins attractive and Contagious to a certain degree across different industries.
I think within industries they're contagious and it's like Showing the UAW membership that we can actually do this.
Like, when was the last UAW strike?
2019.
Oh, okay.
But that wasn't really, again, that wasn't really a major strike, and it was the first time they had really, I think, struck in the era of concessions.
Yeah, I mean, at the Teamsters, UPS Teamsters, we hadn't seen a strike, we still haven't seen a strike since the 90s, you know, and so it's just so good for a movement to be like, We did something and we got something for doing it.
And I think that's going to just get so much goodwill towards Sean Fane and the reform leadership and the more militant elements of organizing that sets everybody up for good stuff in 2028.
Exactly.
I mean, I'll say that is one of the reasons I wanted us all to go out.
That's one of the reasons I wanted the Teamsters and us to go out and around the same time is because that would have been Such a massive moment for not just, you know, the Teamsters and UAW, but for the working class in America as a whole, and would have sent such a strong signal to people.
And, you know, in the UAW, at least, there are people, I swear, who would pick up a rifle if Sean Fain told them to.
Like, he's gotten some people, you know, because these people haven't seen anything, but the UAW are constantly, you know, backtracking and backtracking and backtracking.
And now they're seeing what just a little bit of a fight can do.
So.
You know, it's even just this little bit of a fight was was massively important because it really shows people that when when workers fight back, workers can win and workers do win.
Yep.
This last quote from your article Is from Sean Fane.
If we're going to truly take on the billionaire class and rebuild the economy so that it starts to work for the benefit of the many and not for the few, then it's important that we not only strike, but we strike together, said Fane, calling on other unions to likewise align their contracts to expire on May Day.
Because, yeah, these tentative agreements all revolve around, all expire on April 30th, 2028, which is, yeah, the day before May Day, a famous, you know, working class holiday.
Secondly, we demanded a longer contract because one of our biggest goals coming out of this contract victory is to organize like we've never organized before.
When we return to the bargaining table in 2028, it won't just be the big three, but with the big five or big six, like you said, Alex.
So I just, you know, broadly speaking, I just I love that we are returning to a Working class language, even for these, you know, ostensibly working class organizations like labor unions.
I mean, we saw that with Sean O'Brien.
We saw that with his his willingness to just call the greedy capitalists what they were.
And it was really it was really effective for me because I'm like, I don't know this guy.
I voted for him, you know, because I because I like the platform.
But like, Who knows what kind of a guy he is.
If that's the face he's putting forward, like, I'm happy to go along with this and see what happens.
And I'm happy we did.
And yeah, the stuff from Sean Fane is, if anything, been even more militant that I've seen than Sean O'Brien.
And maybe Sean O'Brien, you know, maybe he'll get a little jealous and step it up a little bit.
In fact, I hope so.
In fact, I heard he was a little jealous at the TDU convention.
Yeah.
I mean, you didn't call a strike, so you can't really complain, you know?
The friend who was telling me this, I was like, this is good to have.
It's actually healthy to be pushing constantly, not just as TDU members.
Of course, that's what you should be doing with any elected president.
But the fact that now Sean O'Brien has to be like, damn, I had the spotlight for just a little bit of time and this guy, people liked him even more.
It's like, great, you're going to have to be even better.
Right, see, this is the marketplace of ideas at work.
This is the competition that we love to see on the left.
Which Sean will come out on top.
Okay, well, we're about to wrap it up here.
Any last words you'd like to say, Logan?
I just want to say thank you guys so much for having me on and letting me talk about this.
I'll be honest, I've been a little disappointed throughout this fight because nobody's really covered it.
I mean, granted, it's been overshadowed a little bit by some other world events and stuff, but even on the left, really, I haven't seen too much coverage of the UAW from friendly outlets, I guess.
So I'm glad to see somebody talking about it.
I know Jacobin does great work.
So thank you, Alex, for coming on and giving some added context.
It was great being on here with you.
Yeah.
I think it's Mike's muted.
I'm great.
I'm great.
Thank you.
I just, I didn't have much to contribute.
Everybody was so awesome.
I just did some enthusiastic nodding throughout.
I hope that was felt.
Well, you did also, there was some behind the scenes stuff you did help out with that nobody will hear, but trust me, it was crucial.
Yeah, really important stuff.
Did you hit the bong?
That's what I need to know.
I only hit it in the beginning.
It didn't feel right for the interview.
Maybe I'll get one on the way out.
Please do.
Yeah, Alex, thank you so much for coming on to talk about your article.
The article is, of course, UAW now has tentative deals with all three automakers and they look to be historic.
We will link to that reporting in this in these show notes.
But would you like where would you like people to go to look at your stuff, Alex?
Yeah, so most of my stuff is at Jackman.com.
Is that what it is these days?
I think so.
Yeah, it's Jackman.com.
You also can just follow me on Twitter or Instagram, wherever.
AlexN, as in Natasha, which is my middle name, Press.
So AlexNPress, anywhere.
And otherwise, I just want to say in closing, you know, Logan, I went to Detroit for the Special Bargaining Convention back in March, the day after Sean was sworn in.
And I wrote, like, 5,000 words of, like, here's what it looks like for reformers to try to take over and take control of the union.
And it was crazy.
I mean, it really was, like—it produced, I think, some of the best writing I've ever done, in part because the autoworkers just had so much to say.
Like, there was—and this frustration had been pent up for years about these corrupt union leaders.
And I was just incredibly, not to be like too earnest or sentimental, I was just so impressed.
These are people who, as you said, you're working six tents.
I mean, and yet you're managing to organize in your plants, in your shops, you're sweeping elections with reformers.
I mean, I was just like completely in admiration of the UAW folks.
And I was really hoping it would go this way, that actually we would see a new UAW.
And so I just like, real props to you and all your coworkers and stuff.
Absolutely, yeah, really inspiring stuff.
Absolutely.
That's a lot of running around on your break.
Trying to talk to people, I'll say that.
Alright, well, thanks for joining us, guys.
Solidarity forever.
Solidarity forever, man.
Thank you so much.
You guys rock.
Thank you.
Bye.
Nice.
Brothers and sisters, I'm going to tell you something.
I hear a lot of talk by a lot of honkies sitting out a lot of money telling me they're high society.
But I'll let you know something.
If you ask me, this is the high society.
This is the high society.
Let's do it.
Bye.
Bye.
But I'll let you know something, if you ask me, this is the high society!
This is the high society!
Let's do this!
Oh, you're a fine, fine person, all around the people.
All right.
Yeah.
So thanks again to Alex Press and Logan from the UAW for joining us for that conversation.
Alex Press does wonderful reporting.
I would highly recommend following her on social media for her writing.
It's great.
OK, moving on.
I think we got time for one segment here.
And, you know, thankfully, we have time for it because it's such an important topic.
Tony, do you like The Simpsons?
Oh, yeah, of course, of course.
No, you don't, because they just told Homer to stop strangling Bart.
Oh, I'm you know, it's funny.
I wish you would have asked because I the Simpsons are fine, but I do.
That's why I watch it.
I watch it for.
That's why everybody watches it.
Homer, Homer aggressively choke and yell at Bart.
That's why I watch it.
It's so it's the best part.
It's so funny because you'll listen if you do.
I mean, if you listen to commentaries from even the classic seasons, the writers and artists are like, whenever there's a scene where Homer is like a second from killing Bart with his bare hands, the writers are have obviously been like, don't don't know if we should have done all that.
Now, I'm I'm of the opinion and this may be controversial.
I'm of the opinion that it's a cartoon.
I don't think it's going to make people abuse their children if they see Homer Simpson do it.
Yeah, I don't think I think it's not only a cartoon, but remember, like in order to be a character on TV does not mean you need to be a saint.
Homer is a flawed individual, right?
He's an anti-hero.
Yeah, it is his struggle to be a good father.
When he assaults Bart, that's that's his truth.
And that's we're not saying it's OK.
No one should see that and say, I want to emulate that.
Matter of fact, we see that and say, that's exactly why we don't do that.
So we're going to lose that example now.
I guess you haven't seen my masculinity page on Facebook that does put black and white stills of Homer strangling Bart and overlays inspirational text on top of it.
Quotes about grit and stuff?
Yeah, so it was just announced in the news that the Simpsons will never strangle Bart again.
Something like that.
Everybody's pretty upset about it, which I couldn't possibly understand because who would know?
Who would know now if Homer stopped strangling Bart?
I would never know that.
A lot of people wouldn't know that.
That's not something you need to know about.
That's like it's if you ask me like, you know, oh, is Homer still strangling Bart?
I would be like, I don't know.
What's the top trending song on TikTok?
These are things that I don't have to know anymore.
Yeah, it's okay.
When I had to envision him choking Bart, I couldn't even think of an actual time.
I think I just created a fake scene in my head.
It's not a really pivotal thing.
It's not what you remember from the episodes.
Yeah, I don't... I can understand being a writer or being an artist, you know, one of the illustrators on these shows and being like, I don't really want to write Bart Homer strangling Bart for necessarily no reason, but I think if there's like a good opportunity to do it, like, like if it's funny, then, then sure.
I'm not morally opposed to cartoon violence.
Um, and the criticisms of it remind me of like the criticisms of why I wasn't allowed to watch the Simpsons growing up.
Yeah.
Which is like, well, my dad was like, I don't want, I don't want you to see Homer in like Get the wrong idea.
You know, I don't, I don't want you to think he's so cool that you're going to grow up to be like Homer.
Negatively influenced by Homer Simpson.
And I'm like, well, first of all, it would be Bart Simpson, asshole.
That's who, that's, that's who I would be emulating.
But even, even then, you know, um, So I don't I'm not I'm not really that like sympathetic to that argument, but but I do understand that, you know, you don't necessarily need to have that just just because it's it's a running bit or whatever.
But yeah, people were really upset about this because.
Um, it recently got, I don't know, confirmed that they weren't doing it despite them not having it in any episodes except for like a Treehouse of Horror episode for like the last two years, like two or three years.
Homer hasn't strangled Bart and nobody, you know, nobody became gay because of that.
Um, and so it's, it's pretty funny to see, like, the reaction come out now and there are some amazing reactions that we should, we should highlight here.
Has, has Bart gotten sassier since?
I don't think, I don't think that's, I think he's maintained the same level of, of, um, we'll say rebellion.
I don't think he's gotten out of hand because of the lack of strangling.
So that's interesting, you know?
I mean, I don't know.
I don't see Bart wear high heels anymore or dress in drag like he did in the in the golden era of The Simpsons.
So maybe the strangling worked.
Oh, OK.
Yeah, that's the direction it's going.
That makes sense.
He doesn't have to do it anymore.
Yeah.
Mission accomplished.
He doesn't have to do it anymore.
Fox 6 News Milwaukee posted about this and Lee Amon said, in the Simpsons defense, it is much less violent than the streets of Milwaukee.
Yeah, there you go.
There you go.
Again, this is not not only like this is the Simpsons, this is the Simpsons.
So, yeah, I guess it should be less violent than the streets of Milwaukee, but also the streets of Milwaukee calm down.
I think I think this nation would be a lot better off if we had more Homer Simpsons on the police force.
Yeah.
If we could if we could strangle these criminals the way that Homer strangles Bart.
But see, we won't even let him do it in a cartoon.
Of course, we're not going to let him do it in real life.
It's funny, too, because like the violence they're referencing in Milwaukee or like, you know, a thug just shooting you for your watch.
Right.
Like that's not good.
Homer's not going to do that to Bart.
So what are you even talking about?
Why are you bringing this correlation?
At least this isn't a live cam of Milwaukee Galleyway.
I feel like in Milwaukee the gun violence is over, like, which Nazi beer company is better?
Yeah, which one?
This was a common response here.
Jamie Lee says, this soft generation good gravy grow up already.
I get it.
I get it.
It's supposed to be wuss, right?
Woo-sification of America.
I get it.
I get it.
Supposed to be wuss, right?
Wussification?
Yeah.
Well, that's that's not a pun.
That's the actual term.
I don't think he's doing anything new with it.
He's leaning into it?
Yeah.
This was a common response.
People are so soft nowadays.
Do they mean you're so soft because we don't like strangulation anymore?
Or you're so soft because like you can't handle it in a cartoon.
And it's if the latter is like the more charitable, definitely people got triggered by seeing child strangulation on TV.
And I mean, like, it doesn't trigger me, but I can see how it would trigger people, people who were strangled by their parents.
Absolutely!
As kids, or like social workers who have to talk to kids who get actually strangled, they're not going to laugh at it.
Which is fine, you know, comedy doesn't have to be for everybody.
But I'm sympathetic to the idea that seeing someone strangled for entertainment might not be entertaining to everybody.
Yeah, this is not necessarily like the, uh, it doesn't take a snowflake for that to happen to you.
Like that's a, it's a, it is a picture, a depiction of violence that is common in American homes and just in homes, you know, in families.
It's not like an outrage, it's not a stretch to, you know, trigger someone by that.
So yeah, by any means, um, that is funny.
This is this is another prime example of a corporation doing something based on like internal whatever, just either by a creative decision by the people who'd make the creative decisions, or maybe there was some like internal polling.
And we like we considered this thing that we always do, like have Aunt Jemima on a fake black woman, Mammy character on the cover of our pant.
Like there were no mass protests about Aunt Jemima.
There were no mass protests or public pressure even about Homer strangling Bart.
Like, if there was, that was like, what, in the 90s?
Like, I haven't seen anything about Homer strangling Bart in a long time.
It's once again like, It's probably just a coincidence, too.
They're probably like, hey, I feel like Homer hasn't strangled Bart in a while.
And the right wing taking that as an opportunity to reaffirm their hatred of their fellow man.
It's probably just a coincidence, too.
They're like, hey, I feel like Homer hasn't strangled Bart in a while.
And they're like, yeah, we kind of just stopped doing that.
They're like, that's that's pretty cool.
We should probably let people know about that.
Like, it's not even I don't think it was an effort.
You know, I don't think it was a you said, I don't think it was like a they don't think they had a meeting over it.
I think somebody like a like a journalist at like exploding in comic books or whatever as they're like, how come how come I haven't seen Homer grip his child's neck and neck and squeeze in like two years?
They're like, oh, we just we decided we made an editorial style guide that just like we don't have Homer's face portrayed straight on, we're also not going to be strangling the boy.
We're not going to be strangling the protagonist of our show anymore.
What it was was some fucking weird.
I was like, I haven't seen Bart's tongue in a while.
It's been a long time since Bart's tongue.
What did I say?
Oh, yeah, when he's getting choked.
OK, we need to get more Bart's tongue in there.
But have we considered, like Carl says, that Homer not being able to strangle Bart, that's like not letting the Fonz use his thumbs up emoji.
But then one of the A's has an accent.
It's just a long line of A. But it has an accent in the middle.
A, stupid woke bull.
Yep.
It is.
It really is.
Really is.
Just like, like, Homer never beat Bart as much as the Fonz gave thumbs ups.
That's a bit different.
The Fonz gave a thumb up a lot.
Also, dog, the Fonz?
Yeah.
We have to be the last ones who know the Fonz, right?
Yeah, if you're two years younger than Tony or me, you have no idea what we're talking about right now.
Yeah, if you like Miss Naked Knight, Like, yeah, there's no, there's, you shouldn't know and that's fine.
Don't know about it.
Don't know about the Fonz.
It is funny that that's the only other character with a thing he can think of.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And it's like, I don't know.
It's like Fonz without a thumbs up, but I guess it's like there's other things you can say about the Fonz, too.
Maybe a better analogy is like, well, that's like Ned Flanders not wearing his sweatshirt or something.
Yeah.
It's like, I don't know.
I don't really care if he wears the sweatshirt anymore, honestly.
Like, the show sucks ass.
He can get nipple piercings.
He probably will next season, and it still won't do anything for me.
What if he shaved the mustache?
He has shaved the mustache.
He has shaved the mustache.
OK.
He shaved the mustache and instantly got a modeling contract.
Not surprised.
I'm not surprised.
I can see I can see it now.
Yeah.
Penny Roberts says throw the whole show away then.
Just get rid of it.
That was the best part of the show.
These people really feel this.
That was the best part of the show.
I could just watch a super cut.
Of Bart being strangled.
Like I said, I know what happened in the show.
I know for sure, but I don't remember like a moment where it was like a pivotal thing, where it was like, where it took the story in a different direction.
It was just a thing that happened, right?
The funny, one of the funny stranglings that I can remember is where, yeah, Homer starts.
Funny stranglings.
He thinks stranglings are funny.
Yeah, I said that at the top of the show.
OK, OK, yeah, true, true.
Is when Homer strangling Bart, but then Bart like grabs his belt and starts strangling Homer back with the belt.
And then they both just get tired and like slowly kind of fall to the floor.
That's that's that's a funny one.
That's good.
That's good.
See, that is that is the unfortunate part about getting rid of of Bart being strangled by Homer is there's not really a reason for Bart to be violent to Homer now.
Oh, well, Bart's a scamp.
Bart's a child.
He doesn't need to have a reason to do violence.
That's their right as children.
They haven't, you know, they haven't had that ripped away from them by society yet.
But like my dad and I need to be depicted in this.
I don't want to put a tack under my dad's seat.
I want to like punch my dad in the face repeatedly.
And so I want to see Bart do that kind of thing.
And I don't think he'll do that unless Homer's putting hands on him.
And that's a shame.
I look forward to that hope.
I don't know what's going to happen, but I always hoped that was going to happen.
And it gave me a reason to tune in.
We do need like a later year, like Simpsons, the later years, where Bart's in high school and doing actual crimes and drugs.
Yeah.
Fighting his dad.
Yeah, actually fighting his dad.
Oh, Tyler says, add a chic and make it lame and gay.
Oh, shit.
There it is.
Well, there it was supposed to be.
There it was supposed to be.
I think chic.
He probably meant chick by that.
He probably meant a woman.
Add a chick and make it lame and gay.
Where have I heard this before?
Where is that from?
Where did that come from?
This is this is the Simpsons crowd.
So it's probably from the Simpsons.
Probably from the Simpsons.
Yeah.
Um, and yeah, Derek's has a bunch of pansies this world has turned into.
Uh, again, like this generation's gone soft.
They don't even let their Simpsons executive producers draw stranglings anymore.
And, like, I know that Bart hasn't gotten older, but he's supposed to kind of evolve, right?
So, like, this is good.
Like you said earlier, they could use this as a testament to stranglings.
Lookit, he strangled him a bunch.
Now he doesn't have to.
There's no need to strangle him anymore.
It works.
This is proof that it works.
I don't think Bart is supposed to evolve at all.
I don't think any of the characters have evolved, literally at all, except to give them a cell phone.
Yeah, I think that's the only new thing about the only like new recurring thing about any of these characters.
Oh, their TV is different.
Yeah, their TV is it's like a flat screen TV now.
Interesting.
Interesting.
Yeah.
So see, that's that's to me, I think that's what makes the Simpsons pussies is that they have a flat screen TV because, you know, I think I had like the last TV I had, I think was the last heavy TV on earth.
And now that I don't have to move that ever, I am a weaker person.
Yeah, Cam Wesley says weakness is corrupting this country.
It's now corrupt because he's not... Like, people look forward to hitting their kids.
It's crazy.
Yeah.
And this is why it makes me think it's not just about viewing The Simpsons.
No.
It's not just about viewing The Strangling.
Like, I really think a lot of this is about The Strangling itself that they want to do to children.
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Like, they're literally like, what, what, they're going to take it away from The Simpsons?
Next they're going to tell me I can't strangle my kid?
Right?
Where does it end?
Yeah.
Yeah, weakness is corrupting this country.
Like, I don't, you know, I know TV is a big part of these people's lives, but I don't think they would admit it.
I think they're talking about actual child abuse.
Lack of actual child abuse is corrupting this country.
Travis Minier, or Minier, I don't know, says, the woke libtards are taking over everything.
Angry face, and then two angry cursing faces, where it has the little ampersand, other symbols over the mouth, but the face is still red.
And I do, I did notice that, and I am sad to say that the libtards, the liberals, have finally taken over the Simpsons.
Yeah, finally.
Just now.
Just now.
And also, is the Simpsons still your, like, touchtone to the Zeitgeist?
Is that still how you, like, know what's going on?
Is that still a Simpsons for you, Travis Minier?
Yeah.
It is because anytime there's a current event, I see a 100% real still from the Simpsons predicting that very event.
Very true.
Yep.
Very true.
So yes, it is.
Yes, it is still a big part of the zeitgeist.
Roderick Wilson Jr.
says, now he'll be given a stern talking to, but not too stern, and be asked about his feelings as they sip tea and have a good cry.
This is why I think it's real.
This is why I think they're talking about actual strangulation.
Why does this sound like a bad thing, Roderick?
Well, it wouldn't be funny.
I mean, you could make it funny, but it's like...
I don't know, like you're mad.
It seems like when they're talking about pussy, weakness is corrupting this country.
This whole country, bunch of pansies this world has turned into.
Like sipping tea, like that's another way people are gay now, is they have tea.
But the thing about this one is like, I mean, Roger, you're not fooling anybody.
I think if you were to really ask, if you were to really do some work and really have you like look inside and like address some childhood trauma, I think the truth is that you wish that instead of hitting you, your dad would have had a stern talking to with you and then ask you about your feelings and then have some tea and you guys can cry together.
I think that you would want that more than anything in the world.
I don't know if you guys what you're saying, but I think that's what's happening here, too.
Yeah, I just I like again to like play devil's advocate or to be charitable about this argument.
Like, yeah, I don't need my television to be an after school special to tell me what's right or wrong and have all the characters act in like a proper way or the way you should act in society.
But plenty of shows have all those things in them.
They're just also funny.
Plenty of shows have characters that you like and almost like 100% approve of everything they do, right?
That's like a common thing you want to write for an audience is somebody who does good stuff.
And it doesn't have to be lame and gay or whatever.
You know, it's just you guys like the child of love violence.
Yeah, that's really all it is.
Both in the cartoon and in real.
And it's just like, I don't I don't know.
It's so weird to be... It sucks because, yeah, the internet has turned everybody into, like, a critic or everybody into a connoisseur.
And it's just like, I'm not going to tell the Simpsons what to write because they already fucked up the show a long time ago.
Like, when they were good, like, there was nothing I could tell them to write that would make it better.
Who am I to tell the fucking Simpsons writers how to be or whatever?
But now that it's like this, I'm not going to...
Be like, oh, the strangling is why it's not good anymore.
Well, they were like, that's all we had.
The writing and the writing was sucks.
The writing sucks.
Now we hate the jokes anyways.
I don't get most of them, but I always understood what was happening when his neck would get all skinny and his head would get a little big and long and his tongue would pop out, wobble around a bit.
Sandy L Stirr says, and pretty soon they are going to stop killing Kenny.
Dot dot dot dot dot.
These are the same reasons they don't show the old school cartoons.
Too violent.
Blah blah blah.
Come on people, give it up.
It is a cartoon!
Yeah.
Christopher says, actually, they did stop killing Kenny.
Yeah, they did that.
I think I remember when they did that.
It's been a long time.
I think it's been a very long time.
It's been like over 10 years, I think.
Yeah.
Which I mean, like, again, good.
But it's just funny.
It's like, Sandy, Sandy, if you ever liked South Park, you know that there's a fan base out there that cares about South Park.
In a way, you could have done a tiny, tiny bit of research on that one, because you just knew you were going to get called out.
Or you could just watch this, actually watch the show you claim to love.
Yeah, yeah.
It's so funny.
I mean, you know, what sort of boycott effect do you think you're going to be able to have by proudly signaling that you're not going to watch the show that you obviously don't watch anyway?
And it's also funny, too, because They like like they, you know, they're claiming to like The Simpsons.
I'm going to miss it or whatever.
But one of the big jokes in The Simpsons is the Itchy and Scratchy Show, which is a joke about superfluous violence.
Yeah, but it's not like a moralistic joke on it.
It's just like a hyper exaggerated version of the violent cartoons.
And so it's like an homage.
It's like an homage to violence in cartoons.
And they're doing it.
Right, they're doing it totally.
They're not going to get rid of that anytime soon.
And there is the classic episode of, I think it's called Marge vs. Itchy and Scratchy.
Yeah.
Where she does try to take on cartoon violence and becomes essentially an anti-Simpsons, you know, mom for liberty type person and goes on the Late night shows to talk about how cartoon violence inspired her.
I think Maggie, like, hit Homer on the head with something.
Yeah.
Somebody else owned her.
She got owned because the same group that was protesting Itchy and Scratchy with her wanted her to protest Michelangelo's David as well.
Yeah, yeah.
Because, you know, nudity.
And she was like, well, that's art.
And she's and then they were like, oh, it's hypocritical for you to be able to tell.
Yeah.
Them that this is art, and this isn't art, and she's like, oh, I guess you're right.
Uncancel Itchy and Scratchy.
And that's the same way I feel as well.
I think we should get rid of David's dick.
Yeah, so Christopher says, actually, they did stop killing Kenny.
And Sandy says, really?
Dot, dot, dot, dot.
Ugh.
I would have deleted my comment instead of responding to it.
So, I mean, good for her, you know.
Yeah, and then finally, I think this is a good place to end.
Trevor Savad says, cartoons are not real life, period.
Crybabies, period.
And it's funny because... Been a lot of people crying here tonight.
Yeah, there's a second where I thought that he was talking to the people in the comment section.
No.
Calling them crybabies, but no.
Yeah.
All right.
That's the episode, folks.
Thanks so much for listening.
If you want to support the show, get two bonus episodes every week.
Go to patreon.com slash Minion Death Cult.
We are an entirely listener funded show.
Don't do ads, anything like that.
We give you some great content.
If you go over there and support us, only five bucks a month.
And you also get a Live stream every Saturday where you can chat with us as we go over various MDC things in the news or culture.
Do you countryside when you gamble for robbery than you do for race?
You're the heaven for a variant.
We allow these laws to exist.
There's a greater value on money than you and life And still we sit faster We let these lost lives stick down And warm this back away I exterminate but drop the label of you And strip it away your eyes So we realize everyone has seen Well, something's gonna change How much fucker could you do?
How much longer can we wait these months to stay the same?
