It is not sufficient to state that capitalism is the linchpin on which all other oppressions depend and that, with the destruction of capitalism, all people will be free from oppression. If that were true, it is likely that our “democratic, anti-capitalist” organization would be more representative of the working class instead of being dominated by the same people who dominate capitalist society at large. In this vein, we pose the question: to whom is classism a “personal issue” and to whom is it a real issue? To whom is patriarchy a “personal issue” and to whom is it a real issue? As a union, we know that classism is a personal issue for working people, as well as a very real issue. We wonder why patriarchy is so often dismissed as a “personal issue” without any regard for it’s equally real consequences. We should all know that the personal is political. Perhaps we need to reassess what it means to struggle or what resistance looks like.
We know it is important to struggle against our bosses. We would never tell a co-worker that we “aren’t taking sides” when they confide in us about abuse perpetrated by the boss. Staying “neutral” is upholding the status quo. “Not taking sides” when someone is called out on patriarchal behaviors means leaving FWs without support and allowing abusers to continue, never being held accountable. Whereas, silence is compliance, Be it resolved that standing in solidarity with people facing patriarchal oppression is subverting the status quo that harms us all.