Lol, as if we acknowledge international law. The UN is a good source of entertainment, but not a organization that furthers left politics.
I am for what you describe, but that isn't what is written:
"Electing or dismissing employee directors and employee supervisors, electing employee representatives to meetings of creditors and creditors’ committees of the enterprise subject to bankruptcy proceedings in accordance with the law, and recommending or electing management personnel of the enterprise as authorized;"
Could mean those that employees vote in (which are not all), could also mean all that have power over employees but I doubt it. Reads like the German and swedish phrasing of the two categories: employee directors (those that are elected by the employees) and "owner" directors (which are elected by shares).
The law has less ability to punish and gold accountable individuals and strengthens more the collective worker organs and gives more information, as well as representation and participation.
"China has made all companies worker-controlled. I would show this article to anyone that claims otherwise. This is worker democracy."
No. Don't overhype yourself in idealist ways cause you want the CPC settle handedly now to introduce full worker control.
This law is a good step and would be great for counties like the US. However it isn't worker control, far from it. Sadly.
It gives institutionalized organs für the workers, which convene rarely, but have mandates to convene, which is good. It is unclear what punishment is if they don't. It is also unclear what powers they have, as for example the German model for large companies has a minority of board members be worker council elected (more or less). However within the board they are a minority. Here it is written, that the company shareholders don't have a say in election of that portion. This means it isn't worker control.
It is an option though to create instruments that might be formalized to express that companies worker's wishes. This is course will have structural problems i.e. who is allowed to vote, talk, what is with internal conflicts, what is with competition between that company and others or the conflict between members of that company and those not employed in it?
For those questions the presented solution is the trade union of that company, which means a structured entity. It isn't clear how exactly that is meant, as the conception of unions varies a lot. I doubt it is the US conception and think it might be more aligned with the bigger unions in China, but derived from their members of that company.
To further align the workers with a struggle that is not only focused on that company the membership within the communist party for some is quite relevant. This is what real socialist countries often encouraged. China has therefore, with it's high membership count, a different condition than if the concept would've just been copied.
The obligations to coerce relevant people and information though is an important step to establish workers control and participation in the companies.
I welcome the spirit of the law as presented by OP, but urge you to not view laws that are stepping stones as the goal already. Details, implementation and practice matters.
There are reasons the law doesn't go further so that it actually is (full) worker control. Capital is still relevant in China, both domestic (even though managed) and international (with mechanisms to reduce capital flight, but not well controlled). This law therefore does try to not scare International capital in practice too much. Talk of worker control (then making the most important decisions) is sadly still propaganda.
The law, if it really got obligations for all companies to create this assemblies would go further then the German law, as that exempts plenty of small companies that account for a majority of companies, even though not a majority of employees. Germany also has no real mechanism to hinder a medium sized company to make smaller ones to slip through.
according to the Provisions on Democratic Governance of Enterprises, relevant local regulations, and subject to the number of its employees.
This means that it mirrors the German law a bit and could include local exemptions i.e. special economic zones.
But none the less:
is set out in national law for the first time.
Current German laws with by having a worker's council elected (sounds cooler than it is often, cause it dissipates anger a bit and makes wild organizing hard), which has the right to request management to talk and inform, but sadly no access to books. They can convene workers assemblies (paid assemblies of the whole employees) multiple times per year is necessary, but also has minimums occurrences required by law. There is too little punishment for hindering those established laws, as the German state is neoliberal in many aspects.
I encourage you to talk to experts of our side in labor relations and see what you can demand from that new law within your company. Also see what structural differences in terms of unions, membership, party membership, co existing laws and judicial system exist, as well as rights to strike, to healthcare and alike.
Within the US as within Germany democracy end at the gate to the workplace. To quote century old writers.
Yes, but Says and Ricardo did talk about what he mentions here rudimentary, too. Marx, but also later empirical economists and political economists more than 50 years ago did highlight that, too.
not only does the Zionist entity seem to be much more committed to their project than white South Africans
Touch grass, this is a really marginalizing comment which ignores the experience of South African people during more than a hundred years.
I don't get why there is the need to create this hierarchy of badness, especially without investigation.
This is like a: "Britta: I can excuse racism moment"
What about summer not being at the same time everywhere? Which hemisphere do you wanna favor? What kind of problems do vacation days in summer create in agriculture?
Shaming people without internal dialogue is ableism.
Shaming conservatives is good.
How do you see the situation in Rojava and the question of jesidic people in Syria, and Turkey's position, what do you think about the PKK? I ask cause it seems you did spend some time thinking about the geopolitics of the region.
You thought that the attack on 7th of October wouldn't lead to retaliation?
Most went as I did expect it. If fewer civilians would've been killed in the initial attack and not so many people be taken as hostage, then I don't think most of the destruction we see now would've been the case, as limited effect with a focus on primary military targets might've kept the refusenik opposition in Israel alive.
However the Nova massacre and alike created a situation in which Muslim Arab Israelis (or Palestinian Israelis) identify with the state of Israel 70% more than with other attributes, the highest value in decades. It also led to plenty leftists, many who knew people killed, to prioritize "safety".
The death of some of the more prominent kibbutzim that were left voices for a shared land solution, that tried to connect the people and workers in the areas also let to plenty unpolitical people to believe more into a narrative of genocidal Hamas and widespread male support in Gaza for them and for violence against Jews.
The Israeli Arab (own self labeling) I know who worked with queer refugees from "Arab countries", including Gaza, tells that his family is quite angry. Hamas or someone with them targeted Arabs, too, and Arabs did try to save people and often did. Previously they were not very friendly with military in Israel and against plenty conservatives, now Muslim school friends of his are in the IDF.
I do think that Israel is now more unified internally than before. I did not think that Hamas and others had enough troops to hold territory and static defenses and tunnels hold their value primary when the opponent can't use time and control of movement of population to chip the military infrastructure away. This will not be able to neutralize all Hamas members, as they can't be differentiated in the population, but it will destroy building and the social conditions for regular life during the hot phases of conflict.
I did expect Egypt to open borders though and allow non military aged people to seek refugee.
Israel itself has a government that will keep using force as long as hostage are alive and bodies are kept, unless some harsh economic or political change happens. At least till the 8th of October of this year there will be support for continued military operations in Gaza. Likely in two-four month the ground operations in Gaza will be declared as "complete" (once every area was under direct Israeli control).
Those are just things that are the another perspective.
Your view ignores international pressure a bit, but in terms of internal logic of the conflict on the ground your outlook is true. No surrounding state is materially attacking Israel.
VMs in which Windows hosts fors RDP run are my solution.
However I try to not having to use Microsoft systems which makes a lot of problem go away.
For a majority of tasks Linux daily drivers are fine, however at work we have plenty of computers with varying operating systems, some even from before 2000.
This article or rather it's usage is an example of antisemitism and a case in which more research would have been good. Questions like: how many, who, what for, what materials(tissue vs organs), how does it differ with other countries practices matter.
125 is the number mentioned in one Israeli lawsuit of tissues or organs (corneas are tissues) of people who had stuff taken out after/during obduction. This is not limited to Palestinian Arabs, but includes Jewish IDF soldiers, and others.
Israel had more restrictive law at that point than some European countries did. For educational and research purposes plenty of tissues could be taken (including in the GDR) and were taken before the pushes for transplantation laws in the 70s and 90s more and more changed the practice around the world. Requiring often previous consent (not needed in all countries), as well as separation of persons declaring dead, extracting organs and transplanting organs, and whether it is used for transplantation instead of research/education/military testing purposes.
All in all the rumor of all encompassing organ trafficking ring here isn't confirmed. Antisemitism is often the rumor about Jews and that something one did all do and never stop doing. That Jewish Israeli people did show the light on it and that the legal system didn't ignore it like with cases in the 80s in Germany is noteworthy.
There are from time to time reports of similar things, in a socialist society we ought to have opt out and a good transparent set of rules of what is allowed and separation of hierarchies.
The main problem I see here is whether the bodies of people were treated the same/different and that it is different if you do take tissues from bodies of people the de facto state doesn't recognize or are assigned hostile. However for those questions there is no solution within the EU, the USA and I am not sure about other states.
There are typically no laws that say: marginalized/homeless/stateless/tourists etc. are exempt from it. So the assigning people as hostile is the problem. A problem lately solved before October last year by forensic institutes in Gaza and West Jordan doing the work.
You mean this one? It's nearly three hours. I do absolutely agree that it is dangerous to oversell poly, but both work with attachment styles if combined with materialism as well as reframing ones relationship ideas is good. Again plenty of people are living realities that aren't as they are sold to us, queer and non queer alike.
https://sites.libsyn.com/476973/the-boys-get-reeducated-shoeless-in-a-polycule
Polysecure / Polywise, and other books exist.
The core of them are that there are multiple alternatives to the default diadic two person relationship. The alternative are easier to handle with awareness of attachment styles, that we can be nets of support, nurture and care for each other, but that we aren't able to fix other people and that when idea and reality clash reality wins.
Plenty of queer cuties are living in family and relationship networks that are not only of two people and if you want to be part of parenting a kid, that is possible. Even being a parent/dad/mother is possible, both via the sexual way or with medical support or due to a social setting.
There are plenty of ways to live. It is likely good to figure out what role you would like to have in your relationship and it likely isn't that of therapist (which likely wouldn't work in any case due to the double role). So outside support and transparent relationship styles might be good for you.
A week is very early and it is understandable to have thoughts when it is your first relationship. Keep talking with external support systems.
You don't have to shoulder your own stuff alone, neither have you to shoulder their stuff alone, neither do the both of yours have to shoulder stuff alone.