[hueving]

>This doesn't make scabbing any less vile

This is a political opinion, and the context definitely matters. This wasn't a strike for higher wages, this was a strike to back a political stance.

How would you feel if the cabbies went on strike because we allow Muslims to vote? Would you so vehemently blast people that want transportation to continue functioning in the interim in that case as well?

[cderwin]

Moreover, because this strike was inherently political, should taxi drivers who actually support the immigration EO (or at least don't feel compelled to protest) be forced to partake in the strike? That sounds like an utterly indefensible position to me.

[ajamesm]

Hoffa is directly collaborating with Trump. You can see for yourself how the left is reacting to union organizers pulling for right-wingers.

(In this case, they dislike Hoffa's collaboration, but nobody started calling for the dissolution of unions.)

[wfo]

It wasn't a strike for higher wages, it was a strike to stop being banned from the country.

Strikes are always political. The point of a strike is to say "you need us" and a HUGE proportion of taxi drivers are Muslim. Their family, friends, the people who keep their family and friends safe risking their lives helping the US military in their home countries were all screwed by this.

They wanted to strike to say 'if you ban Muslims, it doesn't JUST mean the US is now run by weak cowards. It means you won't be able to find a taxi because we won't help you. You need us'. The goal was that plenty of Trump supporters missed their flights because of it and had to think about it -- the services they rely on are run by the people they are attacking. Not sure it happened, but at least they tried.

[muninn_]

Well then the price of Taxi rides will increase and people will stop working at McDonalds and drive taxis. That's how the world works.

And the "Trump supporters missed flights", yeah so did people who were flying home to see loved ones, didn't support Trump, or didn't care.