Learn how to plan strategic collective actions at work, escalating from initial assessments to marches on the boss.

The post Workplace campaigns and collective action appeared first on EWOC.

By the TDSA Ecosocialism Association

It is widely assumed that the political struggles people pay the least attention to are the ones that are closest to home. AI data centers are changing this. In both red and blue states, people are crowding normally barren local government meetings to stop the plague of large-scale AI data centers from reaching their doorstep.

On August 24th, the data center fight arrived in Durham, North Carolina. At a Monday evening meeting that ran from 7pm until midnight, county commissioners Mike Lee, Michelle Burton, Wendy Jacobs, Nida Allam, and Stephen Valentine appeared aligned on passing a moratorium on data centers, but divided on how comprehensive a ban should be. Despite an overwhelming majority of public comments urging a moratorium without carveouts, the commissioners voted 4-1 for a moratorium that included major loopholes. Allam was the lone dissenting vote.

The most significant of these was a carveout allowing for the construction of new data centers in Durham County, as long as they are less than 100,000 square feet. County commissioners spun this as a reasonable measure to allow for the construction of so-called “enterprise” data centers, and claimed that 100,000 square feet is well short of what counts as “hyperscale.” Yet this is enough space to build a data center with a power draw of up to 100 megawatts, the equivalent of powering 80,000 households or over 63% of City of Durham households. Such a facility could further consume 530,000 or more gallons of water per day, once both on-site and indirect water consumption is accounted for. 

Even though the public supermajority supporting a loophole-free moratorium was largely ignored by the county commissioners this time, we should not rush into the mistaken conclusion that public hearings are unimportant or without value. The opposite is true. In fact, one of the biggest reasons why we’re seeing local governments across the country pass moratoriums on data centers in the first place is because of local communities organizing themselves to make their data center opposition as vociferous as possible inside the halls of local power. However, in places like Loudoun County, the proliferation of data centers despite this resistance belies a dirty truth about local “democracy” that speaks to the need to organize a powerful working-class movement both within and beyond the county commissioner’s chambers.

One moment of the debate is worth focusing on to understand the power dynamics lurking behind what took place. After hours of deliberation and public comment, Commissioner Jacobs invites someone from the audience whom she refers to as “Mr. Levitan” to come up to the microphone to provide more context on a question she raised about the Research Triangle Park (RTP) zoning process. As Mr. Levitan makes his way to the microphone, someone else from the audience interrupts, claiming that if Mr. Levitan will be receiving an extra opportunity to speak, so should every other member of the public. The person who interrupts the meeting is then admonished by Chair Lee for interrupting. This interaction encapsulates the political fissures that underlie both Monday’s contentious meeting and local politics writ large in this country.

City council and county commissioner meetings create a certain temporal illusion. During the timespan of a public hearing, local government bodies give the impression that every member of the public has an equal opportunity to influence the debate at hand by ostensibly granting every member of the public an equal amount of time to speak. The interaction described above shatters this illusion. Mr. (Scott) Levitan is not county staff, or another county commissioner. He is the CEO & President of RTP Foundation, and one of only two out of sixty speakers at the public hearing who urged the commission to vote for a moratorium with carveouts, which is what they ultimately did.

Were the opinions of the two speakers who asked for the moratorium with loopholes more persuasive than all the other sixty or so speakers? Why was a particular member of the public granted extra speaking time? What would’ve happened if the interaction wasn't interrupted?

While the details of exactly what happened behind closed doors are not known, we do know some things. Mike Lee publicly asked for exemptions that allow large 75-80 megawatt data centers. Since local governments in North Carolina cannot directly regulate energy use, the strategy switched to square footage. Scott Levitan was the only supporter of a 100,000 square foot loophole at an earlier work session on August 3rd. The staff who wrote the ordinance only listened to public directions from Lee and Jacobs, both of whom have never faltered to address their “stakeholders” (businesses in RTP and Treyburn) since the beginning of public meetings on this topic.

The cozy relationship capitalists enjoy with many politicians isn’t breaking news. But what happened at the county commissioners meeting was a prime example of just how this undemocratic process works. Capitalists like the CEO of the RTP foundation get increased access to elected officials, shaping “the public hearing” even before “the public hearing” takes place. Furthermore, the AI-funded Trump administration’s federal budget cuts create an extra layer of economic pressure on the shoulders of Durham’s elected officials to cater to the whims of tech companies and their promises of economic development. How this development will materialize equitably from a technology whose main selling point is replacing workers, or at best paying them less to do more, remains a mystery. This is to say nothing of how the data center boom is driving up water and energy bills, sucking up water in drought-stressed areas, and delaying the energy transition.

None of this is anything new in the Triangle. The history of RTP reveals that it has been a top-down, corporation-centric project from its very beginnings in the 1950s. Originally cooked up by a small group of capitalists, academics, and government officials, the “Research Triangle” development strategy was meant to change the face of North Carolina by attracting tech companies and knowledge workers to a state dominated by a few low-wage materials processing industries; namely textiles, tobacco, and furniture. While some have certainly prospered thanks to RTP, this same development strategy has time and time again reinforced class inequalities, gentrified historically Black neighborhoods, and facilitated unsustainable, unaffordable, car-centric suburbanization. It also has failed to substantially improve the lot of much of North Carolina’s working class both within and beyond the Triangle, which continues to face low wages, poor working conditions, a degraded environment, and aggressive union busting. This is precisely because RTP did not break with earlier patterns of development in North Carolina so much as supercharge them under the guidance of a detached and dictatorial technocracy.

Despite their long-held sway over regional politics, the movement to oppose the data center boom increasingly has something capitalists do not: public support. A Gallup Poll from March found that seven in ten Americans oppose constructing data centers for artificial intelligence in their local area. This discontent has manifested in grassroots coalitions that have emerged throughout the country. Durham’s Stop Data Centers campaign, of which NC Triangle DSA is a co-sponsor, has played an important role in organizing the community to pack local government meetings and was instrumental in obtaining a recent year-long moratorium at the city level.

Although the county commissioners ultimately sided with Mr. Levitan and RTP’s business elites over the people, the fight is not over. Expected growth trends in both RTP and Duke Health arc towards a probable future of ever more consequential AI data center fights. The degree to which Durham and other cities and towns across the country will be able to thwart the whims of the AI capitalist class is dependent on the degree to which they can organize their communities to stop the rise of the Musks and the Altmans and their machines. Because ultimately, the fight over AI data centers is more than just a technocratic fight over emerging technology and its regulations. At its core, it’s a fight for our democracy, our humanity, and the land, water, and air that we all depend on to survive and to thrive.

DSA has announced its Workers Deserve More program to fight for a better world. Are you interested in DSA? Are you interested in building a better world? Then come to this meeting and help us launch our planning for our Solidarity Initiatives. We would like to hear from you on our planning process, considerations, and your early ideas about how we can strengthen our movement.

Housing Justice, Healthcare for all, Educational for all, labor justice and more are all on the table. But we need your help to get it done. RSVP and join the movement.

Monthly Working Session Meeting

The Political Education Working Group is the place to bring your ideas for workshops, educational material, agitprop, and more. Our goal is to bring socialist ideas, DSA messaging and campaigns, and class consciousness to the people of Ventura County. All levels of organizing experience welcome.

Date: Saturday, September 19 from 10 AM until 2 PM

Location: Kellogg Park• 33 Kellog st, Ventura, CA 93001 US

The Mutual Aid Working Group of DSA Ventura County is engaged in base-building and community organizing by exchanging goods and services with those who want to see a world beyond capitalist profiteering.

A free meal is served to attendees. Come get a free meal, or even bring your favorite potluck item or beverages, or non-perishable food to donate.

If you would like to help our mutual aid efforts but are not able to attend, DONATE HERE:

Monday, September 14 at 7 pm

Join DSA Ventura County’s Mutual Aid Working Group for a planning meeting focused on addressing unmet needs in Ventura County. Bring your big ideas, suggestions for coalition partners, and a desire to stand in solidarity with others. We are cookin’ up some ideas, and will post an agenda on our slack.

Sponsored by

Wednesday, September 9 at 6 pm

Tuesday September 8 (6:30 PM – 8:00 PM) Ecosocialism Working Group Bi-weekly Meeting (in person at 1916 McAllister St and on zoom)

Wednesday September 9 (7:00 PM – 9:00 PM) DSA SF General Meeting (in person at Kelly Cullen Community 220 Golden Gate Ave and on zoom)

Sunday September 13 (1:00 PM – 2:30 PM) What Is DSA?(in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Sunday September 13 (5:00 PM – 6:00 PM) Tenderloin Healing Circle Working Group (on zoom)

Sunday September 13 (6:00 PM – 7:00 PM) Working Class Gender Liberation (Provisional) Working Group (in person at 1916 McAllister St, front room)

Monday September 14 (6:00 PM – 8:00 PM) Tenderloin Healing Circle (in-person at Kelly Cullen Community 220 Golden Gate Ave)

Monday September 14 (6:00 PM – 8:30 PM) Homelessness Working Group (in person at 1916 McAllister St and on zoom)

Monday September 14 (7:00 PM – 8:00 PM) Labor Education Committee Meeting (zoom)

Tuesday September 15 (5:30 PM – 7:00 PM) Social Housing Working Group (in person at 1916 McAllister St and on zoom)

Wednesday September 16 (7:00 PM – 8:30 PM) Tenant Organizing Working Group Meeting (in person at 1916 McAllister St and on zoom)

Thursday September 17 (5:30 PM – 8:00 PM) Phonebank for Prop I (in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Thursday September 17 (6:00 PM – 7:00 PM) Education Board Open Meeting (in person at 1916 McAllister St and on zoom)

Thursday September 17 (7:00 PM – 8:30 PM) Organizing Mindset Training Series (in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Friday September 18 (5:30 PM – 8:00 PM) Movie night: The Battle of Chile Part One (in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Saturday September 19 (11:00 AM – 2:00 PM) Prop B x Prop I Lit Drop (in person at Rochambeau Playground Park, 238 25th Ave)

Saturday September 19 (6:00 PM – 8:00 PM) HWG Food Service [New Location!] (in person at Patricia’s Green Picnic Area, 499 1/2 Hayes St)

Sunday September 20 (3:00 PM – 5:00 PM) Canvass Workers with SF EWOC! (in person at William McKinley Monument, the Panhandle)

Monday September 21 (5:30 PM – 8:00 PM) Yes On I – Social Housing Working Group Lit Drop (in person, location TBD)

Monday September 21 (7:00 PM – 8:30 PM) SF EWOC Local Meeting (in person at 1916 McAllister St and on zoom)

Yes on B Lit Drops!

Prop B has TWO lit drops this weekend, including a joint event with Prop I. We’ll be in:

• Cole Valley (Grattan Playground) on Saturday the 12th at 11AM
• The Castro (Eureka Valley Rec Center) on Sunday the 13th at 11AM.

We need your help to get the word out about what a public bank can do for SF before ballots drop! RSVP here

Organizing Mindset Training: Basebuilding 101, How to Have an Effective Organizing Conversation

Every Thursday at 7PM from Sep 17 through Oct 8
DSA SF Office – 1916 McAllister St

Talking to people is central to effective organizing, but how do you embark on an organizing conversation? Organizing Mindset Training is a four-part event series that goes in depth into every aspect of the organizing conversation so that it’s a sharpened and ready-to-use tool for any campaign. After this training, participants will:

• Learn about the differences between organizing, advocacy, and direct services/mutual aid
• Understand of the role of an Organizing Committee and carrying out an organizing strategy
• Overview the Organizing Conversation and get in-depth practice for each step
• Develop the ability to have multiple successive organizing conversations with a person, with the goal of getting them more involved in your organizing

Attendance of all four sessions isn’t required, but it is encouraged! RSVP HERE

Organizing Mindset Training: Basebuilding 101, How to Have an Effective Organizing Conversation

DSA SF movie nights are back with The Battle of Chile! We will bring to life the heroic struggles of the working people of Chile and Salvador Allende’s presidency in the lead up to the US-backed fascist coup of Sept 11, 1973. These films will give us a glimpse into a powerful class-wide grassroots movement which won the country’s highest elected office and controlled vast sectors of industry and community networks on the ground.

Join us on Fridays Sept 18, Sept 25, and Oct 2 in the DSA SF office at 1916 McAllister St. Snacks and soft drinks will be provided. Bring a friend! RSVP Here

I love the Hearts of Pine. Been to my share of games. Have spent hundreds of bucks on gear. I’m on a first name basis with one of the owners. And I appreciated the statement they made last month calling for accountability after ICE murdered Johan Sebastian Guerrero Duran.

All that said, the city of Portland should not carve out an exception to our working waterfront zone in order to allow them to build a $50 million dollar soccer stadium on land protected for marine-based industries.

Why? Well, soccer stadiums can operate anywhere. Cargo ships, barges, trawlers, and tugboats cannot. Nor can the longshoremen and women, stevedores, harbor pilots, and deckhands who service them. They need deep water ports, which is what the western waterfront provides.

As background, a couple weeks ago, the Hearts of Pine announced they had put Cassidy Point, the westernmost corner of our waterfront, under contract to build an 11,000 seat soccer stadium. That sale is contingent on the city approving a carveout to our longstanding protections for marine-based freight and industrial uses, which need access to the deep water of the harbor.

The zone was first put in place in the late 1980’s after a developer transformed Central Wharf into a string of 150+ high-end condos (now called Chandler’s Wharf). The backlash to that development led to a citizen referendum in which Portlanders voted 2-1 to freeze all non-marine development on the water side of Commercial street.

That zoning has been modified carefully over the years, and only after extensive input from those working the piers. Those modifications have allowed for a certain percentage of non-marine uses, mostly on the upper floors of old or new structures, in order to provide some economic diversity. 

Overall, the amount of space in Portland that marine business can use is decreasing. But for the western half of the waterfront, where the Hearts of Pine want to build their stadium, there’s been some real growth in marine industries. 

Eimskip, a shipping company, moved into the International Marine Terminal at the beginning of the western waterfront in 2013. Around the same time, Portland Yacht Services turned 23 acres of what was fallow land into a thriving boat restoration and storage business. And between those two sites, a massive cold storage facility was built. 

This has meant hundreds of new good-paying jobs, doing exactly the work that can only be done on the waterfront. A real success story of how protecting land for its best community use, not simply its most profitable return for an investor, can help everyone.

But Cassidy Point was recently purchased by a multi-billion dollar out-of-state hedge fund. Those investors have reportedly been trying to make a quick buck by flipping it. Apparently, both the Maine Port Authority and Eimskip had been interested in buying it before the hedge fund, because they had wanted to expand commercial shipping to that area.

But my guess is the hedge fund managers know that if they could find a buyer who would seek to rezone the property out of its protected status, they could exponentially maximize their profit (some estimates say eliminating its protected status inflates the value ten times). That’s where the Hearts of Pine came in. 

When I was mayor, Portland developed a comprehensive plan where groups from all across the city came together to discuss what we wanted to see for Portland by 2030. Fully 91% of Portland residents surveyed at the time supported “continued protections for Portland’s working waterfront.” That is why two of the plan’s major goals for the waterfront are the “ … mitigation of market trends that could compromise the balance between marine industries and competing development,” and “recognize and reinforce waterborne transport of goods and people as foundational to our community.”

Even in our most recent overhaul of our building code, the waterfront protection zone, in its entirety, was kept intact.

So, what to do? Clearly we love our soccer team. And if the owners want to spend their own money building a new stadium, they certainly have that right. But, as I said above, soccer stadiums can go anywhere. They could put it out on Riverside Street (hey, if it is good enough for our homeless shelter, it should be good enough for soccer). Or maybe next to 295, just up from Cassidy Point, where there are huge swaths of land near going unused. The Hearts of Pine owners said they actually looked at 12 viable sites.

But wherever it goes, it should not go on the waterfront. Supporting the home team matters, but in this case, the home team I side with are the women and men who need the waterfront to make a living.

***

This story was originally published by The Beacon, a nonprofit and nonpartisan news organization. To get regular coverage from the Beacon, sign up for the free Beacon newsletter here.

The post Portland’s working waterfront is no place for professional soccer appeared first on Pine & Roses.