Domestic Support for Terrorists is Getting out of Hand

The UAW’s new membership, the California university system’s 48,000 teaching assistants and “academic proletariat,” is striking in open support of anti-Israel protestors (read: pro-Palestinian and Hamas “protestors”).

Never mind that the strike violates the UAW’s no-strike contract with the system—why should a solemn, written commitment be allowed to stand in the way of supporting terrorists? UCLA English grad pupil and UAW local union president Rafael Jaime:

…the union goal is to “maximize chaos and confusion for the employer.”

Nothing to do with arguing for better working conditions, everything to do with supporting those terrorist supporters.

To compound the California system’s problems,

UC faculty have refused to perform the work of their striking assistants….

The WSJ editors speculated that the reason for this is that the faculty support the strike in favor of the terrorist supporters (my characterization of the WSJ‘s “anti-Israel” term), and that’s a plausible speculation. I have another speculation, one that is in addition to rather than in opposition: these professors have gotten too soft and spoiled in their air conditioned offices and requirement to teach only one or two course per semester (or year!), and don’t want to have actually teach to earn their high six-figure and low seven-figure salaries.

At any rate, it seems to my reprobate self, that 48,000 TAs, et al., and those faculty members refusing to step into the TA-missing classrooms and teach have self-identified as no longer wishing to work for the university system.

California’s university system managers should honor their wish and terminate them promptly and with prejudice.

Update: As of this morning (10 Jun 24), a California judge has ordered this strike stopped.


Former House Judiciary Chief Counsel Julian Epstein laments the alleged hijacking of the Progressive-Democratic Party (my label, not Epstein’s) by the far Left, and the supposed lack of courage of Progressive-Democratic President Joe Biden and his staff to say “No” to that supposed far Left.

I speak to Democrats about this all the time. They lament the fact that the intersectional left, the far-left, has overtaken the party. They’ve hijacked the party. …the far-left has commandeered policy-making under the Biden administration, and they haven’t had the guts to say no to them and to say, we’re going to tack towards the political center where majority of the voters are going to go to voters. ….

I disagree with each of the claims. “Hijacking” and “commandeering” each says that it was a takeover and the takeover was done against the will of Party. No, Party is a construct only and has no will to go with or against. Party is populated, though, with grown, adult human beings who do have will to go with or against. The far-Left didn’t takeover Party in any way, shape, or form. Party managers and members openly, whole heartedly, and of their own volition embrace the ideology and have gone toward the Left deliberately and consciously. The far-Left has been absorbed by Party and Party’s core is far-Left.

Then there’s Epstein’s lament that the Biden administration politicians won’t say that they’re going to tack towards [sic] the political center. The problem here is Epstein’s motive for why Party should so tack: that’s where the voters are, and (sotto voce) that’s the path to election wins and continued political power. Party should tack toward the middle because Party’s managers and members think that would be the right thing to do for the good of our nation. Tack this way or that for the political power of the moment. That’s the nature of sincerity in the minds of Progressive-Democrats.