A1. Favorites

La Vía Campesina strongly condemns the military aggression by the United States against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and the violation of its sovereignty.

The post Venezuela: La Vía Campesina condemns US military intervention and calls for an urgent internationalist response appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

"This is nothing less than the violent kidnapping of the head of a sovereign state. There was not even a declaration of war. This act constitutes a blatant and wholesale violation of international law." - Korean Peasants' Unions

The post Korean Peasants’ Unions Strongly Condemn the United States’ Invasion of Venezuela appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

"We reaffirm that Latin America and the Caribbean are a zone of peace, not war. We demand respect for international law and the principles of international relations." ~ CLOC

The post ALERT! The Latin American Coordination of Rural Organizations (CLOC-Via Campesina) Strongly Condemns Multiple US Aggressions on Venezuela appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

By Jeremy Brecher,
Senior Strategic Advisor, LNS Co-Founder

Listen to the audio version >>

The previous Strike! commentary told the story of America’s largest protest, the 1973 national meat boycott. It demonstrated that ordinary people can organize themselves and act on a massive scale when they are aroused around something that affects them directly – like the price of food. Today, the price of food is again provoking consumer rage. How can it become a target for mass mobilization – and how can that mobilization converge with the movement-based opposition to Trump and MAGA?

A Meals on Wheels delivery in Minneapolis, Minnesota, in 2017. Photo credit: Official U.S. Navy Page, MC2 Pyoung K. Yi/U.S. Navy, Public Domain

The US currently has two overlapping food crises. One is the elimination of food programs for the needy. According to the Center for American Progress,

“Project 2025 and the Republican Study Committee budget envisioned a transformative dismantling of federal nutrition assistance programs. In January, the Trump administration chaotically froze federal funding, leaving farmers reeling and nonprofits serving the needy worrying about steady access to support from SNAP and Meals on Wheels. In March, the administration cut more than $1 billion of funding from two programs that supply schools and food banks with food from local farms and ranches. These cuts affected schoolchildren and small farmers in all 50 states.”

Despite the end of the government shutdown, millions face cutoff of food assistance right now. The GOP’s ​“Big Beautiful Bill,” passed earlier this year, cuts the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)  — often referred to by its former name “food stamps” — by roughly 20 percent. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the addition of new work requirements alone will cause 2.4 million people to lose benefits in an average month.

There is also another food crisis that affects everyone – poor and less poor — the fast-rising cost of food.

As you may have noticed, the price of food in American supermarkets has soared. As surveys indicate, the cost of groceries has become a major source of stress for American consumers.

Many consumers compare food prices now to five years ago. According to the Department of Agriculture, five years ago the average cost of groceries for a family of two working adults and two children ranged between $613 and $1,500 per month. In 2025, such a family is spending between $1,000 and $1,600 per month at the grocery store.

Food prices have continued rising through Trump’s presidency. In September 2025, banana prices were up 7% from a year before, ground beef had risen 13%, and roasted coffee rose 19%, according to the most recent Consumer Price Index data available as of this writing. As of September, the average cost of a pound of ground beef was $6.30, according to Federal Reserve data — the highest since the Department of Labor started tracking beef prices in the 1980s and 65% higher than in late 2019. The average retail price of ground roast coffee reached a record high of $9.14 per pound in September, more than twice the price in December 2019 when a pound of ground coffee cost just over $4.

Discontent over inflation was a principal cause of Trump’s 2024 election victory. It was also a principal cause of the Republican rout in the 2025 elections. But there is little public confidence that either Democrats or Republicans will rectify high food prices. And neither has much in the way of a program to fix it – beyond each blaming the other.

The Fight for Food

(8 Apr 1973) “Boycot Meat” protesters in New York demand cut down on weapons expenditure and roll back on food prices. Video credit: AP Archive

In the 1973 meat boycott, households with 50 million members found a way to protest high food prices without waiting for elections. Today, the hundreds of millions of victims of exorbitant food prices may be enraged, but they have not yet found a way to organize themselves and fight back. Nor has the movement-based opposition that has challenged Trump’s galloping autocracy yet found a way to address food and other affordability issues. Food deprivation presents an opportunity for the movement to defend society against Trump’s depredations to bring a new front – and a new constituency –into that struggle.

Although food inflation has multiple causes, our current food crises are in considerable part a result of actions by Trump and MAGA’s would-be autocracy. For example, Trump’s tariffs, a significant cause of rising food prices, represent an unconstitutional usurpation of the exclusive authority of the legislative branch to levy taxes. The violent attacks by ICE on immigrant workers – especially on farm workers – has driven workers from the fields, leading to farm labor shortages and rising food prices. And of course the cuts in SNAP and other food support programs make food immensely more expensive for millions of people. While long-term solutions to food prices and food security will require major reforms in agricultural and other policies, reversing Trump’s tariff, anti-immigrant, and anti-SNAP policies could help a lot right now.

The anti-autocracy movement has the opportunity to raise the issues of food and other consumer prices as a fundamental part of the way MAGA autocracy is hurting ordinary people. The message can be: The destruction of democracy is hurting your pocketbook. This can open a way to the convergence of “pocketbook” concerns and the “No Kings” struggle for democracy. The movement-based opposition can serve as an ally to help people organize themselves and fight for themselves – as households with 50 million members did in the 1973 meat boycott.

That boycott grew out of the daily life conditions of millions of people; mass response to today’s food crises will similarly depend on the experiences, feelings, reflections, discussions, and above all experimental actions of those suffering their consequences. But one of the limits on the meat boycott’s success was the difficulty it had formulating concrete demands and a program which could actually realize its objectives. Today, there are proposals “in the wind” to bring down food prices that are well worth discussing and testing. They include:

End all tariffs on food Trump’s tariffs contribute significantly to the high cost of meat, coffee, bananas, and other groceries — tariffs on Brazilian beef imports are more than 75%, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation. Whatever the Supreme Court decides about current challenges to the constitutionality of Trump’s tariff programs, he will almost certainly try to perpetuate his tariff powers using different legal justifications – and the impact on consumers will continue. Yet his recent reduction of some tariffs on food shows how politically vulnerable he is on this issue – and indicates that pressure could force even more reductions.

The Yale Budget Lab recently estimated that tariffs will cost American households almost $2,400 a year. In a recent poll, three-quarters said their regular monthly household costs have increased by at least $100 a month from last year. Respondents identified the tariffs as the second biggest threat to the economy. Only 22% supported Trump’s tariffs. A demand to end all tariffs on food might win quick and massive support – and find allies among the public officials and corporate leaders who are turning against Trump’s tariffs. Senator Jacky Rosen of Nevada recently introduced the No Tariffs on Groceries Act, saying, “Donald Trump lied to the American people when he promised to bring prices down ‘on day one.’ His reckless tariffs have done the opposite, raising grocery costs and making it harder for hardworking families to put food on the table.”

Restore all food programs The hunger-producing cuts in nutrition programs like SNAP are immensely unpopular. In October, Republican Senator Josh Hawley, of all people,  introduced two bills to reinstate SNAP benefits and critical farm programs during the government shutdown. Despite the end of the government shutdown, cuts in SNAP and other nutrition programs are burgeoning. A campaign to cancel all cuts in all food programs would have wide popular support and could be spearheaded by local food pantries and those who have lost or will lose their benefits. Legislation to do so was introduced in Congress in late November by Congresswoman Jahana Hayes and others.

Provide free school meals Free school meal programs represent a widely accepted form of support for all families –without demeaning means tests. In Colorado voters just passed statewide ballot measures which would raise $95 million annually for school meals by limiting tax deductions for high income taxpayers. The measures will support Healthy School Meals for All, a state program that provides free breakfast and lunch to all students regardless of their family’s income level. Excess receipts can be used to compensate for the loss of federal SNAP funds. Nine states and many cities already provide free meals for all students. Such programs can directly reduce the money families have to pay for food.

Expand SNAP to all who need it A proposal by food insecurity expert Craig Gunderson would provide SNAP benefits to all those with incomes up to 400% of the poverty line. If benefits were also expanded by roughly 25%, it would reduce food insecurity by more than 98% at a cost of $564.5 billion. While such a program is not likely to be instituted all at once, the demand to expand SNAP eligibility could win wide popular support and directly benefit tens of millions of people. According to Gunderson, states can and have set higher eligibility thresholds of up to 200 percent of the poverty line. Given the wide public outrage over the soaring wealth of the wealthy, surely a tax on high-income people to pay for such a program could win popular support.

Support community gardens, local farms, and food mutual aid The Trump administration has eliminated two programs that provided schools and food banks $1 billion to buy food from local farms. This has directly impacted food banks, schools, and farmers by cutting off a key market for local produce and reducing the amount of fresh food available to those in need. People don’t have to wait for government programs to start growing their own food to fight hunger – in fact, they are doing so already, for example, through community gardens. But state and municipal programs can provide essential support for expanding these efforts.

Open public grocery stores New York Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani has proposed a network of city-owned grocery stores focused on keeping prices low, rather than on making a profit. They would buy and sell at wholesale prices, centralize warehousing and distribution, and partner with local neighborhoods on products and sourcing.

“Don’t Starve – Fight”

Dozens of immigrant rights activists protested at a Home Depot store in New Jersey and delivered a letter of demands to the store’s manager, July 4, 2025. Video credit: People Dispatch

Historically it has often been hard to find the levers of power to affect food prices. The 1973 meat boycott was powerful enough to bring about token action by President Richard Nixon. But it was unable to parlay participation by families with 50 million members into an effective way to reduce food prices. Around the world food riots have often been more successful in bringing down governments than in bringing down the price of food.

Targeted boycotts have recently proved effective where they could seriously affect a powerful target – witness the Tesla Takedown causing Elon Musk to withdraw from his Doge disaster and Disney’s rapid rehiring of Jimmy Kimmel. Targets might include food companies that have supported Trump.

Today’s boycotts are highly effective at generating new and creative tactics: Consider the anti-ICE activists in Los Angeles, Charlotte, and elsewhere who swelled long lines to buy 17-cent ice scrapers, then again swelled long lines to return them — to send a message to Home Depot “to scrape ICE out of their stores.”

Boycotts are only one means that could be used for food protests. Local demonstrations and “hunger marches” can be vehicles for dramatizing the issue and mobilizing people around it. Food pantries, unions, churches, and other local institutions are in a strong position to initiate such actions. There is no way to know in advance what actions will achieve traction, but that is a good reason to start “testing the waters.”

Under public pressure, many states are stepping up to replace SNAP funding to compensate for federal cuts. A special session of the New Mexico legislature, for example, authorized $20 million weekly to provide state nutrition assistance benefits to the 460,000 New Mexicans who rely on SNAP.

But states will only be able to fill in for the federal government for a limited period of time. The New Mexico program, for example, only provides funding through the week of Jan. 19, 2026. At some point, even Republican governors and legislators may well begin demanding “re-federalization” of food programs.

Such a dynamic can be seen in the federalization of relief in the early days of the Great Depression. The entire American establishment, led by President Herbert Hoover, abhorred the idea of federal help for the poor and hungry, maintaining it was exclusively the responsibility of local governments and charities. But “hunger marches” and other protests, often under the slogan “Don’t Starve – Fight!” created disruption and fear of social upheaval. In response, many cities and states created emergency relief programs, but soon many of them were on the verge of bankruptcy. Once-conservative city and state leaders began trooping to Washington to ask for federal support. As Cloward and Piven put it, “Driven by the protests of the masses of unemployed and the threat of financial ruin, mayors of the biggest cities of the United States, joined by business and banking leaders, had become lobbyists for the poor.”

Under such pressure, the Hoover administration developed a program of loans to states to pay for relief programs. With the coming of the New Deal, this became an enormously expanded program of federal grants. The New Deal also began to buy surplus commodities from farmers and distribute them to families with low income.

While the details are different, this basic dynamic of pressure from people to cities and states to the federal government is still relevant today. Pressure to expand local and state programs is not an alternative to federal programs, but a step to forcing their expansion.

One weakness of the 1973 meat boycott was its isolation from the other burgeoning movements of the time, including the civil rights movement, the movement against the Vietnam war, and the large-scale wave of strikes, many of them wildcats. This made it less powerful than it otherwise might have been. A food movement today would have the opportunity for powerful alliances. Like consumers, farmers are being devastated by Trump’s tariffs and would benefit from expanded food programs. Like food consumers, farmers are also being hurt by the ICE policies driving farm workers away from the fields.

Food inflation might seem to be a middle-class issue, but low-income people spend a substantially higher proportion of their total income on food, so rising food prices affect them even more. In 2023, the one-fifth of the population with the lowest incomes spent nearly one-third of their income on food; the highest-income fifth spent less than one-tenth of their income on food. The rising cost of food means the poor can buy even less with whatever small funds they have. So low-income and better off food consumers are natural allies.

High food prices were an important reason for Donald Trump’s election; he promised to reduce prices on “day one” of his presidency. Spooked by rising consumer anger at high food prices, on December 6 Trump established two task forces to investigate “whether anti-competitive behavior, especially by foreign-controlled companies, increases the cost of living for Americans.” An accompanying fact sheet stated, “President Trump is fighting every day to reverse Biden’s inflation crisis and bring down sky-high grocery prices — and he will not rest until every American feels the relief at the checkout line.” The task forces were instructed to report their findings to Congress within 180 days and present recommendations for Congressional action within a year.

A movement against the failure to bring down high food prices could be a natural ally for the emerging movement to defend society against Trump and MAGA – what I have called “Social Self-Defense.” Conversely, the emerging movement-based opposition to Trump and MAGA has everything to gain by encouraging the development of a movement that allows millions of people to fight, not starve.

Get “Strike!” via EmailGet “Strike!” via Substack DONATE ONLINE

The post Food Fight, Anyone? first appeared on Labor Network for Sustainability.

Read and subscribe to our monthly newsletter and support our work.

The post Latest Newsletter first appeared on Labor Network for Sustainability.

By LNS Executive Director Joshua Dedmond

As 2025 draws to a close and we look toward a deeply uncertain future, we at LNS return to a central truth that defines our work: we are living through a massive political crisis simultaneously fueled by the onset of authoritarianism and white supremacist nationalism, while facing pervasive environmental and climate challenges. Jeremy Brecher aptly describes this confluence of crises as the “Polycrisis.”

In this critical moment, it is more important than ever that we remain committed to our mission: to more swiftly bring the labor movement and the environmental and climate justice movement together. Our work is a vital bridge, essential for forging a united front capable of meeting this historic challenge.

We must stand firm in the chaos!

The current political environment is brutally challenging for small, mission-driven environmental justice non-profits. The administration has labeled our groups “pariah” and “terrorist,” sowing confusion and violence to silence justice and dissent. This year has brought significant losses, including the sunsetting of key partners like the Green New Deal Network and 350.org.

Despite its small size and challenges, LNS significantly impacts the lasting connection forged between the labor and Environmental Justice (EJ) movements, highlighting a shared struggle rooted in mutual humanity and community well-being.

The forces of authoritarianism seek to divide us, to distract us, and to strip us of our democratic and environmental rights. Their goal is to fracture the very solidarity we need to survive this polycrisis.

LNS will continue leading the movement, linking workers’ rights and planetary health. A just transition is essential. We urge your sustained support to ensure the vital work of labor and climate justice thrives.

At the close of this year, please consider this a clarion call to our friends, supporters, and comrades. Now is not the moment to abandon our missions. In this tough political moment, your commitment to LNS is not just an investment in a small non-profit; it is an investment in the foundational principle that we must challenge the authoritarianism at hand.

We must always remember: This is our planet, and we deserve to “make a living on a living planet.”

Joshua D. Dedmond,
Executive Director,
Labor Network for Sustainability

The post The Polycrisis Demands Our Solidarity: A Year-End Clarion Call first appeared on Labor Network for Sustainability.

Jennifer Krill is the Executive Director of Earthworks, and has been a LNS board member since the organization’s founding in 2010. Her journey in the movement at the intersection of labor and climate began when she was working as a landscape architect and felt the need to reconcile human needs with the natural limits of the environment in our infrastructure.

Krill then began working on a campaign to save the Redwood Forest from being logged, where she immediately identified a connection between environmental and labor struggles–the employees in the woods who were not unionized had jobs that would be liquidated when the forest was done being logged. It was clear that there was a shared interest in long-term economic and ecological sustainability.

Krill furthered her collaboration with labor when she met organizers fighting Kaiser Aluminum’s union-busting campaign, where striking Steelworkers were locked out for months. This began an alliance between environmentalists and the Steelworkers union; together they formed the Alliance for Sustainable Jobs and the Environment (ASJE). Together, they shut down WTO meetings in Seattle and forged powerful ties with longshore workers, timber workers, and the King County Labor Council.

Krill joined LNS after these experiences revealed to her how important labor is to achieving environmental sustainability. Too often, she sees environmental and labor movements being pitted against each other in ways that only benefit bosses and corporate interests. She believes doing work that demonstrates how these movements are aligned is the work of a lifetime. Krill has dedicated her career to the work of building these bridges through organizing workers, strengthening alliances, and ensuring environmental progress never comes at the expense of working people.

The post January 2026 LNS Spotlight: Jennifer Krill first appeared on Labor Network for Sustainability.

Photo credit: kallerna, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Illinois has just passed the Clean and Reliable Grid Affordability Act to restructure the state’s energy policies. The package was supported by environmentalists, the renewable energy industry, and the union-backed Climate Jobs Illinois.

According to Capital News Illinois, the bill will fund energy storage projects the way it now funds wind and solar power. It will require energy efficiency programs for utilities to reduce demand and lower prices for consumers. It lifts a longstanding moratorium on large-scale nuclear power plants, but it also hikes fees for nuclear plant operators. And requires community solar project developers to hire union labor, a major priority for organized labor groups.

Source: Capital News Illinois.

The post Illinois Labor and Environmentalists Cut Electric Bills, Help the Climate first appeared on Labor Network for Sustainability.

Photo credit: Joe Piette, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

More than 1,000 Amazon employees have signed an open letter expressing “serious concerns” about AI development. It warns that Amaxon’s “all-costs justified, warp speed” approach to the powerful technology will cause damage to “democracy, to our jobs, and to the earth.” The letter was organized by employees affiliated with Amazon Employees for Climate Justice.

The workers say Amazon is “casting aside its climate goals to build AI. Amazon’s annual emissions have “grown roughly 35% since 2019”, despite the company’s promise in 2019 to achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2040. Many of Amazon’s investments in AI infrastructure will be in “locations where their energy demands will force utility companies to keep coal plans online or build new gas plants.”

The Amazon workers demand that the company power all its data centers with clean energy, make sure its AI-powered products and services do not enable “violence, surveillance and mass deportation,” and form a working group comprised of non-managers “that will have significant ownership over org-level goals and how or if AI should be used in their orgs, how or if AI-related layoffs or headcount freezes are implemented, and how to mitigate or minimize the collateral effects of AI use, such as environmental impact.”

The letter was also endorsed by more than 2,400 workers from other tech companies, including Meta, Google, Apple and Microsoft.

To learn more: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/nov/28/amazon-ai-climate-change

The post Amazon Workers Warn AI Rollout Threatens Jobs and Climate first appeared on Labor Network for Sustainability.

Photo credit: NASA/METI/AIST/Japan Space Systems, and U.S./Japan ASTER Science Team, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

By Gianna Sansonetti, LNS Staff

I recently sat down with Jennifer Krill, Executive Director of Earthworks and LNS board member, featured in this issue’s “LNS Spotlight.” Krill discussed a long-term project her team at Earthworks has been working on to improve the labor and environmental conditions of mining communities worldwide, and what we can take away from this work as we look towards the transition to a more sustainable economy.

Earthworks has focused on tracking the human rights and environmental impacts of the expansion of the mining industry for the renewable energy transition, particularly due to the boom caused by electric vehicles (EVs). Earthworks collaborates with a broad coalition: Industrial Global Union, Steelworkers, Human Rights Watch, First Nations partners across Canada, mining-affected communities in Africa, and corporate stakeholders from automakers to electronics companies.

The minerals used for EVs, such as lithium, are currently needed at a scale that the world has never seen before, demanding more and more extraction from frontline communities across the globe. Legal protections for Indigenous communities are weak or nonexistent where these minerals are currently being sourced. In the cobalt mines in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, for example, there are tremendous labor problems, and local unions are interested in working to solve these issues. The unions support environmental protections in the places the mining occurs.

In the absence of effective protections by national governments, Earthworks, the Industrial Global Union, and other partners built an accreditation system that requires more responsible practices. This coalition has also created an independent audit system to ensure that wherever mining is occurring, it occurs with just practices for workers and the environment.

Krill emphasized the need to reduce the global demand for all these materials, and for transportation to be seen as a human right with mass transit, rather than personal vehicles, at the center. EVs are not the whole solution, she argued. Reducing the demand for them and the minerals they use can start with building a “circular economy.” The US throws away massive amounts of copper, lithium, and other metals; increasing copper recycling alone would create significant union jobs while lowering the need for new mineral extraction.

EVs can be a symbol of hope, but only if the minerals that power them are mined responsibly, and only if society begins to confront its addiction to constant consumption at the expense of workers, lands, and waterways in the Global South.

The post Liberating the EV Supply Chain first appeared on Labor Network for Sustainability.

Jeremy Brecher’s newest report, co-published by the Labor Network for Sustainability and ZNetwork.org, argues that the US is facing an increased authoritarian threat under Donald Trump and the MAGA movement, characterized by executive overreach, suppression of dissent, and the use of state and vigilante violence. In response, Brecher asserts that the country must look beyond conventional means and consider social strikes–large-scale, nonviolent withdrawal of cooperation, which has brought down authoritarian regimes around the world. He defines social strikes as mass actions that make society ungovernable by disrupting not just workplaces, but all political and social structures that enable tyranny. By citing international and US examples, the report outlines how such strikes have been organized, what tactics they use, and how they might serve as a last line of defense if democratic institutions are further eroded. While success is never guaranteed, Brecher emphasizes that understanding these methods is essential to resisting a potential MAGA dictatorship.

Read the Report: Social Strikes

The post Social Strikes vs. MAGA? first appeared on Labor Network for Sustainability.

Photo Credit: Andreas Bohnenstengel, CC BY-SA 3.0 DE, via Wikimedia Commons

By the Just Transition and Care Network

Just Transition and Care: An International Inquiry is a report prepared by an international research team and published November 20 by the UN Research Institute for Social Development. The report reflects on the results of an international “workers’ inquiry” conducted by the Just Transition and Care Network between 2021 and 2023 to hear the voices of care workers, union representatives, and members of social movements and grassroot organizations from around the world. The research drew on the experience of LNS’s Just Transition Listening Project.

Motivated by the devastating impacts of the pandemic we saw the just transition framework as an unprecedented opportunity to re-orient ecological and social policies towards the satisfaction of the largely unmet needs of both care givers and care receivers. This led us to ask what a just transition could look like when considering “care work.” We shared this question with 17 representatives from 12 countries and in 5 different areas of caring -domestic and community care, food provision, environmental care, health care and education.

Our report broadens the concepts of “care” and “just transition.” We refer to “care” as work, even when it is unwaged, informal, or not commonly recognized as work. And we refer to “carers” or “care workers” as those who do the work of caring in both social and environmental realms. This approach expands upon restricted understandings of “care work” as that which is provided by paid “service” workers and sheds light on the fact that care workers are the majority of the working class.

We understand just transition as including both a concern for work and for the conditions that sustain people’s lives beyond the job, including the biophysical environment. From this angle, JT policies are part of the repertoire of ecosocial welfare policies such as health care, education, clean air and water. In fact, a comprehensive just transition points to a transition away from persistent inequalities — whether capitalism, patriarchy, racism, xenophobia or ableism.

Our report is not the first or final word on the subject, even for the JTC Network. It allows us, however, to identify several persistent problems, such as the plight of care workers, mostly women and many immigrants, and to propose that a just transition in care, and beyond, requires well-funded and democratic public policies that include care workers in their formation.

The post A Just Transition for Care Workers first appeared on Labor Network for Sustainability.

Photo credit: David, January 16, 2021, Flickr, CC BY 2.0

In an article published December 14 on Common Dreams, LNS co-founder and senior strategic advisor Jeremy Brecher writes, “It’s Time for an All-Out Food Fight With Trump.”

Half-a-century ago, tens of millions of households mobilized a nationwide meat boycott to challenge soaring food prices. It was arguably the largest protest in American history. It demonstrated that ordinary people can organize themselves and act on a massive scale when they are aroused around something that affects them directly – like the price of food.

Today, the price of food is again provoking consumer rage. Donald Trump is running scared in the face of consumer anger. Polls show that majority of Americans are stressing out over food prices and other signs of an “affordability crisis.” “It’s Time for an All-Out Food Fight with Trump” lays out how today’s soaring price of food can become a target for mass mobilization – and how can that mobilization can converge with the movement-based opposition to Trump and MAGA. It tells how ordinary grocery shoppers can organize — and how they can become part of the movement that is endeavoring to protect society against Trump’s authoritarian juggernaut.

For the full article: It’s Time for an All-Out Food Fight With Trump

The post Food Fight, Anyone? first appeared on Labor Network for Sustainability.

Landworkers’ Alliance and CETIM successfully called for UN intervention on behalf of hunger strikers, who are part of the 33 activists still in pre-trial detention for protest actions carried out in solidarity with the Palestinian people.

The post Solidarity is not a crime: LWA and CETIM successfully call for UN intervention on behalf of hunger strikers appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

The debate over genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in Kenya has evolved into one of the country’s most significant agricultural and legal controversies, touching on food security, environmental protection, public participation and farmers’ rights.

The post “We are not against science, but want choices that protect our livelihoods” – KPL struggle against GMO in Kenya appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

La Via Campesina – Arab Region – expresses its full solidarity with Sudanese farmers in the face of the serious and systematic violations they have suffered since the outbreak of war in mid-April 2023.

The post Sudan: Violations suffered by farmers constitute a serious breach of international law appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

Most EU Member States approved at the COREPER meeting the provisional trilogue agreement on the deregulation of plant GMOs obtained by new genomic techniques ignoring farmers’ concerns.

The post ECVC statement | EU approve the deregulation of GMOs obtained by NGTs: a strategic error for Europe’s food and seed sovereignty appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

On December 13th, several migrant organizations came together with engaged social movements to exchange experiences and strategies – and this joint statement highlights the reflections.

The post Joint Statement | To Migrate is a fundamental human right and a movement of resistance! appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

This edition of the Nyéléni newsletter shares a selection of the 3rd Nyéléni Global Forum highlights, capturing several of the participants’ perspectives.

The post Nyéléni newsletter | 3rd Nyéléni forum: Building global solidarity for system transformation appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

Farmers’ organisations firmly reject the EU-Mercosur treaty and call for a strong CAP with a strong budget to guarantee farmers a decent income and the regulation of agricultural markets.

The post EMB and ECVC farmers mobilise at Liège airport against the EU-Mercosur agreement appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.