The fact is that there seems to be a school of thought which suggests that companies do not have the right (or obligation) to fight for their right to exist, and to mobilise their workforce (peaceably, legally and without resort to coercion) to do so. I think this is odd, especially given that, like it or not, it is commerce which has done as much as anything to drive human and societal development.

–> This is a very old point of view, known as ‘corporatism’. In it’s more radical form of ‘solidarism’ it was first politically expressed by a certain Benito Mussulini. Good thinking LOL

I quite like GM’s approach – they’re appreciating the value of personal stories as well as traditional advocacy (or yes, maybe they’re just desperate). Although I think it was a mistake to simply ask employees to contact their policymakers without really fitting this tactic into a broader grassroots campaign which already had at least some momentum behind it: 1) This would have justified the email somewhat and made the ‘they’re pathetic and desperate’ angle harder to apply when it was leaked (and GM should have known that these things are always leaked); and 2) It would make mobilisation amongst GM employees more likely because they’d have seen their efforts as part of a bigger effort rather than a last-gasp ploy.

With regards to making it work in Europe, I would encourage companies to give it a go if they know their issue is likely to get people excited. However, I’d always: 1) again, carefully frame it within a broader campaign; 2) make sure that efforts did not become fragmented by having one place online where all efforts and campaign material is synchronized; and 3) not do it alone – the web is an amazing integrator, so harness this and hyperlink an employee initiative to relevant campaigns or communities elsewhere, or get support from other unconventional campaigners (in Opel’s case, employees in other sectors who know they might be next, citizens who live near a factory that’s facing closure etc.)

James