What is common between Anna & Starbucks?

Further to my July 30 post 'Eyes on Star-bucks', the Starbucks strike at Chile has ended. In July, the nearly 200-member strong union in Chile launched Starbucks' first strike at company-owned stores, seeking pay that keeps up with inflation, a $100 monthly lunch stipend, as well as other benefits.

Although the strike ended with the company willing to welcome back the unionized partners, the larger issue that this low profile strike stirred has not been lost on many. Experts feel that Starbucks strike in Chilie is a symptom of a larger people movement in that region. Not only starbucks, some other companies have also seen such conflicts. but to read these strikes as organization-specific and only IR-related case would be a huge error. Rosa Luxemburg describes - 'workplace struggles as part of a fabric of broader political struggle against the state and its imperialist wars. She points out how essential it is to see the overlapping between political and economic struggles, to see how struggles for unionization emerge in the context of broader political upheavals. She also points out to the dynamic relationship between economic and political struggle and how they enrich one another.' (source: blackorchids collective)

This is why Anna's movement in India perhaps has a huge significance. More than anything else, the mass-support to Anna's movement is a representative of the angst of people against the corrupt system. The movement also marks yet another major show of real people power and spontaneous support rather than orchestrated show of strength that most of the political parties have been doing in India.

Nations and organizations cannot remain blind to such movements, whether in Chile or India. Engagement of people in any systems can only happen on real and equal terms and by initiating concrete steps towards building both rational and emotional connect with the enterprise.