3 ms·
No, companies rely on forcing obedience from their employees through the threat to remove healthcare and livelihood. They rely on forcing compliance from their
by wfo 11y ago
No, companies rely on forcing obedience from their employees through the threat to remove healthcare and livelihood. They rely on forcing compliance from their customers by hiring a team of highly trained psychologists who specialize in propaganda and brainwashing to try and subconsciously trick people into purchasing your product. They rely on anticompetitive business practices: forcing out competition, or competeting so hard that margins are so thin for everyone that there is no choice but "the lowest cost in dollars" which generally comes at the highest cost in social good or human rights. You're describing some utopia where people work for a company because they want to and have many choices of employer. This isn't the case for the vast majority of people. Saying a company gets your consent because you continue to work for them is like saying a rapist gets your consent because you didn't punch him hard enough when he assaulted you. It's not dadist at all, it's honest and practical. The alternative dishonest -- to perpetuate the myth that draws a hard line between 'consensual' actions -- those which are forced by our economic system -- and 'voluntary' ones like which brand of a product do I purchase -- those which don't matter.
Society is defined exactly in the way that you know it should be. Asking whether or 'society' for Joe's local coffee shop includes Indonesian fisherman is simultaneously saying you understand what society is and that you refuse to admit you know what it is. It's intentionally misunderstanding others for a rhetorical purpose, i.e. arguing in bad faith and you know it. Cut it out.
Western democratic governments are required to try. You're right dictatorial regimes operate more like large corporations and can do as they wish -- they are possibly even worse because they tend to include death camps as well. So if when I say 'government is generally more transparent than private industry' your response is 'what about the Syrian government', well, fine, you've made my point.
Publicly traded firms (a minority of 'industry') are "accountable" to a tiny group of the wealthy hyper-elite in that they have to publish very specific technical details about their accounting. That's quite a stretch.
- Kalium 11y agoYou refuse to define your words, claiming that the meanings are obvious and that I'm dishonest for asking you to offer your definition. You define consent as impossible because incentives are possible. You change your positions as you go while simultaneously claiming you have not. Enough. I wish you luck with your rhetorical games, but I shall not be playing them with you any longer. Perhaps someday you'll stop and wonder why the revolutionary change you wish for hasn't happened. If you've become wiser, you'll realize that the answer is that the revolutionary is you.