4 ms·

Question: during the Civil Rights movement, people of all sorts disrupted white people just trying to eat breakfast; just trying to get an education; just tryin

by scarmig 10y ago

Question: during the Civil Rights movement, people of all sorts disrupted white people just trying to eat breakfast; just trying to get an education; just trying to get to work. Is that "giving them hate"? Should MLK have made fastidiously sure to go to cordoned off areas where no one would have been inconvenienced in the slightest?

danharaj 10y ago
All protests should be relegated to government sanctioned free speech zones /s
icebraining 10y ago
The question asked wasn't whether the Civil Rights protesters shouldn't have inconvenienced people. It's whether a company should force its workers to join a protest.
- ajamesm 10y ago
  How many companies donate to super-PACs, the DNC, RNC, etc.? In this case, the mechanism of political action is constricting the labor supply instead of giving cash to politicians. It seems crazy for a company to force workers to join a protest, until you think about how they force workers to turn a profit and then donate to politicians that would happily oppress those same workers.
  - icebraining 10y ago
    So two wrongs do make a right? What other abuses of worker's rights should we demand they do, for "good reasons"? Companies also collectively fire people to bolster their profits, maybe we should demand they do some mass firings for a good cause. Trump supporters, maybe?
    - ajamesm 10y ago
      I'm not offering a moral judgment, or making a statement about the efficacy of those tactics. I'm saying it's nothing new. (On a related note, there are some regulations around mass layoffs: https://www.doleta.gov/programs/factsht/warn.htm https://www.doleta.gov/programs/factsht/warn.htm American companies will run a series of layoffs JUST below the limit to avoid the reporting mandates! Kind of like structuring deposits of $9,999 to avoid the reporting requirement at $10k. Interesting.)
baddox 10y ago
You're asking an unrelated question. The morality or advisability of engaging in disruptive protests is completely separate from the morality of Uber allowing its drivers to choose to work while taxi drivers are protesting.
- scarmig 10y ago
  How is it unrelated? The comment I was replying to said, "How about other people that were not part of the protest and were trying to get home/get to the airport?" Implying that Uber shouldn't be condemned for scabbing and helping them get to the airport because the protests were disruptive and they were just providing a public service by making them less disruptive.

by scarmig 10y ago

danharaj 10y ago

All protests should be relegated to government sanctioned free speech zones /s

icebraining 10y ago

The question asked wasn't whether the Civil Rights protesters shouldn't have inconvenienced people. It's whether a company should force its workers to join a protest.

ajamesm 10y ago
How many companies donate to super-PACs, the DNC, RNC, etc.? In this case, the mechanism of political action is constricting the labor supply instead of giving cash to politicians. It seems crazy for a company to force workers to join a protest, until you think about how they force workers to turn a profit and then donate to politicians that would happily oppress those same workers.
- icebraining 10y ago
  So two wrongs do make a right? What other abuses of worker's rights should we demand they do, for "good reasons"? Companies also collectively fire people to bolster their profits, maybe we should demand they do some mass firings for a good cause. Trump supporters, maybe?
  - ajamesm 10y ago
    I'm not offering a moral judgment, or making a statement about the efficacy of those tactics. I'm saying it's nothing new. (On a related note, there are some regulations around mass layoffs: https://www.doleta.gov/programs/factsht/warn.htm https://www.doleta.gov/programs/factsht/warn.htm American companies will run a series of layoffs JUST below the limit to avoid the reporting mandates! Kind of like structuring deposits of $9,999 to avoid the reporting requirement at $10k. Interesting.)

baddox 10y ago

You're asking an unrelated question. The morality or advisability of engaging in disruptive protests is completely separate from the morality of Uber allowing its drivers to choose to work while taxi drivers are protesting.

scarmig 10y ago
How is it unrelated? The comment I was replying to said, "How about other people that were not part of the protest and were trying to get home/get to the airport?" Implying that Uber shouldn't be condemned for scabbing and helping them get to the airport because the protests were disruptive and they were just providing a public service by making them less disruptive.