9 ms·

> What you are suggesting is akin to suggesting that fascism and democracy are both the same You've taken dictatorship and equated it with fascism. I'll assum

by bmelton 10y ago

> What you are suggesting is akin to suggesting that fascism and democracy are both the same You've taken dictatorship and equated it with fascism. I'll assume you didn't intend the bait and switch there, but it's not necessarily the case. It's worth remembering that not all democracy is good, and not all authoritarianism is bad[1]. California's proposition 8 banning homosexual marriage was a democratic decision, while supporting the arts through encouraging the establishment of People's Houses[2] was an authoritarian one. The point that I believe the grand-parent was making is that a lie in support of a goal that you like is not better than a lie in support of a goal that you don't. Both are lies, and shame on whomever proffers them as fact. If your position is indeed the superior one, then you shouldn't need to result to lies to bolster your position. That said, it's been well established that unions, democratic or not, are not always acting in the best interests of their members. We've seen this time and again with kickback cooperation, compelled membership, disallowance of disassociation, corruption, etc. I'm not necessarily invested in the debate here, so please don't take my position as arguing for or against either side, but as I recently mentioned elsewhere, if your position is that "unions are good and companies are bad", then you've fallen prey to ideological confirmation bias, and are disinviting nuance from the conversation, which limits the effectiveness of said discourse. It is indeed "not that simple". [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_dictatorship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_dictatorship [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Houses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Houses

wfo 10y ago
You are certainly correct about fascism and dictatorship, that was a mistake not an intentional bait and switch on my part. And certainly in isolated cases dictatorships can be better than democracies. But I think there's plenty of evidence throughout history to suggest that over time democracies perform better for the people in them. There are certainly companies that operate like benevolent dictatorships; many high end tech firms come to mind. Small businesses I've worked at come to mind. These are companies which don't require unions and for which unions are mostly counterproductive -- I agree. You generally do not see unions where workers don't need them and a great many companies fall into that category. But we are discussing the case where a union is being formed/already exists. So a huge number of workers have already decided that trusting the dictator's benevolence has not been working out. And indeed, unions can act opposed to the interest of some of its members. That's why unions have meetings and discussion and voting. States can act against the interest of their members as well. We don't throw away the idea of voting at all and give a person absolute and complete power because this happens.

by bmelton 10y ago

wfo 10y ago

You are certainly correct about fascism and dictatorship, that was a mistake not an intentional bait and switch on my part. And certainly in isolated cases dictatorships can be better than democracies. But I think there's plenty of evidence throughout history to suggest that over time democracies perform better for the people in them. There are certainly companies that operate like benevolent dictatorships; many high end tech firms come to mind. Small businesses I've worked at come to mind. These are companies which don't require unions and for which unions are mostly counterproductive -- I agree. You generally do not see unions where workers don't need them and a great many companies fall into that category. But we are discussing the case where a union is being formed/already exists. So a huge number of workers have already decided that trusting the dictator's benevolence has not been working out. And indeed, unions can act opposed to the interest of some of its members. That's why unions have meetings and discussion and voting. States can act against the interest of their members as well. We don't throw away the idea of voting at all and give a person absolute and complete power because this happens.