4 ms·

> Perhaps in an non-standard understanding of what is and isn't political. "Politics is a set of activities associated with the governance of a country or an a

> Perhaps in an non-standard understanding of what is and isn't political. "Politics is a set of activities associated with the governance of a country or an area. It involves making decisions that apply to group of members" - Wikipedia > An apolitical office is political in the same sense that secularism is a religious stance. This sentence doesn't make any sense as Secularism is a political concept and not a "religious stance". An office can never be an apolitical entity, given that it involves the organisation of people and decision making about their activities, AND that office necessarily interacts with wider society which is unavoidably a political area. When you think about it, it's really quite baffling that people can think they can spend almost 30% of their waking life within some system that is devoid of political relevance. Life is political. Society is political. What you do in your work and career is one of the most politically impactful parts of a persons life. To be generous, treating the workplace as devoid of politics is just support of the status-quo. Not sure whether I should belabour this point... > Yes, the apolitical thing is to not intervene in others' political process. Given that many people are socialists and want to live in a society where say, Education, is a public good and managed by public institutions, then simply maintaining private educational institutions is intervening in the "political process" of others.

manfredo 7y ago
> "Politics is a set of activities associated with the governance of a country or an area. It involves making decisions that apply to group of members" - Wikipedia And thus, an office in which this "set of activities" is not permitted is an apolitical office. > An office can never be an apolitical entity, given that it involves the organisation of people and decision making about their activities, AND that office necessarily interacts with wider society which is unavoidably a political area. I think you're failing to distinguish between an apolitical office, and the company being an "apolitical entity". A company of any significant size is going to end up interacting with politicians. But this does not mean that its offices cannot be apolitical spaces. I do not know why you seem to insist that this is the case. All that is necessary for an office to be an apolitical space is to make political activity off limits in the office. > When you think about it, it's really quite baffling that people can think they can spend almost 30% of their waking life within some system that is devoid of political relevance. Life is political. Society is political. What you do in your work and career is one of the most politically impactful parts of a persons life. Life and society are indeed political. Sure, some people may want to bring politics into the 30% of their lives that they spend in the office. But plenty of other people are happier when a company has employees use the 70% that is spent outside of the office. > To be generous, treating the workplace as devoid of politics is just support of the status-quo. For the fourth time, absence of a political view is not the support of any view. This is a toxic "you're with us or you're against us" mentality and it's exactly this kind of thing that people are sick of hearing from their co-workers. > Given that many people are socialists and want to live in a society where say, Education, is a public good and managed by public institutions, then simply maintaining private educational institutions is intervening in the "political process" of others. And in an apolitical office they are free to organize activism to push politicians towards achieving those ends - during the 70% of the time they spend outside of work. Maintaining an apolitical office is not an endorsement of the status quo or any other viewpoint. It prevents people who want to change the status quo from bringing their politics into the office, but also prevents those people who want to defend the status quo. The only thing is does is it makes people carry out their political activity in a space other than the office.
- rtpg 7y ago
  > And thus, an office in which this "set of activities" is not permitted is an apolitical office. Organization of people involves power dynamics. Maybe you can make an argument that something like holocracy generates an apolitical environment, though I think that doesn't hold up experimentally. Management deciding whether or not to increase vacation days is a political act. Employees deciding whether they want to stand together in negotations with management or handle stuff individually is a political decision. Hell, trying to push for more/less meetings in day to day work is a political act. It's pretty hard to have any sort of organization without the political aspect coming into play immediately.
  - manfredo 7y ago
    > Management deciding whether or not to increase vacation days is a political act. No, it's a company policy. There is a contingent of people who believe everything is a political act, and perhaps you are among them. But know that this view is not as widely held as you might think. > Employees deciding whether they want to stand together in negotations with management or handle stuff individually is a political Interestingly, unions actually try to argue that they are not political. That is the cornerstone of their arguments as to why union dues are not compelled speech. > Hell, trying to push for more/less meetings in day to day work is a political act. Again, not for the overwhelming majority of people who consider this an apolitical change. Yes, if you believe everything is political then everything in the workplace is political. But most people don't subscribe to this view.
    - joshuamorton 7y ago
      Your argument boils down to "most people agree with me". Can you substantiate that claim? Even if you could, that doesn't make the popular claim right, but your don't even have a proof that most people agree with you, sot you?
      - manfredo 7y ago
        Go around and ask your co-workers, "would you you consider a push by management to have fewer meeting a political act?". I sampled my co-workers and none of them considered it political. This works both ways: what data do you have that workers consider adjustments to things like meetings political acts?
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

manfredo 7y ago

> "Politics is a set of activities associated with the governance of a country or an area. It involves making decisions that apply to group of members" - Wikipedia And thus, an office in which this "set of activities" is not permitted is an apolitical office. > An office can never be an apolitical entity, given that it involves the organisation of people and decision making about their activities, AND that office necessarily interacts with wider society which is unavoidably a political area. I think you're failing to distinguish between an apolitical office, and the company being an "apolitical entity". A company of any significant size is going to end up interacting with politicians. But this does not mean that its offices cannot be apolitical spaces. I do not know why you seem to insist that this is the case. All that is necessary for an office to be an apolitical space is to make political activity off limits in the office. > When you think about it, it's really quite baffling that people can think they can spend almost 30% of their waking life within some system that is devoid of political relevance. Life is political. Society is political. What you do in your work and career is one of the most politically impactful parts of a persons life. Life and society are indeed political. Sure, some people may want to bring politics into the 30% of their lives that they spend in the office. But plenty of other people are happier when a company has employees use the 70% that is spent outside of the office. > To be generous, treating the workplace as devoid of politics is just support of the status-quo. For the fourth time, absence of a political view is not the support of any view. This is a toxic "you're with us or you're against us" mentality and it's exactly this kind of thing that people are sick of hearing from their co-workers. > Given that many people are socialists and want to live in a society where say, Education, is a public good and managed by public institutions, then simply maintaining private educational institutions is intervening in the "political process" of others. And in an apolitical office they are free to organize activism to push politicians towards achieving those ends - during the 70% of the time they spend outside of work. Maintaining an apolitical office is not an endorsement of the status quo or any other viewpoint. It prevents people who want to change the status quo from bringing their politics into the office, but also prevents those people who want to defend the status quo. The only thing is does is it makes people carry out their political activity in a space other than the office.

rtpg 7y ago
> And thus, an office in which this "set of activities" is not permitted is an apolitical office. Organization of people involves power dynamics. Maybe you can make an argument that something like holocracy generates an apolitical environment, though I think that doesn't hold up experimentally. Management deciding whether or not to increase vacation days is a political act. Employees deciding whether they want to stand together in negotations with management or handle stuff individually is a political decision. Hell, trying to push for more/less meetings in day to day work is a political act. It's pretty hard to have any sort of organization without the political aspect coming into play immediately.
- manfredo 7y ago
  > Management deciding whether or not to increase vacation days is a political act. No, it's a company policy. There is a contingent of people who believe everything is a political act, and perhaps you are among them. But know that this view is not as widely held as you might think. > Employees deciding whether they want to stand together in negotations with management or handle stuff individually is a political Interestingly, unions actually try to argue that they are not political. That is the cornerstone of their arguments as to why union dues are not compelled speech. > Hell, trying to push for more/less meetings in day to day work is a political act. Again, not for the overwhelming majority of people who consider this an apolitical change. Yes, if you believe everything is political then everything in the workplace is political. But most people don't subscribe to this view.
  - joshuamorton 7y ago
    Your argument boils down to "most people agree with me". Can you substantiate that claim? Even if you could, that doesn't make the popular claim right, but your don't even have a proof that most people agree with you, sot you?
    - manfredo 7y ago
      Go around and ask your co-workers, "would you you consider a push by management to have fewer meeting a political act?". I sampled my co-workers and none of them considered it political. This works both ways: what data do you have that workers consider adjustments to things like meetings political acts?

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]