4 ms·

But they are not the same. Every company and organisation will advocate for itself by advertising, lobbying, legal battles etc. Brands will also adopt a LGBT pr

But they are not the same. Every company and organisation will advocate for itself by advertising, lobbying, legal battles etc. Brands will also adopt a LGBT pride/BLM/etc campaign as soon as they think it provides good publicity. The aim of all this is to help the company/org. It's not the same as employees bringing up their social or political views while at work.

md_ 6y ago
Companies do not merely advertise or lobby for specific regulations that affect their industry: they spend money to elect specific politicians who take positions on laws that affect that company's employees, in and out of the workplace.
- howlgarnish 6y ago
  No, companies spend money to elect politicians who will favor them, and the fact that those politicians have to have positions on social issues as well is (for companies) an unavoidable negative. Hobby Lobby type companies with an active social agenda are a tiny minority.
  - md_ 6y ago
    Yes, I think we're saying the same thing. :)
  - ClumsyPilot 6y ago
    Ah, so these companies lobby for policies that have no impact on any social issues, like taxes and immigration? They have no effect on my life?
    - username90 6y ago
      Lobbying about taxes and immigration is working as intended since it is just telling politicians what policies would benefit said company. It is important for politicians to know about it when they make policies so they can better consider pro's and con's. However lobbying for for laws such as for/against gay marriage or religious rights is unrelated to their business. Then the company is used to exert some individuals political influence instead of just being a business. Of course politicians are sometimes corrupt and get favors from the companies and then go to do whatever the companies lobbyist tells them to, that is what people usually mean when they mention "lobbying". But lobbying itself isn't inherently a malicious or political act, in its purest form it just conveys information so politicians can make better decisions.
      - md_ 6y ago
        Lobbying isn’t an inherently political act?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
ivanbakel 6y ago
That attitude reifies the company - the company itself is nothing more than the collection of people who work together to drive it. Political stances, even for business purposes, come from the individuals who make up the company leadership, not out of some abstract organisation. In that sense, it's terribly unfair to forbid employees to bring up politics at work. After all, their bosses are doing it: and not only that, their bosses are using their employees' productivity to empower those political views.
- chii 6y ago
  > their bosses are using their employees' productivity to empower those political views. that's because the bosses (an owner of the company) is paying for it. Presumably, doing so reduces the amount of money the company can make (since employee time is diverted away to an unproductive, but political action). The employee, however, do not have this right, because if they are doing so not under the instruction of the owner of company, they are taking away their productivity that they've sold to the company (for their wage/salary).
- hackerfromthefu 6y ago
  Proportion is important - bringing politics up occasionally (rarely), peacefully, and in proportion to other topics .. is very different to crusading about it, bullying about it, being emotional and irrational and losing sight of others' perspectives. Those strongly emotional actions are a whole different thing and it's dishonest to use mild language to describe those behaviours as 'bringing it up' and more accurate to call it something such a 'arguing about politics instead of working'. Viewed in that light is it unfair to forbid employees to regularly argue about politics instead of working?
ClumsyPilot 6y ago
This is the textbook definition of "have it both ways" and "hypocrisy"
bJGVygG7MQVF8c 6y ago
It's not just a matter of publicity — the non-profit / NGO sector is a vector for oligarchical / corporate political influence. Corporate lobbying is a problem. People who can't seem to fathom that political litmus tests among employees are an intensification of that problem are useful idiots for power they claim to object to.

md_ 6y ago

Companies do not merely advertise or lobby for specific regulations that affect their industry: they spend money to elect specific politicians who take positions on laws that affect that company's employees, in and out of the workplace.

howlgarnish 6y ago
No, companies spend money to elect politicians who will favor them, and the fact that those politicians have to have positions on social issues as well is (for companies) an unavoidable negative. Hobby Lobby type companies with an active social agenda are a tiny minority.
- md_ 6y ago
  Yes, I think we're saying the same thing. :)
- ClumsyPilot 6y ago
  Ah, so these companies lobby for policies that have no impact on any social issues, like taxes and immigration? They have no effect on my life?
  - username90 6y ago
    Lobbying about taxes and immigration is working as intended since it is just telling politicians what policies would benefit said company. It is important for politicians to know about it when they make policies so they can better consider pro's and con's. However lobbying for for laws such as for/against gay marriage or religious rights is unrelated to their business. Then the company is used to exert some individuals political influence instead of just being a business. Of course politicians are sometimes corrupt and get favors from the companies and then go to do whatever the companies lobbyist tells them to, that is what people usually mean when they mention "lobbying". But lobbying itself isn't inherently a malicious or political act, in its purest form it just conveys information so politicians can make better decisions.
    - md_ 6y ago
      Lobbying isn’t an inherently political act?
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

ivanbakel 6y ago

That attitude reifies the company - the company itself is nothing more than the collection of people who work together to drive it. Political stances, even for business purposes, come from the individuals who make up the company leadership, not out of some abstract organisation. In that sense, it's terribly unfair to forbid employees to bring up politics at work. After all, their bosses are doing it: and not only that, their bosses are using their employees' productivity to empower those political views.

chii 6y ago
> their bosses are using their employees' productivity to empower those political views. that's because the bosses (an owner of the company) is paying for it. Presumably, doing so reduces the amount of money the company can make (since employee time is diverted away to an unproductive, but political action). The employee, however, do not have this right, because if they are doing so not under the instruction of the owner of company, they are taking away their productivity that they've sold to the company (for their wage/salary).
hackerfromthefu 6y ago
Proportion is important - bringing politics up occasionally (rarely), peacefully, and in proportion to other topics .. is very different to crusading about it, bullying about it, being emotional and irrational and losing sight of others' perspectives. Those strongly emotional actions are a whole different thing and it's dishonest to use mild language to describe those behaviours as 'bringing it up' and more accurate to call it something such a 'arguing about politics instead of working'. Viewed in that light is it unfair to forbid employees to regularly argue about politics instead of working?

ClumsyPilot 6y ago

This is the textbook definition of "have it both ways" and "hypocrisy"

bJGVygG7MQVF8c 6y ago

It's not just a matter of publicity — the non-profit / NGO sector is a vector for oligarchical / corporate political influence. Corporate lobbying is a problem. People who can't seem to fathom that political litmus tests among employees are an intensification of that problem are useful idiots for power they claim to object to.