10 ms·

The view you just described is active support for the status quo. One fairly non-controversial part of the status quo right now is our dependence on fossil fue

• rbecker 6y ago
  > The view you just described is active support for the status quo. [..] fossil fuels and co2 emissions to keep our economy running. So there's really no difference between doing nothing, and donating to FUD campaigns against climate science? They're both equally active in their support for fossil fuels, both equally "apolitical"? Or have you diluted the term "apolitical" to the point of meaninglessness, if it can describe such wildly different behavior? Would you describe yourself as "actively supporting" Kony (or some other, similar warlord)?
  • adamsea 6y ago
    No one said equally active. This is an extreme example but imagine someone knocks on your door and says “help, the secret police are after me.” You don’t help them, and, you don’t turn them in.
• flyingfences 6y ago
  > The view you just described is active support for the status quo. A passive stance is, by definition, not active support for anything. Coinbase is actively working on financial infrastructure. That's what they "actively" do. > Saying "I'll keep my views private" means I'm giving an okay to what's happening now. No, it means that what's happening now is, while certainly important to many employees as people, not a part of or in any way related to the company's business.
  • glenda 6y ago
    The financial infrastructure that Coinbase is working on brushes up against the lines drawn by the law in many countries. Working with Bitcoin could be seen as a somewhat political act in itself.
    • flyingfences 6y ago
      Yes, it would be a necessarily political act in direct furtherance of the company's mission, not a misdirection of finite resources and effort.
    • mc32 6y ago
      No I don’t think so. Upper management yes. Not rank and file. It’s like if the company vision failed and their next big product fails. That’s on management but not on the rank and file.
  • baron_harkonnen 6y ago
    > A passive stance is, by definition, not active support for anything. Passive support for the status quo is that we all have to work and survive in this world. If you have to work for an airline to live, but hate what co2 emissions is doing for this world, you are passively supporting the currently political narrative. Insisting that any belief that is non-status quo be silenced is active political action. You can pretend that it's passive, but that is just a cowardly way of abdicating political responsibility.
    • deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    • SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
      "Silenced" strikes me as a uselessly broad category. If I tell my friends to stop yelling about politics because we're trying to have a nice dinner, that isn't an active political action.
    • joyeuse6701 6y ago
• CyberRabbi 6y ago
  Being apolitical at work is not active support for the status quo. It’s simply not using your role as an employee for your company as a vehicle to advance your political agenda. An agenda which is most likely irrelevant to the mission of your company. You can be apolitical at work while still opposing the so called status quo with your vote. Or you can oppose the status quo in an explicitly political organization outside of your job.
  • baron_harkonnen 6y ago
    > your political agenda And the alternative is the company's political agenda. So you are saying we must all, 8+ hours a day, support our employers political agenda, and then in the time remaining we can try to counteract that a bit. If you think political action begins and ends at the vote then you have a lot to learn about the nature of politics in practice.
    • CyberRabbi 6y ago
      You aren’t being paid to promote your political agenda, you are being paid to perform your function as an employee. If you don’t support your company’s agenda, why would you work there?
      • baron_harkonnen 6y ago
        You honestly don't see how what you're describing is a fairly radical political opinion? You are now arguing that you should choose your means of survival as a political statement. If you don't lock-step agree with the politics of tech companies in general, you should find a lower salary someplace else that agrees more with your political beliefs. I would love if people who are privacy advocates could get facebook salaries working for the EFF. It looks like what you are advocating here is that not only should you silence non-status quo opinions, but your income should strongly correlated with your alignment with dominant political powers.
        • SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
• SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  I don't agree. Opponents of the status quo can get an advantage by defecting from an apolitical equilibrium, by bringing politics into spaces where people who disagree with them aren't willing to. But when everyone starts being political, opponents of the status quo lose, because almost by definition their views are less popular.
• justinclift 6y ago
  > The view you just described is active support for the status quo. It's really not. It's just not giving a shit about whatever the thing is the political argument is about, instead putting time and care into other things you consider more important. eg kids, family, etc.
  • sagichmal 6y ago
    It is.
  • FooBarBizBazz 6y ago
    "Kids, family" aren't necessarily in opposition to "political argument". When you watch a political protest, you should see people fighting FOR their children's futures. Whenever politics has a multigenerational timescale, that's what it's about. I also point out that "not giving a shit" and "considering more important" are synonyms for "not mattering" and "mattering", respectively.
    • justinclift 6y ago
      Well yes. Some person may feel that their particular hot issue is "the most important thing ever". (!) Other people don't, and care about other things. Claiming that people who actively put their time and effort into stopping that change ("supporting the status quo") are the same as people who prioritise other things (eg "looking after their sick sibling"), is outright dishonest. And seems both silly, and like it would generate a bunch of negative things by trying to push it. To illustrate, lets take a dumb example... Lets say my sister is dying of cancer, and I need to pay for her treatment, her family's housing and costs meanwhile, and whatever other expenses come up. So, I'm doing bulk hours at my job to make that work. In that situation, someone pushing an agenda of "there needs to be more sausage rolls in the canteen" (!) can go to hell. I have more important (to me) things to care about. I don't care about their hot issue in any way. But if they keep on trying to take up my time with it, they're not going to get a positive reaction as they're literally wasting time I could be using productively. ;)
• RestlessMind 6y ago
  > The view you just described is active support for the status quo. Not really. I can do my job from 9 to 5 in a non-political way and then actively try to change the status quo on evenings and weekends. That doesn't align with how you are describing being apolitical at work means. > If every individual shares the thinking at every company then it is impossible to even imagine how the most catastrophic climate change can be avoided. Because many individuals can sincerely believe that the way to deal with climate change goes via individual or citizen advocacy groups changing cultural attitudes and then exerting pressure on the Governments to bring in the necessary regulations. Companies should not be engaged in climate change politics (or global poverty or abortion rights) if they want to avoid it.
• fourstar 6y ago
  > "Just do you job and don't voice contrary opinions" is a pretty radical political opinion if you ask me, so your definition of "apolitical" is only "A"-political because you are so intensely in opposition to non-status quo beliefs that you disregard them completely. Which is your personal opinion on the matter. What do I suggest for you? Start your own company and allow your employees to have their political views expressed as part of your ethos (or Manifesto if you can relate more to that).
• diab0lic 6y ago
  > The view you just described is active support for the status quo. I hear this all the time but I cannot for the life of me figure out why it is "active support" isn't it at most passive support? If you were actively supporting it, you'd be taking political actions and therefore not being apolitical?
• skinkestek 6y ago
  Will you be OK with everyone else doing the same, including people you deeply disagree with? Because those people also have strong opinions, not because they are evil, but because from their point of view it is the right thing to do. I'd say: unless you are OK with both Trump supporters, Biden supoorters, Pro-Lifers, Pro-Choice etc etc all bringing their politics to work, be careful about trying to use work for politics. Edit: let me also add the Communist party, Jehovas Witnesses, the Catholic Church, Hinduism (a number of my colleagues wanting to learn meditation got stuck between two factions arguing loudly and angrily about some detail regarding reincarnation), the local NRA and everyone else. Unless you want to accept them doing activism on company time: don't be the one who starts it. > in opposition to non-status quo beliefs that you disregard them completely. Many of us disagree strongly with the status quo because we find it is way too little conservative. Do you really want us to start using harder tactics instead of sticking to our current strategy: - hoping the kids on the left will grow up soon. Traditionally in generation after generation they abandon the dumbest ideas after a decade or so. (And yes, this holds true for me too, I was influenced by socialism as a teenager even though I never torched anything.) - be nice so that others will be nice to us, or at least think twice who they want to support - stand up for others and hope others will stand up for us (and yes, despite me being deeply "conservative" that also means standing up for immigrants. I do that.) - vote - pray - depending on location: make sure we are able to defend ourselves and our families if police cannot be expected to do so (we don't need to think about that here as crime rates are low and police arrive quickly if you need them)
• specialp 6y ago
  Perhaps I want the status quo at my job. If I worked somewhere truly objectionable I would quit working there and rally against it in my own time. I get paid to produce services that we sell. I don't get paid to change the world as powerful as we'd like to think we are. Also I don't expect my employer to pay me to be an activist unless they really wanted to. I have every other hour than the 40 I work to do whatever I want. I admire people that are willing to put in the time to advocate what they believe is right and just. And they are free to do that whether I agree with them or disagree with them. I just don't want to be at work where just coming in and wanting to do your job is considered insufficient and you have to be saving the world somehow. That doesn't mean that I disagree with the cause or won't contribute in my own time. I just want us working on the goal for our company. It could work both ways. Like what if an oil company gave you days off to counter protest at climate change events? If you did not attend, it would be questionable and perhaps ruin your career. So I think as a whole we support activism because it is the activism we like but it might not always be that way.
• meragrin_ 6y ago
  It is not active support for the status quo. No one is saying to quit being political entirely. Just during work hours.