5 ms·

The union is free to pay Amazon employees $15 an hour to watch their propaganda videos. This paternalism of low wage employees needs to stop. They can make up

by bko 6y ago

The union is free to pay Amazon employees $15 an hour to watch their propaganda videos. This paternalism of low wage employees needs to stop. They can make up their own mind and actually have skin in the game as opposed to some tech worker making 10x as much telling them they're being brainwashed

geofft 6y ago
Why are you deeply concerned about paternalism from tech workers who aren't even in contact with the employees in question and are just posting on a message board, and not concerned about potentially-illegal paternalism from the bosses of the employees?
claudiawerner 6y ago
Of course they can make up their own mind - but simply pointing out the existence of propaganda and other factors at play, and the fact that ideology plays a large role in our lives, does not imply 'brainwashing' as much as ideological forces. The tug-of-war between labour and capital has been raging for centuries, and at no time hitherto is it more visible that it has graduated to the ideological battlefield when Amazon starts putting up posters and training their employees on otherwise hilarious videos to push their point of view. And I think anyone should point that out - whether it's a union organizer in Alabama, a tech worker making 10x the salary (who, by the way, may also have an interest in improving cultural support for unions if they are a tech worker in favour of software engineer unions) or a historian on capital-labour relations. As far as I know, however, no tech worker has contacted anyone in Alabama and told them they're brainwashed. 'Paternalism' would be someone pushing the ballot for them 'for their own interests'. That does not preclude discussion of priorities, rationality, and the rational frameworks (epistemological/ideological/moral/practical/etc.) we have available to discuss how wise those decisions are.
- refurb 6y ago
  ”simply pointing out the existence of propaganda” Why do you assume only you can see that’s it’s propaganda and they can’t?
  - claudiawerner 6y ago
    I don't assume that. Actually, I assume the opposite - they are more likely to see some propaganda for what it is than I am. But I do think everyone has blind spots, and I do think propaganda is effective, even if you know it's propaganda. Even with a small group of people believing propaganda, peer pressure and the desire for humans to conform with the actions of their in-group can wield significant influence. In the same way, I have no doubt that many citizens of the USSR or China or Nazi Germany or even the US can see through the propaganda targeted at them. But I don't think anyone would argue with the idea that propaganda was and continues to be effective for a significant (and important) portion of the population. I would also think that, say, a historian who is an expert on propaganda, or an economist who is an expert on labour relations, a political campaign manager, or a company marketing manager would be able to more accurately and quickly identify propaganda when they see it. Some people can see through certain propaganda. That's not controversial.
    - refurb 6y ago
      You start off saying "they are more likely to see some propaganda for what it is than I am", then go into 2.5 more paragraphs how that's not really true and they are susceptible. I find Amazon worker susceptibility to propaganda to be a little silly. And I'm talking about "fake news" propaganda, not promotion of a true, but pro-Amazon viewpoint. Most folks I worked with a lower-paying, manual labor jobs had zero illusions about their employer. They aren't getting the "bring your whole self to work" and "help us change the world" bullshit that the big companies feed their white collar workers. It was very clear that the employer looked out for themselves (e.g. profit) and workers were easily replaceable. I think people who claim they were manipulated need to give the workers a little more credit.
heymijo 6y ago
This is an ahistorical argument that is wildly ignorant of the power dynamics between labor and capital, with a Nassim Taleb-ism shoe-horned in to a place where it doesn't fit.
- listless 6y ago
  And isn’t this the core issue behind nearly every political disagreement? Who has power, and how can we take it. I’m not saying that’s always bad, but it is, at the end of the day, about control.
  - KSteffensen 6y ago
    And here I was thinking political disagreement was about solving problems and reaching compromises to everyone's benefit. I guess I'm naive. Edit: Updated for clarity
    - Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
      Amazon is entirely apathetic to the concerns of their warehouse and trucking staff. That's why they need to wear diapers, soil themselves, shit in bags in the back of their trucks, and piss in bottles. If Amazon was interested in compromising we wouldn't be seeing nationwide coverage of these issues wherever Amazon builds a warehouse.
- bko 6y ago
  How doesn't it fit? You don't live in this neighborhood. You don't work at an amazon warehouse. You probably don't even know anyone who does. You can comment about power dynamics on a forum for software engineers. They have the power to seek better employment. Youre the one that wants to strip them of the power for them to vote on matters concerning them directly.
  - snypher 6y ago
    Please don't personally attack people here - I fit most of your criteria posted and your post seems very exclusionary.
KSteffensen 6y ago
I don't see the paternalism in the comment you are replying to. Nobody is saying that workers can't make up their own minds. To me the comment is pointing out that we as outsiders very likely don't know what is going on because reporting is probably biased.

by bko 6y ago

geofft 6y ago

Why are you deeply concerned about paternalism from tech workers who aren't even in contact with the employees in question and are just posting on a message board, and not concerned about potentially-illegal paternalism from the bosses of the employees?

claudiawerner 6y ago

Of course they can make up their own mind - but simply pointing out the existence of propaganda and other factors at play, and the fact that ideology plays a large role in our lives, does not imply 'brainwashing' as much as ideological forces. The tug-of-war between labour and capital has been raging for centuries, and at no time hitherto is it more visible that it has graduated to the ideological battlefield when Amazon starts putting up posters and training their employees on otherwise hilarious videos to push their point of view. And I think anyone should point that out - whether it's a union organizer in Alabama, a tech worker making 10x the salary (who, by the way, may also have an interest in improving cultural support for unions if they are a tech worker in favour of software engineer unions) or a historian on capital-labour relations. As far as I know, however, no tech worker has contacted anyone in Alabama and told them they're brainwashed. 'Paternalism' would be someone pushing the ballot for them 'for their own interests'. That does not preclude discussion of priorities, rationality, and the rational frameworks (epistemological/ideological/moral/practical/etc.) we have available to discuss how wise those decisions are.

refurb 6y ago
”simply pointing out the existence of propaganda” Why do you assume only you can see that’s it’s propaganda and they can’t?
- claudiawerner 6y ago
  I don't assume that. Actually, I assume the opposite - they are more likely to see some propaganda for what it is than I am. But I do think everyone has blind spots, and I do think propaganda is effective, even if you know it's propaganda. Even with a small group of people believing propaganda, peer pressure and the desire for humans to conform with the actions of their in-group can wield significant influence. In the same way, I have no doubt that many citizens of the USSR or China or Nazi Germany or even the US can see through the propaganda targeted at them. But I don't think anyone would argue with the idea that propaganda was and continues to be effective for a significant (and important) portion of the population. I would also think that, say, a historian who is an expert on propaganda, or an economist who is an expert on labour relations, a political campaign manager, or a company marketing manager would be able to more accurately and quickly identify propaganda when they see it. Some people can see through certain propaganda. That's not controversial.
  - refurb 6y ago
    You start off saying "they are more likely to see some propaganda for what it is than I am", then go into 2.5 more paragraphs how that's not really true and they are susceptible. I find Amazon worker susceptibility to propaganda to be a little silly. And I'm talking about "fake news" propaganda, not promotion of a true, but pro-Amazon viewpoint. Most folks I worked with a lower-paying, manual labor jobs had zero illusions about their employer. They aren't getting the "bring your whole self to work" and "help us change the world" bullshit that the big companies feed their white collar workers. It was very clear that the employer looked out for themselves (e.g. profit) and workers were easily replaceable. I think people who claim they were manipulated need to give the workers a little more credit.

heymijo 6y ago

This is an ahistorical argument that is wildly ignorant of the power dynamics between labor and capital, with a Nassim Taleb-ism shoe-horned in to a place where it doesn't fit.

listless 6y ago
And isn’t this the core issue behind nearly every political disagreement? Who has power, and how can we take it. I’m not saying that’s always bad, but it is, at the end of the day, about control.
- KSteffensen 6y ago
  And here I was thinking political disagreement was about solving problems and reaching compromises to everyone's benefit. I guess I'm naive. Edit: Updated for clarity
  - Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
    Amazon is entirely apathetic to the concerns of their warehouse and trucking staff. That's why they need to wear diapers, soil themselves, shit in bags in the back of their trucks, and piss in bottles. If Amazon was interested in compromising we wouldn't be seeing nationwide coverage of these issues wherever Amazon builds a warehouse.
bko 6y ago
How doesn't it fit? You don't live in this neighborhood. You don't work at an amazon warehouse. You probably don't even know anyone who does. You can comment about power dynamics on a forum for software engineers. They have the power to seek better employment. Youre the one that wants to strip them of the power for them to vote on matters concerning them directly.
- snypher 6y ago
  Please don't personally attack people here - I fit most of your criteria posted and your post seems very exclusionary.

KSteffensen 6y ago

I don't see the paternalism in the comment you are replying to. Nobody is saying that workers can't make up their own minds. To me the comment is pointing out that we as outsiders very likely don't know what is going on because reporting is probably biased.