4 ms·

Evil wasn't mentioned in this article, only oppression. If you don't think that the managerial system is oppressive, perhaps it isn't to you, but many people ar

Evil wasn't mentioned in this article, only oppression. If you don't think that the managerial system is oppressive, perhaps it isn't to you, but many people around the world find administrated life unbearable.

NikolaNovak 4y ago
I think that's semantics. If oppression is not evil / undesirable / bad, then definitions for each have been diluted beyond use. And I think you agree that oppression is bad, based on your statements. My question therefore remains - is every manager bad? Are we to burn them all? Are all rules or processes or structures inherently and always bad? Is anything but pure anarchy oppressive? Is all society horrible? If yes, that's a fascinating, and I put forward unrealistic perspective. If not, then I think that's the interesting part of conversation. What is a manager that a leader isn't? What makes a manager bad? What makes a system oppressive? Otherwise it's just a meaningless "managers are bad" platitudes for cheap points. Edit / add on Basically I'm still stuck on first claim that managers are inherently I oppressive. I had bad managers and they were oppressive. I had good managers and they were liberating. They took care of organizing things. Just like last night - somebody seemlessly took care of timing, keeping track of numbers and puzzles, and helping us resolve confusion and communication. So rest of us could focus on fun and puzzles. They were a good manager and the opposite of oppressive. so I still need some backing before I grant or consider that premise given in such a universalist fashion. Edit 2 - re read and come on. You put racism and capitalism and managers in same statement as members of same category. If that's not calling them evil I don't know what it is :-)
- bshepard 4y ago
  Oppression is very natural: the moral value of "nature" is quite complex, so it seems inaccurate to say that oppression equates with evil, or badness, although certainly it does in many contemporary political cultures. This is a sign of the shallowness of these political cultures, their tendency to think in polarized/binary ways. You are doing that here too, with your question about whether managers are 'always bad' -- that isn't the question, managerialism is an oppressive/violent system of rule and domination that emerged, that became dominant, and that hides itself. It hides itself because people have a hard time grasping complex historical systems. They want to moralize them, either from anti or pro positions. Such moralizing doesn't accomplish very much. Surely I am guilty of it as well, too, but seek to be aware of my own moralisms, which your comments have helped with. Thank you!
- dr_kiszonka 4y ago
  I agree that a good manager can be liberating. One piece of advice that stuck with me is that good leadership / management is about serving your team.

NikolaNovak 4y ago

I think that's semantics. If oppression is not evil / undesirable / bad, then definitions for each have been diluted beyond use. And I think you agree that oppression is bad, based on your statements. My question therefore remains - is every manager bad? Are we to burn them all? Are all rules or processes or structures inherently and always bad? Is anything but pure anarchy oppressive? Is all society horrible? If yes, that's a fascinating, and I put forward unrealistic perspective. If not, then I think that's the interesting part of conversation. What is a manager that a leader isn't? What makes a manager bad? What makes a system oppressive? Otherwise it's just a meaningless "managers are bad" platitudes for cheap points. Edit / add on Basically I'm still stuck on first claim that managers are inherently I oppressive. I had bad managers and they were oppressive. I had good managers and they were liberating. They took care of organizing things. Just like last night - somebody seemlessly took care of timing, keeping track of numbers and puzzles, and helping us resolve confusion and communication. So rest of us could focus on fun and puzzles. They were a good manager and the opposite of oppressive. so I still need some backing before I grant or consider that premise given in such a universalist fashion. Edit 2 - re read and come on. You put racism and capitalism and managers in same statement as members of same category. If that's not calling them evil I don't know what it is :-)

bshepard 4y ago
Oppression is very natural: the moral value of "nature" is quite complex, so it seems inaccurate to say that oppression equates with evil, or badness, although certainly it does in many contemporary political cultures. This is a sign of the shallowness of these political cultures, their tendency to think in polarized/binary ways. You are doing that here too, with your question about whether managers are 'always bad' -- that isn't the question, managerialism is an oppressive/violent system of rule and domination that emerged, that became dominant, and that hides itself. It hides itself because people have a hard time grasping complex historical systems. They want to moralize them, either from anti or pro positions. Such moralizing doesn't accomplish very much. Surely I am guilty of it as well, too, but seek to be aware of my own moralisms, which your comments have helped with. Thank you!
dr_kiszonka 4y ago
I agree that a good manager can be liberating. One piece of advice that stuck with me is that good leadership / management is about serving your team.