4 ms·

They'd rather see poor people earn no money than see them earn anything below what their own preconceptions have labelled a fair wage. It seems that for a lot o

They'd rather see poor people earn no money than see them earn anything below what their own preconceptions have labelled a fair wage. It seems that for a lot of people, it's not about building things, it's about tearing things down. The psychology appears akin to the childhood bully who, unable to build their own, goes around kicking over other children's sandcastles, then feels smugly content with their "accomplishment"... not recognising all they've done is ruin others work without contributing anything of value to the world.

phailhaus 4y ago
OK, so then we should repeal labor laws and allow employers to abuse their employees? The problem is that your tired analogy has no nuance: all criticism is considered "bullying". We should simply allow everyone to do anything they want? Clearly that's absurd, so the sandcastle analogy doesn't work. Why not just argue the criticism on its merits, rather than complaining that criticism shouldn't be allowed at all?
- ripe 4y ago
  I don't know why you're being downvoted. Your point is valid. Many arguments can be made against the article's critique, but the analogy used by the comment above yours is rejecting the very idea that these companies can be criticized at all.
- cscurmudgeon 4y ago
  So all off shoring is labor abuse? TIL
  - phailhaus 4y ago
    I'm saying there's a conversation to be had about off-shoring labor, but the parent comment basically said "no, all criticism is bullying, and bullying is wrong."
Der_Einzige 4y ago
They call it "critical theory" instead of "constructive theory" for a reason. It takes no skill to critique.
Xelynega 4y ago
I think your "building" and "tearing down" analogy is actually spot on. We have a whole group of people who are so concerned with what's already built and building more and more onto it, that any attempt to point out where they went wrong in the foundation is met with criticisms like "all you people want to do is tear things down" and "well if your foundation is so good then why haven't you built as much as us". Look at the whole phenomenon of critical theories, especially critical race theory. People were so enraged by the prospect of having the foundations questioned that the actual criticisms were less important.

phailhaus 4y ago

OK, so then we should repeal labor laws and allow employers to abuse their employees? The problem is that your tired analogy has no nuance: all criticism is considered "bullying". We should simply allow everyone to do anything they want? Clearly that's absurd, so the sandcastle analogy doesn't work. Why not just argue the criticism on its merits, rather than complaining that criticism shouldn't be allowed at all?

ripe 4y ago
I don't know why you're being downvoted. Your point is valid. Many arguments can be made against the article's critique, but the analogy used by the comment above yours is rejecting the very idea that these companies can be criticized at all.
cscurmudgeon 4y ago
So all off shoring is labor abuse? TIL
- phailhaus 4y ago
  I'm saying there's a conversation to be had about off-shoring labor, but the parent comment basically said "no, all criticism is bullying, and bullying is wrong."

Der_Einzige 4y ago

They call it "critical theory" instead of "constructive theory" for a reason. It takes no skill to critique.

Xelynega 4y ago

I think your "building" and "tearing down" analogy is actually spot on. We have a whole group of people who are so concerned with what's already built and building more and more onto it, that any attempt to point out where they went wrong in the foundation is met with criticisms like "all you people want to do is tear things down" and "well if your foundation is so good then why haven't you built as much as us". Look at the whole phenomenon of critical theories, especially critical race theory. People were so enraged by the prospect of having the foundations questioned that the actual criticisms were less important.