4 ms·

> Governments (at the behest of businesses) enforce borders so that labor cannot effectively organise. This is backwards, and I'm having trouble understanding

> Governments (at the behest of businesses) enforce borders so that labor cannot effectively organise. This is backwards, and I'm having trouble understanding how a more diverse, more transient population would find it easier to find common interests and unite. Suppose a factory unionizes - without borders, the owner will find it easier to import non-union workers. While moving a factory is challenging regardless of borders - it's a big, heavy thing, tied into local infrastructure and supply chains. It's even reflected in the rhetoric - "immigrants will do the jobs Americans won't". It's also reflected empirically: Whole Foods' heat map says lower rates of racial diversity increase unionization risks - https://www.businessinsider.com/whole-foods-tracks-unionization-risk-with-heat-map-2020-1 https://www.businessinsider.com/whole-foods-tracks-unionizat... (unpaywalled: http://archive.is/1khJw http://archive.is/1khJw) And in the strong Danish unions as far back as 1981 (https://mattbruenig.com/2021/09/20/when-mcdonalds-came-to-denmark/ https://mattbruenig.com/2021/09/20/when-mcdonalds-came-to-de...) when Denmark had only 3.02% of immigrants and their descendants (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Denmark#Modern_minorities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Denmark#Modern...)

nerdponx 4y ago
> easier to find common interests and unite I think the idea is that there are common interests to be found, but borders artificially keep people apart, by segmenting up legal jurisdictions. For example, why Starbucks employees in Jersey City aren't all that different from Starbucks employees in New York City right across the river. > Whole Foods' heat map says lower rates of racial diversity increase unionization risks To what extent is this correlated with the economic security of their employees? Employees in wealthier areas (statistically correlated with whiter) might be more educated on average (which could be correlated with desire to unionize) and/or more likely to have a higher-income partner or family member (which means lower financial risk due to failure or being fired).
- nhchris 4y ago
  > borders artificially keep people apart GPS data shows how wolf packs carve out territory - https://bigthink.com/hard-science/wolf-gps/ https://bigthink.com/hard-science/wolf-gps/
  - nerdponx 4y ago
    This is not what I believe, but my attempt at summarizing the point under discussion.
- slackdog 4y ago
  Corporate DEI initiatives using divisive rhetoric designed to foster paranoia, in order to keep workers on edge around each other. ("You're all racist. Even if you think you aren't racist, asserting you have no subconscious racial biases only proves that you're overtly racist. You're constantly commit racist 'microaggression' offenses against your coworkers without even realizing it.") Such paranoia between coworkers is a serious impediment to labor organization. The more diverse the workplace, the better this works.
  - nerdponx 4y ago
    My experience has led me to believe that most individuals in favor of corporate DEI initiatives are earnestly and in good faith attempting to put into practice the recommendations of critical race theory and related frameworks. The same experience has led me to believe that most managers and employers are not so crafty, and are going along with it because it seems to be trendy and in-demand and because they don't want to be publicly canceled. It's more about petty virtue signaling among managers than coordinated suppression of organized labor. Furthermore, most DEI initiatives do not look like what you describe, outside of a limited subset of academic institutions that have always been somewhat radical (including few to none of the name-brand universities in the Americas) and smaller companies/startups headed by highly-opinionated idealists. In general I think we are right to be skeptical of attempts to divide, rather than unite. It's absolutely possible that DEI initiatives are weaponized at some organizations, and we should be wary of that possibility. But it's also not fair or correct to assume that it's always being wielded as such. It's worth noting that there are legitimate good intentions behind all this no-subconscious-bias microaggression stuff. It's derived from a very earnest radical academic tradition. The kernel of wisdom at the core of it all is that diversity is good and should be not just acknowledged but actively embraced and celebrated. That is, people can be united together, without all being the same.
    - slackdog 4y ago
      > My experience has led me to believe that most individuals in favor of corporate DEI initiatives are earnestly and in good faith attempting to put into practice the recommendations of critical race theory and related frameworks. Yes, of course they are. As explained by Chomsky's model of propaganda, corporations hire true believers for these roles because they are the most effective and reliable. > most managers and employers are not so crafty Amazon being so crafty is a documented fact; it's naive to think they're the only ones.
pessimizer 4y ago
> I'm having trouble understanding how a more diverse, more transient population would find it easier to find common interests and unite. I think it would make it far easier. The problem is every jurisdiction attacking unions and workers in their own unique legal frameworks, and the forcing of unions/workforces to compete with each other across the borders between these jurisdictions. Capital gets to play Mexican against Indonesian workers, even down to workers in Cook County against workers in DuPage county. If an Indonesian can easily work in Mexico and a Mexican can easily work in Indonesia, their interests aren't just theoretically similar, they're almost the same.

nerdponx 4y ago

> easier to find common interests and unite I think the idea is that there are common interests to be found, but borders artificially keep people apart, by segmenting up legal jurisdictions. For example, why Starbucks employees in Jersey City aren't all that different from Starbucks employees in New York City right across the river. > Whole Foods' heat map says lower rates of racial diversity increase unionization risks To what extent is this correlated with the economic security of their employees? Employees in wealthier areas (statistically correlated with whiter) might be more educated on average (which could be correlated with desire to unionize) and/or more likely to have a higher-income partner or family member (which means lower financial risk due to failure or being fired).

nhchris 4y ago
> borders artificially keep people apart GPS data shows how wolf packs carve out territory - https://bigthink.com/hard-science/wolf-gps/ https://bigthink.com/hard-science/wolf-gps/
- nerdponx 4y ago
  This is not what I believe, but my attempt at summarizing the point under discussion.
slackdog 4y ago
Corporate DEI initiatives using divisive rhetoric designed to foster paranoia, in order to keep workers on edge around each other. ("You're all racist. Even if you think you aren't racist, asserting you have no subconscious racial biases only proves that you're overtly racist. You're constantly commit racist 'microaggression' offenses against your coworkers without even realizing it.") Such paranoia between coworkers is a serious impediment to labor organization. The more diverse the workplace, the better this works.
- nerdponx 4y ago
  My experience has led me to believe that most individuals in favor of corporate DEI initiatives are earnestly and in good faith attempting to put into practice the recommendations of critical race theory and related frameworks. The same experience has led me to believe that most managers and employers are not so crafty, and are going along with it because it seems to be trendy and in-demand and because they don't want to be publicly canceled. It's more about petty virtue signaling among managers than coordinated suppression of organized labor. Furthermore, most DEI initiatives do not look like what you describe, outside of a limited subset of academic institutions that have always been somewhat radical (including few to none of the name-brand universities in the Americas) and smaller companies/startups headed by highly-opinionated idealists. In general I think we are right to be skeptical of attempts to divide, rather than unite. It's absolutely possible that DEI initiatives are weaponized at some organizations, and we should be wary of that possibility. But it's also not fair or correct to assume that it's always being wielded as such. It's worth noting that there are legitimate good intentions behind all this no-subconscious-bias microaggression stuff. It's derived from a very earnest radical academic tradition. The kernel of wisdom at the core of it all is that diversity is good and should be not just acknowledged but actively embraced and celebrated. That is, people can be united together, without all being the same.
  - slackdog 4y ago
    > My experience has led me to believe that most individuals in favor of corporate DEI initiatives are earnestly and in good faith attempting to put into practice the recommendations of critical race theory and related frameworks. Yes, of course they are. As explained by Chomsky's model of propaganda, corporations hire true believers for these roles because they are the most effective and reliable. > most managers and employers are not so crafty Amazon being so crafty is a documented fact; it's naive to think they're the only ones.

pessimizer 4y ago

> I'm having trouble understanding how a more diverse, more transient population would find it easier to find common interests and unite. I think it would make it far easier. The problem is every jurisdiction attacking unions and workers in their own unique legal frameworks, and the forcing of unions/workforces to compete with each other across the borders between these jurisdictions. Capital gets to play Mexican against Indonesian workers, even down to workers in Cook County against workers in DuPage county. If an Indonesian can easily work in Mexico and a Mexican can easily work in Indonesia, their interests aren't just theoretically similar, they're almost the same.