5 ms·
That's all good and well, but that still doesn't mean someone has the moral right to striking and preventing scabs from doing their jobs. "Any argument making
by friend_and_foe 3y ago
That's all good and well, but that still doesn't mean someone has the moral right to striking and preventing scabs from doing their jobs.
"Any argument making a different point from the one I want to make is derailing the discussion." You can't just frame a discussion the way you want it to play out and then when other people say wait, there's another aspect ofthis we want to explore, just say they're not part of the discussion. We were having a nice discussion about whether the right to strike is fundamental, moral or absolute, and you are trying to derail it by dismissing it outright, surely you can see that?
- corinroyal 3y agoWay to miss the point. The author's trick was to try get us to look at the relationship of strikers to scabs and employers in isolation without considering the totality of the power relationships or the social results of the collective action. This was done to obscure the fact that employers hold the vast majority of power and use it unjustly all the time and to the detriment of all but a tiny minority. So maybe it's not me that's having trouble with critical thinking Maybe championing wrong and regressive billionaire propaganda is not something you need to do, especially since you have no talent for it. None of the points you made held up to scrutiny, and let's be honest, you didn't even make much effort.