Well, I have been absent from Tree Hugger (the Greenie Communitarian with Fascist leanings site) for a while so I figured it was time to pay a visit.
SideNote: due to the Great Diaspora / Banning by TH of those willing to challenge their “Green Come First” religion, it has been OUR great benefit that “C.dog e. doG” and “Cris P. Bacon” have become tremendous commenters here – again, thanks guys!
At “Should We All Be Working a Four Day Week“, an architect decided to put her firm on a “5 days work in 4 days” schedule. Great! If she’s the owner and wants to do that, she should have the Right to do so (as long as no laws are abrogated). They also had a poll asking what folks thought about a 4 day work week (e.g., yes, no, other). I left the following for the original downer premise (emphasis mine):
We are working’ 5 days in 4’ week because how we live as individuals has consequences for everyone else. The way we live now has created many problems: scarcity of resources, scarcity of jobs, climate change, wealth discrepancies and many wasted lives. These are all escalating problems which are not being addressed by the institutions of power: Governments, Banks, the Multinationals have too many vested interests in the current system to be the agents of change.
for the architect:
Why should it be up to OTHER entities (“Governments, Banks, the Multinationals have too many vested interests in the current system to be the agents of change”) to make such a decision for YOUR company?
You made it for your’s – good for you. If employees like it they will stay; the converse if they do not. Push the decision making down to the lowest granular level – if you can make and win the argument, congratulations! To have those “Power Entities” make the decisions for others is summed up in one word: “tyranny”.
Blaming it on others or other entities is a cop out – especially when one has made the right decisions and done the hard work to be in a place where they are able to make such a decision. I figure that some might not like the longer days but some might really like always having 3 day weekend but one didn’t (emphasis mine):
Other. It won’t work if we squeeze more work into less hours. It will only solve unemployment problems if the work is distributed to more employees. In order for that to happen, governments need to make the paperwork and costs of two employees the same as that for one employee.
Snarky mood, snarky reply (but it was the next commenter was….interesting):
Economic unicorns and fairy dust, eh?
The emphasis always seems to be to demand or rely on a governmental solution. The next / third step what what that might portend seems to elude these nitwits. True Progressives always assume that Governmental actions are non-judgmental, non-partisan, and always beneficial. Esther Yates-Abrams, the commenter,
Sidenote – why is it that those with double – hyphenated names are almost always Progressive Liberals?
can’t seem to bring herself to the logical answer: simple to make the cost the same – 1/2 their pay. She obviously hasn’t a clue that most people can be more productive when required. Back to my original comment (above). It seems that a commenter, Bussdriver87, took exception to it:
Tyrannical bosses exist TODAY and people can’t just quit their job which includes healthcare and do well in this job market finding another job. Plus many people have a great deal of debt hanging over them. Many people live in a form of tyranny already. OUR government which used to be for and by the people should push around private interests not the other way around.
This person can’t seem to make the difference between being in a bad spot personally from making bad decisions and when a Government puts you in a bad spot – and I told him that:
If you have put yourself into bad situations (a boss you hate, a job you hate, debt that you racked up, yada, yada, yada), that is not “tyranny” - that is simply reaping the negative rewards of bad decisions and creating a self-derived myth that you are a victim. Do not conflate the two or try to redefine the language – instead, stand up, take charge of yourself, and accept that YOU are in charge of you instead of allowing others to control your future.
Government pushing private interests around IS, by definition, tyranny; if Government has free reign to push “private interestings” around also includes private people.
When Government can push people around like pawns on a chessboard, how can that be “freedom”, Bussdriver78?
The point I was trying to get across is that to believe that one has NO control whatsoever is making yourself a victim. We all make decisions – we believe (or delude ourselves into believing) that they are good ones. Some, we do know are clunkers and sometimes even admit to such. However, if you believe yourself to be a victim, you automatically take away making choices from yourself – a truly bad place to be and that’s where he seems to want to be. I just can’t, for the life of me, understand why he doesn’t believe that when Government starts “to push private interests” around that he has completely changed the Proper Role of Government. I made the attempt that it should be the individual in charge and not Government – he wasn’t buying it. Instead, of arguing the issue, we went ad hominem:
YOU are not the center of the world and it illustrates a lack of maturity to expect everybody to be like yourself (and arrogant to assume they succeed emulating you.)
Everybody does not have a choice; this personal responsibility crap can go too far. Having said that, I do realize Americans don’t understand responsibility (quite often the preachers are the worst.) Being a victim IS popular, I don’t deny that either. This culture breeds sheeple and it is asking a lot to expect them to overcome it when they can’t even chuck their parent’s primitive religions.
You selectively skip things. A people’s government pushing around private interests is not tyranny.
Willing to take responsibility for myself and my actions is a “lack of maturity”? And I did kinda have to strain a bit on the “personal responsibility crap can go too far” and I really didn’t get the preachers dealy (an angry atheist?). It also seems that he has an amazing grasp of self-delusion in sticking to the meme that his brand of government “pushing around private interests” is a brand new version of the word “tyranny”:
I’m not selectively skipping anything at all. Nor do I see myself as the center of any world – but neither do I see Government being such (and nor should it be).
I challenge you to defend your thesis that “Everybody does not have a choice” – people have and make choices each and everyday. Perhaps what you are not seeing that one’s present state in life has been made by thousands of choices over time. To be true, some made by others that impact you (like your parents’ choices) and one’s you have made on your own. You have the choice to try to mitigate the former and you have the choice to mitigate your own suboptimal ones as well – it all depends on if you have the self-discipline to do so.
A “People Government”, eh? Like that ones that failed in the USSR and the Eastern Bloc nations? Certainly, the self-named “Peoples’ Governments” of Stalin and Mao killed hundreds of millions of their own citizens for political reasons – in “pushing private interests around. Sounds like tyranny to me.
Liberty stems from following the Rule of Law, of accepting that there are natural Rights which Government is instituted to protect (and not “push around”), and that everyone is equal before the Law (and not equality of outcome).
I do wonder - what is YOUR definition of responsibility that most Americans do not understand and why are preachers the most egregious offenders of such?
I should have also added in there a mention of the Right to Private Property – another mainstay pillar of our Republic. Well, with his next reply, it seems that I got under his skin:
To disprove a universal is easy, no challenge. You must be one of those who filibusters in chess and must have a checkmate to stop! We need a godwin’s law to shut up all you extremists who quickly label everything communist.
Government works by force (including threats) allowed by the people at their “will”. think about it.
Liberty from rule of law? ha! BS. I know enough Libertards. I wonder how you’d do with the philosophical arguments on how there is no free will.. Do some homework outside your political religion.
Not wasting more time on you. notifications off.
I kinda was in shock: me, a Libtard? With the argument that I was proceeding with, I thought I was firmly on Conservative firma – what, oh what have I missed these past few years?? A Godwin’s Law corollary could be a handy thing to have from time to time, but I did point out that if there was a crossing of the line, it wasn’t me who did so:
In other words, you have no logical argument to make. You state it “is easy, no challenge” and then fail to do so. As far as Godwin’s law is concerned, you were the first that mentioned “Peoples Government” – I merely followed your lead and pointed out the actions / results of those Governments that titled themselves that.
Indeed – Governments can force compliance by force – but sometimes outside of the “will” of the electorate. Adherence to the Rule of Law is important as it maintains for the equality of treatment and a certainty of the behavior of Government towards its citizens, and also if followed, citizens to other citizens. It also presupposes that those enacting Law respect our innate Rights and make no law that would take them away – the Law as umpire instead of Law as social engineering.
Extremist? I think not – and I doubt anyone but you here would agree that ANYTHING I have said here is extremist in nature; it certainly is in line with the philosophy of the US Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution – I invite you to point out where I am in error.
As to Free Will? I am no Calvinist with respect to strict predestination but will agree that sometimes it seems that somethings do seem to be pre-ordained. The vast majority of the time I do believe we have the ability to choose (wisely or not) and decide for ourselves – even when others or events wish to make it seem that we cannot. Certainly being in jail severely restricts choice (as an extreme example) – but one had numerous choice beforehand (many of which led to the condition of having Bubba as a roomie in your new concrete & steel adorned room).
And this is how I spent my Saturday night!