Yeah it has its roots going back to classical economics my concern is more with the new economic justification for authoritarianism that's been popping up here and there the past couple of years.
Yeah it has its roots going back to classical economics my concern is more with the new economic justification for authoritarianism that's been popping up here and there the past couple of years.
erm
disquiet over the hierarchical nature of the workplace has been a thing since the industrial revolution in the 1700s. From the right, too, even, because it was an unholy place that gave no respect to God and family, and encouraged the immorality of the urban slum, and enabled a new and ambitious class of rentiers with no respect for gentry.
you are hardly the first person to argue that workplaces should be democratic. We already know what an economy of worked-owned cooperatives looks like, even: they look like conglomerates, with a mass of businesses constellated around an investment bank that jointly manages the worker's pensions. Mondragon still operates along this line, today. They're not functionally very different from conglomerates, because smaller businesses all die to the vagaries of chance and technological change eventually, so diversification and size is essential. And diversification and size directly contradicts any desire to give small units of the workplace any feeling of autonomy: it winds up feeling very much like national elections, where established factions with their established electoral campaigns tend to dominate the direction of the whole community.
Yeah it has its roots going back to classical economics my concern is more with the new economic justification for authoritarianism that's been popping up here and there the past couple of years.
erm
disquiet over the hierarchical nature of the workplace has been a thing since the industrial revolution in the 1700s. From the right, too, even, because it was an unholy place that gave no respect to God and family, and encouraged the immorality of the urban slum, and enabled a new and ambitious class of rentiers with no respect for gentry.
Not arguing that it hasn't?
you are hardly the first person to argue that workplaces should be democratic. We already know what an economy of worked-owned cooperatives looks like, even: they look like conglomerates, with a mass of businesses constellated around an investment bank that jointly manages the worker's pensions. Mondragon still operates along this line, today. They're not functionally very different from conglomerates, because smaller businesses all die to the vagaries of chance and technological change eventually, so diversification and size is essential. And diversification and size directly contradicts any desire to give small units of the workplace any feeling of autonomy: it winds up feeling very much like national elections, where established factions with their established electoral campaigns tend to dominate the direction of the whole community.
We also see forms of democracy in Germany's betriebsrats which are doing fairly well. I'll have to look Mondragon up though, thanks for that tip.
I don't understand how "neither agree nor disagree" is an acceptable response to the statement "In the next few years, an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect our liberties."
Like, perhaps they should recode that as "Too stupid to breathe without being reminded."
0
Options
silence1186Character shields down!As a wingmanRegistered Userregular
I don't understand how "neither agree nor disagree" is an acceptable response to the statement "In the next few years, an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect our liberties."
Like, perhaps they should recode that as "Too stupid to breathe without being reminded."
Maybe...they're hedging against the possibility that in 2015, the Xnarthren will finally arrive and enslave us all?
I don't understand how "neither agree nor disagree" is an acceptable response to the statement "In the next few years, an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect our liberties."
Like, perhaps they should recode that as "Too stupid to breathe without being reminded."
Maybe...they're hedging against the possibility that in 2015, the Xnarthren will finally arrive and enslave us all?
I think there's a non-trivial who think the first revolution is not necessary, but the second revolution to overthrow the excessive first revolutionary regime is necessary
I don't understand how "neither agree nor disagree" is an acceptable response to the statement "In the next few years, an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect our liberties."
Like, perhaps they should recode that as "Too stupid to breathe without being reminded."
Maybe...they're hedging against the possibility that in 2015, the Xnarthren will finally arrive and enslave us all?
I think there's a non-trivial who think the first revolution is not necessary, but the second revolution to overthrow the excessive first revolutionary regime is necessary
Huh.
Now that I've read that sentence a couple of times, I think I might be inclined to agree with those people.
I don't understand how "neither agree nor disagree" is an acceptable response to the statement "In the next few years, an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect our liberties."
Like, perhaps they should recode that as "Too stupid to breathe without being reminded."
Maybe...they're hedging against the possibility that in 2015, the Xnarthren will finally arrive and enslave us all?
I think there's a non-trivial who think the first revolution is not necessary, but the second revolution to overthrow the excessive first revolutionary regime is necessary
Huh.
Now that I've read that sentence a couple of times, I think I might be inclined to agree with those people.
I left out "number." So it was like the Paul Ryan budget of posts.
I don't understand how "neither agree nor disagree" is an acceptable response to the statement "In the next few years, an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect our liberties."
Like, perhaps they should recode that as "Too stupid to breathe without being reminded."
Maybe...they're hedging against the possibility that in 2015, the Xnarthren will finally arrive and enslave us all?
I think there's a non-trivial who think the first revolution is not necessary, but the second revolution to overthrow the excessive first revolutionary regime is necessary
I don't understand how "neither agree nor disagree" is an acceptable response to the statement "In the next few years, an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect our liberties."
Like, perhaps they should recode that as "Too stupid to breathe without being reminded."
Its an option for those who agree but are too chickshit to admit it.
Posts
the arguments put forth during US panic of 1819 would be familiar to us today
erm
disquiet over the hierarchical nature of the workplace has been a thing since the industrial revolution in the 1700s. From the right, too, even, because it was an unholy place that gave no respect to God and family, and encouraged the immorality of the urban slum, and enabled a new and ambitious class of rentiers with no respect for gentry.
you are hardly the first person to argue that workplaces should be democratic. We already know what an economy of worked-owned cooperatives looks like, even: they look like conglomerates, with a mass of businesses constellated around an investment bank that jointly manages the worker's pensions. Mondragon still operates along this line, today. They're not functionally very different from conglomerates, because smaller businesses all die to the vagaries of chance and technological change eventually, so diversification and size is essential. And diversification and size directly contradicts any desire to give small units of the workplace any feeling of autonomy: it winds up feeling very much like national elections, where established factions with their established electoral campaigns tend to dominate the direction of the whole community.
Not arguing that it hasn't?
We also see forms of democracy in Germany's betriebsrats which are doing fairly well. I'll have to look Mondragon up though, thanks for that tip.
And Mellon still deserves dick punching.
It seems that the outing of the fraud of the R&R paper has compromised the austerity movement, though.
As much as I dearly hope this is true, I remain skeptical. I must be a liberal, because I'm also apparently a pessimist.
Edit: I could have sworn that was relevant. I'm sorry - it's where his birth certificate is registered that matters, I got things messed up.
Why does that matter?
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Well, if he's referring to the presidency, the president has to be a born citizen of the US.
pfft and? He's not black, that's all that matters
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
I don't understand how "neither agree nor disagree" is an acceptable response to the statement "In the next few years, an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect our liberties."
Like, perhaps they should recode that as "Too stupid to breathe without being reminded."
E: The preview image is actually perfect.
Maybe...they're hedging against the possibility that in 2015, the Xnarthren will finally arrive and enslave us all?
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-113hr1638ih/pdf/BILLS-113hr1638ih.pdf
Problem: Unemployment numbers look too good for the President
Solution: Stop collecting unemployment numbers. In fact, let's stop census taking altogether except for the decennial one.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Don't our capitalist overlords need those numbers? This will go exactly nowhere.
Huh.
Now that I've read that sentence a couple of times, I think I might be inclined to agree with those people.
It would also hose gerrymandering.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
I left out "number." So it was like the Paul Ryan budget of posts.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
It's less "Boo Obama!" and more anti-government, anti-census nuttery.
So, France, then
Its an option for those who agree but are too chickshit to admit it.
http://www.ijreview.com/2013/04/48974-brutal-judge-jeanines-slapdown-of-jihadi-bomber-mother/
I don't know what to tell her other than FOX is not news.