Stop Microsoft
Miscellaneous => The Lounge => Topic started by: hm_murdock on 22 October 2002, 02:28
-
This has always pissed me off. Call me a bohemian, rebel, or whatever, but it does.
The idea that there is a "professional look".
It seems to have become more pronounced in recent years as casual dress becomes more and more casual. It wasn't as big a deal 50 years ago when people wore suits all the time.
Take, for example... people that work in an office building. Who's going to see them, aside from the boss? So how is requiring cubicle dwellers to wear suit and tie "improving company image"?
It seems to me that it's more along the lines that the corporate world is just that out of touch with the real world. In their little dreamworld, everybody is like them, should be like them, and will be like them.
But nobody seems to see or care. And it might not seem like a big thing, but it's just another example of breeding sameness, "team" (herd) mentality, and mediocrity. The idea that when you're "on company time" that somehow you become part of a collective and no longer have an identity or individuality.
Now, here's an interesting question for you... my friend is an aspiring model. Let's say she makes it, and is able to make a living off of this occupation. Define "professional looking" for a model. Lingerie, swimsuits... a pretty smile and strategically placed shadows?
Also... the concept of "company time". Last time I checked... they were the ones that NEEDED YOU FOR THEIR EXISTANCE. That without you, the front-line worker, they'd crumble. They announce that they are hiring, they ASK YOU TO COME. You come, and then the roles change. It's not you coming to them so that they may survive, it's them compelling you to come because they now somehow own you, and that all that time you have with family and friends and for yourself... you're lucky to have it, so don't complain about getting too little time off, and don't let me hear you complain about not getting paid enough, you're lucky the CEO lets you have that, because it's making him wait another day or two to get a new Lexus... and you! Who the hell do you think you are wearing a turtleneck rather than a white shirt and black tie? We're the company, and we need you to work for us, otherwise we'll collapse, because we corporate types are above doing your job, and even if we weren't... we don't have a clue how to do it anyway, we just come up with halfwit ideas about how you should do what you already know how to do better, but it doesn't matter, even though we need you, we're the company and own you because all that stuff when you're not on the clock means nothing to us, and when you're on "our time" it doesn't mean anything to you, we're the only thing in existance, so forget your former life and former identity, you're now an employee, a white-collar worker and you don't have a union, because the CEO would have to pay you more and actually consider your opinions and think of you as a large group of human beings rather than just numbers on a payroll report, so get back to work, what are you all standing around listening to me for? You should have been pushing those papers WHILE I WAS TALKING! I'll send out a memo sometime next week and put it near the trash can in the executive break room that you can't go in because you're only the most important layer of the company, and not an executive who's descended from Zeus or someone like that. Oh, we're cutting everybody's pay because we didn't make our projected 500% increase in profits over last year. It has to be your fault, because God knows, the way you sit down here and do mundane tasks has everything to do with our profits! Profits not people! That's what's important! If people were important, we'd trade them on the stock market! But since we don't, profits are what matters! Profits for us, not you! What? you think you're entitled to getting something back from us when you actually do something to help us? No! If you did something like that, it's only because of our great leadership! We've trained you well. But if you mess up, it's your fault, and don't you forget it...............
Die corporate america.... DIE. shove your profits up your filthy assholes and get a clue. without "employees" you're just a bunch of clueless bastards with no purpose on this planet other than to SUCK IT
::breathes heavily, almost hyperventilating:: I'm...... okay.......
-
Wow! Calm down man! I don't want you to have a seizure or anything. :D
Your post says it all, so I don't have anything to add to that but I can see you're were a bit stressed out when you wrote it. Anyway, don't get upset! This kind of shit comes with the free market concept, so there's really nothing that you or I can do about it. I mean I'd love to be able to change the whole world and make it more human-oriented but I can't so I'll just stay romantic. (http://smile.gif)
-
Don't get this the wrong way or anything, but at first glance you seem insane.
But hey, you're right, and I can't blame you. There are numerous things that are so insane, but are percieved as normal, so sane men and women just look insane when talking about them. This is just one of them.
The more I live in this world, the more I detest the stuff that happens in it. Luckily for me, it is somewhat balanced by friends who don't play along, a will to battle it all and an awe of the natural world. Otherwise I'd long be insane myself.
-
What happened man and got you so upset?
BTW i am with you on everything that you said.
-
well, first thing that got me pissed off is that I was turned down for a job because the clothes I wore to the interview didn't "look professional enough".
then, the thing that just threw it over the top was in a thread talking about Windows Longhorn, someone said it "looked more professional" (not knockin' whoever said that... it's just the statement pushed me over the top)
As for being insane... I have been, but we're much better now :D
Another thing that pisses me off his how the "corporate culture" is pushing itself into places it should not exist. One such area is education. My college has a Board of Regents, and a Board of Directors. The school distric I graduated from now has a Chief Financial Officer and CIO instead of having a Superintendent of Finance and an IT Director that they used to have. The new positions do the same job... but they're not directly in the chain of command. They're off to the side. A teacher cannot communicate with the office of the CFO without first going through the Superintendent's Office.
Now someone explain to me why some CEO in the 1960s said that without corporate leaders, we'd crumble...
-
Your right! The Jimmy James / Bob deserves 6 stars. But the sad thing is, even though the corporations need the workers, with out social system, the workers need the corporations as well. Without the workers, the co. would collapse, but without the money from the company, the workers would starve. The corporate executives have enough money that if the company were to collapse they could still continue to live a happy life with their savings. All they need to company for is for even more luxury, even more things that they don't really need, but want for status. Note that in USA, and most of the western world money = status. So unions and strikes can help ease the suffering of the workers, it really does very little.
My theory: as technology advances, capitalism becomes less, and socalism becomes more suited for society. Here's why: With advanced technology, more work that could otherwise be done by people can be done by machines. This reduces the amount of work that needs to be done by humans in a society. Things that people need and want can be created more efficiently. This *should* give people more time to spend for themselves, doing what they want instead of working, and should make the things they want easier to obtain, make people both happier and more free. Under capitalism, this is prevented. In order to obtain that which one desires or is necessary to survive, one must have money, and money is controlled by a few elite. Those elite wish to keep as much of that money as possible, and give as little as possible to the general poeple. They attempt to as much as possible keep people from obtaining what they want or need without giving up their money to them. A good example would be a CD. With modern technology, they can be created by only a few people for a very small price. It would be entirely possible to sell CDs for less than 50 cents and still maintain profitability. Yet the business owners will not have it, they will do everything in their power to keep the cost as high as possible. They also do whatever they can to stop people from hearing music WITHOUT USING THEIR COMPANYS BUSINESS. Food and clothing are also kept at a very high price to ensure that the company controls it. Everything is kept at a much higher price than is necessary. Today most work done is probably unnecessary. It is often breauracratic in nature or service oriented. Or even as a result of a whimsical decision made by unqualified management. When the economy slows, why is it that people lose jobs instead of letting people keep their jobs, and just reducing the working day? Company Profits! Why is less work seen in society as a terrible thing instead of a chance for people to do what they want? Since that which needs to be produced is getting easier and easier, why isn't it getting any easier for the people to have? In fact, if a way is for people to get what they want is deemed too easy by business, the companys try to shut it down! In todays society it would be entirely possible for the working day to be cut almost in half, and to make it much easier for people to obtain what they want and need. Corporate power alone is what is preventing people from taking more control of their own time and having more of what they want. Were corporate power reduced, and more of that power given to the people *Socalism*, the world would be a better place. Today we are not nearly ready for the communist utopian dreams of some, that would require star trek like technology. But it is long past time for a major step in this direction.
WE NEED A REVOLUTION!!! :mad:
V (http://tongue.gif)
-
Yes we do need a revolution, Corprate USA/Canada is not the problem. Its everyhting Corprate! What i really think is that we actually need to organise a riot in the center of new york! We need to go on a fucking rampage!
FUCK THE SYSTEM!
-
quote:
Originally posted by Doctor V:
Were corporate power reduced, and more of that power given to the people *Socalism*, the world would be a better place.
*shhh* don't mention the evil 'S' word; the americans don't like it.
That's right what you say about technology making socialism more achievable; in fact free software is an example of the perfect application of left-wing philosophy to an end that is practically useful to everyone.
-
quote:
flap: *shhh* don't mention the evil 'S' word; the americans don't like it.
Socialism, anarchism :D
But anyway, why? The United States got a socialist party too...
-
go socialism. capitalism is teh sux0r
-
quote:
Originally posted by Refalm:
Socialism, anarchism :D
But anyway, why? The United States got a socialist party too...
Yes buy 98% of US Citizens have there head in a far place up there ass! So its no use!
-
quote:
Originally posted by X to da 1 to da 1 / b0b 2.1:
Yes buy 98% of US Citizens have there head in a far place up there ass! So its no use!
I think that Australians have a skewed perspective on Americans. It might be your convict heritage (how's it feel?). I was born and brought up in the immediate area of the first pure Communist society in history (it pre-dated Marx and Engels). The Oneida Community was a religious society that held all property in common; they also had no real marriages, nor were children raised by their biological parents. They even dabbled in Human breeding experiments, with some pretty bad results (they didn't know about recessive/dominant genes). The actual community no longer exists, but perhaps you may have heard of Oneida Community Limited, the biggest manufacturer of tableware in the world.
There were a large number of Socialist/Communist experiments in the United States. It's too bad that none of them were succesful, it might have changed the way Americans are perceved by the rest of the world.
-
The movement has already started. Leftists are coming to power all over the world. In Europe, Socalist thinking is already tolerated. The EU considers the people important, instead of focusing 100% on business and leaving the needs of the people in businesses hands. South America will be the next point of leftist uprisings. Other than Castro (who is a bit too radical IMO) in Cuba, we have seen Hugo Chaves come to power in Venesuela. Soon, former union leader "Lula" will take power in Brazil, and from there, South American Countries will liberate themselves one by one. The South American liberation will rise up and probably stop at Mexico. From there, India, and much of Southeast Asia will rise, and along with a moderate Europe, a good chunk of the world will be free of USAs grasp.
quote:
Originally posted by X to da 1 to da 1 / b0b 2.1:
Yes buy 98% of US Citizens have there head in a far place up there ass! So its no use!
This is true, I left USA 3 years ago, and because of this fact will probably never go back.
V
And why does everyone have numbers in their names now?
:confused:
-
quote:
Originally posted by Doctor V
And why does everyone have numbers in their names now?
we have all "upgraded" or something. hopefully now the members of the forum will have less bugs and crashes, or at least show-off a new feature that will revolutionize Humanity-1.5a. the good thing is, if we dont like it, we can change them (http://smile.gif) (provided everyone here is released under the gpl and are not naxis like m$)
anyways, ill stop now since im bored (does it show?) and this post has nothing to do with the topic..
ecsyle1.2
-
quote:
Originally posted by flap:
*shhh* don't mention the evil 'S' word; the americans don't like it.
That's right what you say about technology making socialism more achievable; in fact free software is an example of the perfect application of left-wing philosophy to an end that is practically useful to everyone.
I'm an American, and I don't have any problem with Socialism. Aren't we technically Socialist now? The votes of the people really don't matter, and the gov't controls parts of the economy.
So there.
-
communism just sucks ass, it has never worked.
-USA is wealthy and capitalist
-Britain is wealthy and capitalist
-Germany is wealthy and capitalist
-Canada is wealthy and capitalist
-Australia is wealthy and capitalist
now lets look on the other side of the spectrum
-Russia is poor from being Communist
-China is poor and communist
-basically all of East Europe is or was communist and are poorer than crap
-
quote:
Originally posted by Chooco:
communism just sucks ass, it has never worked.
-USA is wealthy and capitalist
-Britain is wealthy and capitalist
-Germany is wealthy and capitalist
-Canada is wealthy and capitalist
-Australia is wealthy and capitalist
now lets look on the other side of the spectrum
-Russia is poor from being Communist
-China is poor and communist
-basically all of East Europe is or was communist and are poorer than crap
The "Communism" run by the Soviets, Chinese, and Eastern Europe was very very different from the communism in books written by Karl Marx. It was based on the Soviet totalitarianism set up by Joseph Stalin. Stalin was an evil power hungry dictator, and even Lenin didn't like his ways. I certainly do not support that type of government. On the other hand. Lets look at countries that, while not Communist, have had Socalist ideas incorporated into them. Some good examples would be Germany, Sweden, and the Netherlands. (I have never lived in any of those countries, and apologize to anyone if what I am saying is not totally accurate). They are considered among the best places to live in the world. Lets also remember China was poor before they even started communism, and now after moving away from communism and towards socalism, they are posied to become a rich nation.
USA has never been 100% capitalist. It is however today moving rapidly in that direction. A good example of a purely capitalist country would be Brazil. In Brazil, there is a small ultra-rich minority and masses who are in utter poverty. Two classes of people. This is the way is is basically for all of South America, Africa, Southern Asia, and the Middle East.
So, I think few people actually want to be Communist, but want to be moderately Socalist or Capitalist with Socalist ideas incorporated into society.
V 0.8.7
-
In Plato's Republic, one can see the diffrence between what we call a socialist (or even communist) nation and a capitalist (or democratic) nation, is the abundance of luxurie.
Where one country may have many trinkits and nice superflous sparklies, the others have the bare essentials held as that which is truely valuable.
I don't think it's a simple question about right or wrong, good or sux ass. It's a question of ideological morality. Which one produces the most virtuous people and which produces those who are consided, petty, materialistic, and egotistical (http://smile.gif)
Beside's were talking about Socialism not Communism.
-
the problem with US people (and of course there are many exceptions, so don't take offence if you are a US citizen who isn't like this(!)) is that many of them tend to lump a lot of things together under the bracket of 'communism'.
socialism is not communism, but many people have a hard time understanding the many differences (and i'm no longer talking about just americans).
socialism is inherently more complicated than capitalism, and while it has more benefits, it is much more intricate and delicate. a tribal/clan based society such as natively occurred in scotland, many parts of africa, australia and northern america has no chance when it is hit head on by a single minded monarchy such as the spanish/british/dutch/whoever empire/invaders.
Basically the simplicity of capitalism makes it more workable, but less rewarding on the whole. The human is not a completely social or selfish animal and so many attempts at either scenario will have varying degrees of success or failure and will inevitably lead the humans sconcerned to think that the grass is greener on the other side.
-
quote:
Originally posted by creedon:
I think that Australians have a skewed perspective on Americans. It might be your convict heritage (how's it feel?). I was born and brought up in the immediate area of the first pure Communist society in history (it pre-dated Marx and Engels). The Oneida Community was a religious society that held all property in common; they also had no real marriages, nor were children raised by their biological parents. They even dabbled in Human breeding experiments, with some pretty bad results (they didn't know about recessive/dominant genes). The actual community no longer exists, but perhaps you may have heard of Oneida Community Limited, the biggest manufacturer of tableware in the world.
There were a large number of Socialist/Communist experiments in the United States. It's too bad that none of them were succesful, it might have changed the way Americans are perceved by the rest of the world.
Creedon your one of the 2% that are good!
What im saying is that the US Citizens dont know anything about Socialism/Communism because there heads are up there asses. I should have posted more descriptively!
-
quote:
Originally posted by Calum-21.2:
the problem with US people (and of course there are many exceptions, so don't take offence if you are a US citizen who isn't like this(!)) is that many of them tend to lump a lot of things together under the bracket of 'communism'.
This is true. To say anything leftist at all runs the risk of being called a commie. Its sad how few people in America really understand what Communism is.
In America, people have been taught since they were children that Communism is the Great Evil. So people start hating Communism and socalism without really knowing what it is. And when told about what it is, they are usually given a very biased explination.
Its very important that people understand that modern Socalism is not the same as what was preached by Stalin and others. Totalitarianism is certainly NOT Socalism. In fact Socalism is by nature democratic.
It seems America is moving closer and closer to Capitalistic totalitarianism. Instead of people having no rights and everything being dictated by the government, business is what is stripping people's rights away one by one, and dictating every aspect of people's lives.
V 0.8.7
-
quote:
Originally posted by Chooco:
communism just sucks ass, it has never worked.
-USA is wealthy and capitalist
-Britain is wealthy and capitalist
-Germany is wealthy and capitalist
-Canada is wealthy and capitalist
-Australia is wealthy and capitalist
now lets look on the other side of the spectrum
-Russia is poor from being Communist
-China is poor and communist
-basically all of East Europe is or was communist and are poorer than crap
The reason those countries adopted communism was because they were poor in the first place, not the other way around.
That's about as intelligent as saying "non-caucasians suck ass".
USA is white and wealthy
UK is white and wealthy
Germany is white and wealthy
Nigeria is non-white and poor
Afghanistan is non-white and poor
China is non-white and poor
-
whites are human and stupid,
blacks are human and stupid,
asians are human and stupid,
aboriginal australian and aboriginal north and south americans are human and stupid,
oriental people are human and stupid,
by contrast,
dolphins are nonhuman and have never stuffed up the planet,
elephants are nonhuman and have never invented any weapons,
penguins are nonhuman and have never had a war
aardvarks are nonhuman and have never imposed sanctions
horses are nonhuman and do not make a habit of allowing other horses to go hungry in order to line their own pockets
you see what i'm getting at?
-
There's a basic fallacy in both systems; the capitalist system basically says that if you work hard, you will accumulate personal wealth and live well. The Socialist system says that all workers should work hard, the state will become wealthy and share the benefits of that wealth equally with all the workers.
What neither system addresses is the tendancy of the leaders of a system to try to hold on to power (leadership). That's the fly in the ointment; Humans are Anthropoids, with the social hierarchy of that species; "I've got power, and I'm going to hold onto it any way I can." As far as I know, there has never been a completely selfless Human in a leadership position in history, and once the leader has established his authority, he establishes a system of support that ensures that he will remain in power by giving authority to other individuals who support him. Once a system like this is in place, the majority of the population is only allowed to rise to a controlable point; in other words, Capitalism and Socialism both limit the rise of the average individual, keeping him in a position where he can't threaten leaders without risking his limited social status, or his life.
My conclusion is this; Anarchy is the only system that allows an individual to actually better his social position, but Anarchy is a Uti=opian dream that requires cooperation between individuals that our Anthropoid ancestry won't allow; in other words, we're fucked- live with it.
-
No... Marxist Communism doesn't say "people work hard and state gets rich"... that's Lenin and Stalin's work.
Real communism has never existed, and can't exist as long as people think they need money instead of simpler things, like food and shelter. If anybody lived in a true communistic society, they'd rather die than live in an ass-backward country like the States.
The US *is* moving to capitalistic totalitarianism... and fast. Such a thing is even worse than Leninism. Instead of there being a man, or men to blame... there's only organizations that are at the same time public and private. Anybody could own part of the company, but the company would still own you.
Think of Robocop... the police, military, public services, and city administration were handled by a corporation. Luckily for the people of that story, the leaders were for the most part well-meaning, able to balance their love of profit with providing a quality service, there were others that weren't.
It's frightening when our country is run by the Bill Gateses and Dick Joneses who create their shitty operating systems and crappy war robots in the name of profit, and then screw everybody up the ass so they can make more profit.
Okay... enough movie metaphors!
-
Humans are corrupted by money, power, greed and women very easily. Thats our main problem. Communism, Fascism and everything else inbetween ALL suck, because WE suck inherently. we struggle to act logically and cooperatively and thats why we're all doomed, but make an effort to enjoy life anyway (http://smile.gif)
[ October 28, 2002: Message edited by: Tux ]
-
You guys are playing with words as many people do. Bah.
To the comments that Americans are idiots and yada yada. Way to go. Kudros for your high IQ. Have you actually lived and worked in America you midget brain? If you did then I think you didnt hang around with many people.
Communism==Stalinism here in America. Those two words have been mixed up, simply because every country that had Communism(Stalinism in other words) had a goverment that wasnt worth a dogs pile of shit!!!
For the most part Americans can distinguish the difference, but as I said, Communism has been so much abused that it got a black eye (long Live Stalin for example).
Oh by the way your country sucks dick. Oh? Whats that? I dont know where you from or I never been there? It doesnt matter, I can talk shit about you from what little my stupid ass brain knows (did you get the sarcasm?)
Anyway. I lived half of my life in Greece during its socialistic highs ( i havent been there for 7 years so i dont know whats going on there now).
Socialism is not bad. You dont have as much liberties as in capitalism but in general its more "relaxed".
Capitalism has more freedoms but its way more cruel than Socialism.
Just my two worthless cents.
And to whomever made the remarks about whites Vs other Races and so on. Its true that whites are more wealthy but did you ever think the reasons?
I take exemption to the China, cause their goverment simply handicaps its self.
But for the blacks for example. God bless us, the white Race, for fucking them (Both Europeans and Americans) so damn good, that they are still trying to get around all the shit they been through cause of us. The MASTER white race.
.<Get the sarcasm?>.
[ October 28, 2002: Message edited by: bazoukas ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by bazoukas:
And to whomever made the remarks about whites Vs other Races and so on. Its true that whites are more wealthy but did you ever think the reasons?
I take exemption to the China, cause their goverment simply handicaps its self.
But for the blacks for example. God bless us, the white Race, for fucking them (Both Europeans and Americans) so damn good, that they are still trying to get around all the shit they been through cause of us. The MASTER white race.
.<Get the sarcasm?>.
[ October 28, 2002: Message edited by: bazoukas ]
Er, yes that was the point i was making.
Did you not get the sarcasm?
-
In 1917 Russia was at the same level of development as India - post revolution it took off, so much for Communism = poor.
Great Britain was not capitalist, it was social-capitalist - until the 1980's when the social bit was dropped and we (the majority) are worse off than we were. (Trains and pensions anyone?)
Competition may have founded civilisation but it is not civilised - co-operate or perish, that's socialism and that's right.
The open Source movement is socialist in principle and in practice.
We'll keep the red flag flying here!
(http://smile.gif)
zooloo/bob
-
we still call ourselves a liberal democracy (hah! even though we're a monarchy!)
-
I agree with George Carlin...
Big rock needs to hit the Earth and end humanity's reign of terror.