patrick.net

I don’t understand why it’s difficult to standup against subordinate employees that make a loud stink about politics or whatever dumb social movement.

Most companies should have a blanket “no politics” policy. Don’t discuss it, don’t advocate at work, don’t bitch about actions the workplace takes while at work, don’t wear BLM or MAGA or whatever stupid shit people try to wear at work, and if you get offended by someone wearing the US flag, then go fuck yourself and get a job elsewhere. Not difficult. Not one bit.

But when you start thinking of yourself and your company as leaders of social change, that’s when the trouble starts.

FuckTheMainstreamMedia says

I don’t understand why it’s difficult to standup against subordinate employees that make a loud stink about politics or whatever dumb social movement.

It never was, until Millennials entered the workforce.

And yes, you can say it's BS Generational stuff which is partially correct, but the grovelling of bosses to the weird entitlement mentality of their employees didn't start until those born around 1990 entered the workforce.

re "Beware of the 'pushback against wokeness'": But he also seems sold on it. Or maybe not sold on it, but acknowledging that its a present force that you need to address.

He cited many stats and advanced many arguments for why companies need to "lead on ESG" = Environmental, Social, corp Governance, which means wokeness in many cases. He said 50% of ppl claim they wont buy from brands unless the brand supports certain social issues, which is basically saying the wokeness agenda is controlling things.

But he also said companies should kinda stay in their own lane, and only go woke and speak in certain situations (not sure what he meant - maybe he means shut up unless they call on you, then you better bleat lots of wokespeak to avoid the rage mob).

The whole "people trust companies more than govt to get the job done, so companies need to step up and do more" is worrying. While its obvious companies are more competent than govt, and always have been, handing them the reigns for govt duties doesn't generally seem like a good idea. We just saw what happens when you hand pfizer the reigns during a pandemic, and their actions were very self serving for them.

Hircus says

handing them the reigns for govt duties doesn't generally seem like a good idea.

That's the end goal.

You vill own nothing, und you vill be happy.

FuckTheMainstreamMedia says

I don’t understand why it’s difficult to standup against subordinate employees that make a loud stink about politics or whatever dumb social movement.

Because they hired a bunch of "diversity managers" and gave them control.

Big operations rely in bank liquidity, loans, and often government largesse and sunshine status. A lot of our social miseries extend from the central banks imposing the One World Order from on top, and the funnels of big company ownership have now narrowed to a handful of operands in Geneva.

They get orders from the Guv and from their banks to go woke, they go woke, or wind up fearful of having their liquidity challenged, higher ownership replacing the executive class with more compliant stooges, or the captive government coming after them in various ways.

I seriously doubt any of them 'want' to go woke, they just are pandering to the powers of centralized psychopathic control that have evolved from our current ridiculous fiat world.

If you are an executive, and you can bail out after 'going woke' with a nice golden parachute, even if it fucks your company, then there may not be much inhibition not to do so to appease the puppet masters.