Someone deserves criticism for working for an evil corporation if they could just as easily, with the very same benefits to themselves (understood broadly, as in, the same benefits concerning everything and everyone they care about), work at a non-evil corporation. Note that I am giving here a sufficient condition for criticism, not a necessary one.
That also takes care of your question 2.
I sure as fuckall wouldn’t want to be associated with Chick-Fil-A, but even I can see a difference between getting a min-wage job as a cashier at a legal restaurant establishment to pay some bills (outright accusing her of hate by association because her employer happens to have some corporate hate-based policy would be ridiculous unless she actually comes forward as against SSM), and…
…Some Neo-nazi seeking secret initiation into an infamous and likewise branded hate organization, with a renowned history of violence and murder, which operates within a surreptitiously anonymous underground.
Both repugnant, but there are layers of reasonable deniability/ignorance in the former that the latter does not have.
Nice to see brazil84 associate with the former, not seeing the difference, and likewise putting himself in association with the latter.
Honestly, by asking such a question you’re demonstrating that mhendo overestimated the number of functioning neurons you have.
It’s almost mind boggling that people like b84 can live on such a weak foundation, and under a house-of-cards-like world-view… yet somehow their stupidity serves as an incredibly strong joint compound.
Driving around giving black people dirty looks doesn’t pay as well as one would think.
It seems to me that anyone who can’t see such differences is either dishonestly and willfully blind to them, or is completely ignorant of the two organizations is question. I’ll be charitable and assume that you are merely ignorant, rather than dishonest and willfully blind.
Firstly, the KKK is not an employer in the same sense that CFA is an employer. As alluded to by cmyk in a recent post, it doesn’t even have “low-level employees” in the same way as a fast-food organization does. It is primarily a membership organization, not primarily an employer. In that sense, the two organizations aren’t really comparable.
Connected to this issue, but even more importantly, the KKK is, first and foremost, an ideological organization. It isn’t a chicken-selling or a service-providing organization that happens to be run by someone with an ideological bent. In the case of Chik-Fil-A, its main purpose is to make money by selling a particular product; in the case of the KKK, its ideology is its very raison d’etre. For CFA, the ideology is coincidental to the existence of the company (the guy didn’t decide to sell chicken because he hates queers); for the KKK, the ideology is the only reason for the organization to exist in the first place. For CFA, the product is chicken; for the KKK, the product is ideology.
It should be very clear that someone who “joins” CFA as an employee—especially a low-level service employee, and especially in the period before the company gained nationwide notoriety for its political positions on gay marriage—most likely did so primarily because that person needed to make a living, and CFA happened to be a reasonable way to earn money. I guess it’s vaguely possible that some employees joined the company as a “fuck you” to the gay community, but for the most part i’m willing to bet that a bigger consideration was, “Will this job allow me to pay rent and keep from starving?”
By contrast, people join the KKK precisely and specifically because they subscribe to its ideology. The KKK isn’t well-known as a reliable, nationwide employer with decent hours and good health bennies. It is known as a political organization, and its politics and ideology are precisely what attract people to it. I guess it’s possible that there are a few people working within the KKK who are employed in non-ideological job, and who don’t subscribe to the KKK’s philosophy.
It’s possible, for example, that there’s an accountant who does the KKK’s books, and who works out the organization’s financial affairs without subscribing to its ideology. But if such a person exists, he or she is a small minority within the organization. And, to be honest, if some accountant (or whatever) had to choose between working for the KKK and not having a job, i probably wouldn’t be too critical of him or her making the decision that kept the rent paid and food on the table.
As i said above, CFA is, first and foremost, selling chicken. Its leader is also pushing an ideology, but there is no necessary connection between that ideology and most of the company’s employees. CFA employees end up with the company not because they want to end gay marriage, but because they want to pay their rent. The KKK, on the other hand, is first and foremost selling an ideology. The people who get involved in the KKK are mostly members and supporters, rather than employees, and they are attracted to the organization precisely because of the ideology it is selling.
All of this is precisely why i’m not willing to condemn an employee of Chik-Fil-A (or any other “evil” company) just because they happen to work for said company. Condescending Robot is welcome to characterize me as either a “Christian supremacist” or a “hand-wringing ‘liberal’ who views gays as an annoying obstacle to Obama’s re-election,” but neither pole of that asinine dichotomy describes my position. I simply recognize, in cases like this, that we can draw valid distinctions between the people who set policy at companies like CFA, and people who simply need a paycheck to live. We can also draw valid distinctions between organizations whose prime purpose is business, and organizations whose prime purpose is political ideology, and we make reasonable distinctions between those who get involved in the first type and those who get involved in the second.
What the hell is wrong with most of you lot? He subjected this “chick” (who looked about thirty) to less than a minute of “abuse”.
Seriously I was expecting something entirely different. I don’t geddit.
(And please don’t forget that hating gay marriage is disgusting. I mean, horrendously so)
Well, for myself, i don’t think the guy should be locked up or anything. Nor do i believe that he inflicted some heinous damage on the woman. I doubt she’s scarred for life.
But he acted like a total douche. I’m not sure what’s unclear about that.
He was being a sanctimonious blowhard, and douchnozzled it all over Chick-Fil-A chick. She was probably amused or at least all WTF about it all anyway as working a drive thru window brings you assholes bigger than that.
The sad part is he thought he was pretty fucking awesome, and actually uploaded that on the Internet, defying commonsense and forgetting the Internet has the same maturity level as 7th graders. His employers, now embarrassed that the guy they hired as CFO douched all over everything that has wifi access, asked him to step down so as not bring bad PR on the company.
A case of self-sabotage and a moral to everyone: If you’re gonna be a douche, don’t record it. And if you do, don’t upload it on YouTube.
What a world.
It’s what I’d call a douché.
This is really what cements it, and why I have no sympathy. It wasn’t broadcast live. He had time to review the video and was apparently pleased with the outcome. He apparently didn’t think “hmm, this actually doesn’t come across that well, maybe I should try again and try to find a target who’ll sass me back a little.” No, he saw the video of him being a dick to a sweet-faced female cashier who politely took it in stride and concluded that this was going to be a really effective piece of publicity for the cause.
I care less about the “right or wrong” of confronting a low-level employee and more about what he was trying to accomplish with this bit of theater. It was poorly planned, poorly executed, poorly judged, and it rightfully blew up in his face.
b84’s lame attempts at equivalency with the Klan are just that, lame. He has one tool, the bread-crumb trail into a “gotcha!” trap, and struggles mightily to apply it to every situation.
Ok, so if the head policy-maker at Evilcorp would have to take a $1000 a year pay cut to work for Goodcorp, e.g. from $201,000 per year to $200,000 per year, then he doesn’t deserve any criticism?
Of course he does. You don’t think that contradicts the principle I articulated, do you?
Seems to me you are describing yourself pretty well here. Projection, I suppose.
So what? We are talking hypotheticals here, and it’s reasonable to hypothesize that the KKK has had occasion to hire low level employees.
Surely there have been many KKK-like organizations over the years who have hired low level employees.
Again, so what? You are conveniently forgetting the original point, which I will quote again:
A low-level employee of a KKK-like organization is simply working for a living, not setting policy. He is trading time for money.
It’s hard to believe that you are so ignorant to have forgotten this point – it must be your intellectual dishonesty and self-deception.
Perhaps not, but you would still criticize him – even though he is simply trading time for money.
Anyway, you have continually ignored my simple, reasonable questions from Post #192.
Significantly, you dishonestly implied that my position was that it would be illegal for the university to continue to employ Smith. When called on it, you simply ignored your strawmanning rather than own up to it and apologize.
You also ignored my simple, reasonable questions about your position; presumably you wish to hide your intellectual dishonesty behind a cloak of ambiguity.
In any event, I have no interest in engaging with people who engage in this kind of conduct.
Goodbye, liar.
Yes, I must have misunderstood your point.
Let’s try again.
If I understood you correctly, if the window girl at Chick-Fil-A could switch to an equivalent job at the Wendy’s across the street, then she deserves to be criticized.
Right?
And thats also why his latter apology video was self serving bullshit. That didn’t come out till well after the shit had hit the fan.
Note that in his apology video only a few short sentences in he says something like “I’ve wanted to apologize to X since the moment the words came out of my mouth”.
So, he realized he was a rude dick to somebody right away AND still put the damn thing up AND then took a day or three to put up an apology.
Either he’s dumber than fuck or he is lying through his teeth about immediately wanting to apologize. But probably both.
Funny then, that you are unable to answer the question.
To more precisely repeat what I said before, if she could switch to a job with the very same benefits to her (in the broad sense described in the previous post), then she deserves criticism. Again, that is sufficient for her to deserve criticism, but it is not necessary.
And if she won the lottery she wouldn’t have to work at all. But then, she’d be accepting money from an evil government that disallows SSM. Is that how it works?
Does that mean i’ve finally shown you up sufficiently to make it onto your personal banned list?
Please don’t throw me in the briar patch! Please!