Risking One's Neck for Better Grog: Mutinies Reveal Tipping Points for Collective Unrest

reply to post by wildtimes

"Open door policies" are, in my opinon, an invitation to come and complain to whomever, and then be told what the CEO says. Management above my level were ready to deliver bad news and exploitative management because that was what they were TOLD TO DO.

I have stated before that I simply refused, because I thought what they were doing was hypocritical and disrespectful....and.....Poof! End of my managerial support.

Welcome to the club. My view was that as a manager, my job was to protect my workers from Upper management so they could get on with doing their jobs. Needless to say I have been blackballed.

I am a capitalist who supports SMALL firms. My experience has been that the large Corp see people as numbers - the change from the personnel dept to the Human Resources dept is the classic example of this change in attitude.

In the fifties, sixties and even seventies people were seen as long term investments to be "groomed" and nurtured and trained. Now we are seen as interchangeable cogs. If we will not work for less why just import desperate third worlders to replace us.


A very prophetic article from 1989:

Of mergers and acquisitions each costing $1 million or more, there were just 10 in 1970; in 1980, there were 94; in 1986, there were 346. A third of such deals in the 1980's were hostile.

The 1980's also saw a wave of giant leveraged buyouts. Mergers, acquisitions and L.B.O.'s, which had accounted for less than 5 percent of the profits of Wall Street brokerage houses in 1978, ballooned into an estimated 50 percent of profits by 1988...

THROUGH ALL THIS, THE HISTORIC RELATIONSHIP between product and paper has been turned upside down. Investment bankers no longer think of themselves as working for the corporations with which they do business. These days, corporations seem to exist for the investment bankers....

In fact, investment banks are replacing the publicly held industrial corporations as the largest and most powerful economic institutions in America....

THERE ARE SIGNS THAT A VICIOUS spiral has begun, as each corporate player seeks to improve its standard of living at the expense of another's.

Corporate raiders transfer to themselves, and other shareholders, part of the income of employees by forcing the latter to agree to lower wages. January 29, 1989 www.nytimes.com... New York Times

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

Ah well. I used to feel a great deal of pity for the common man, but the more I know, the more I realize that they are not so different on the whole from those who exploit them.

In my cynical old age I came to this conclusion:

Socialism/Collectivism appeals to many for the following reasons:
1. Those who have nothing and are too lazy to work for their betterment see socialism as a way to profit from Our Labor.

2. Those who were born into wealth and feel guilt when they see the poor can assuage their guilt by giving away Our Labor.

3. The power hungry can seize control by appealing to our sense of humanity and using our guilt to build up larger and larger government bureaucracies, passing more and more laws but never really correcting the real problems. After all if the problem goes away so does the guilt and the power hungry's control lever.

Mencken said it best: "The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the urge to rule it."

For after all the basic premise of socialism or collectivism is "the needs of the many should outweigh the needs of the individual", and WHO is the largest group??? Why the entire nation so the needs of the individual must be subordinate to the needs of the nation or in real life the needs of the puppet masters who control the government.

No wonder the banking and corporate elite love socialism It gives them the "moral high ground" for reintroducing feudalism and a return to serfdom where the slaves can not own property instead they ARE property. Not only that but the future slaves will help them put the chains on! Such a deal.

Originally posted by crimvelvet

Socialism/Collectivism appeals to many for the following reasons:
1. Those who have nothing and are too lazy to work for their betterment see socialism as a way to profit from Our Labor.

While I agree that there are those within socialist systems who seek to profit from the labor of others, I would say that holds true for ALL systems. In any group of humans, (or other animals) there will arise exploiters or cheaters. Its up to the cooperators to keep weeding them out. In any system.

Socialism did not arise from the lazy wanting to exploit the hardworking. It arose from the hardworking being exploited by the lazy. (Aristocrats) It was just a flawed system. It was "reactionary" in the sense that it was the opposite of what had been the status quo, and the thinking is simplistic. "Well, if this didnt work out well, lets try the opposite."

It really didnt address the root cause of the original problem, and it also did not take into consideration basic human and animal nature, and so, it failed. But the people who promoted it were far from the lazy people. In many cases, they were the hardest working, who were just tired of being drained by the idle rich.

Originally posted by crimvelvet
2. Those who were born into wealth and feel guilt when they see the poor can assuage their guilt by giving away Our Labor.

I dont disagee with that entirely. As long as the motive really traces back to guilt. Some "gifts" arent really gifts, but bribes. As long as that is accounted for, im ok with that.

Originally posted by crimvelvet
3. The power hungry can seize control by appealing to our sense of humanity and using our guilt to build up larger and larger government bureaucracies, passing more and more laws but never really correcting the real problems. After all if the problem goes away so does the guilt and the power hungry's control lever.

Again, I dont disagree, but our humanitarian urges are only one possible in, and really, not even the most common. By far more common is appeal to self interest. The Iraq war for instance, was largely an appeal to self interest. They used our fear for our own safety against us. There WAS a humanitarian aspect thrown in to make the appeal more broad and to allow the more intelligent and altruistic to feel good about it, but that aspect was the lesser part of the argument. The bulk of the argument was "this is why this is good for YOU."

Originally posted by crimvelvetFor after all the basic premise of socialism or collectivism is "the needs of the many should outweigh the needs of the individual", and WHO is the largest group??? Why the entire nation so the needs of the individual must be subordinate to the needs of the nation or in real life the needs of the puppet masters who control the government.

Well, the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the individual is also a large part of democracy. Not just socialism. Another problem with the theory of "individualism" is that its a lie. Human beings are social animals. Without writing a book, the idea that it must be either/or, one or the other, is ridiculous. Its actually that we need a balance between the two, much like you see in nature. You need to allow individual achievement and reward, but you cannot sacrifice the group for it. Both Plato's meritocracy and Smiths free market are based on this balancing of self and group interest.

Ayn Rand was a mediocre philosopher. She is one of the main proponents of "individualism" and yet she conveniently overlooks the FACT that the altruism of others contributed greatly to her own success. A lot of successful people over look real cause and effect and attribute all their success to their own greatness, and forget those who helped them, and even luck. In her case, her family, even her extended family, helped her get out of Russia, accomdated her to give her a start in America, helped her get work. Luck played a role in her meeting Cecil B DeMille, and his kindness, not his self interest, caused him to show her the ropes, give her a job despite her evaluation for said job being very poor, etc.

Many rugged individualists are merely egoists. They benefit from cooperation and altruism, but it doesnt suit their ego to admit it. And so they paint themselves as masters of their own destiny, architects of their own fate, and they belittle and abuse those who do not do as well as they. Many "rugged individualists" inherited great wealth, and none of them felt strongly enough about their own convictions to refuse the fortune, and the social greasing on their behalf, to actually place themselves in the position many poor are to prove their own ability to climb the mountain of success themselves.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

Reciprocal Altruism.

Find people who practice it, and make yourself a community of them, and dont waste your time on those who do not practice it.....

Best suggest I have seen in a long time. But be very careful that the Reciprocity is real. I have been stung many times by the "Talks a big Talk" type who is all great ideas and no work!

Other less nice terms are con men or free loaders

reply to post by crimvelvet


Which is why I suggested to wildtimes that you carefully watch people, rather than listen to them. Sociopaths will lie. Happily. They get pleasure out of being "smarter" than others, which is how they see preying off the altruistic. Far better than listening to someones description of their own altruism is to watch them. DO they fight for others when there is nothing to gain for themselves? Or do they only cry out for altruism when their own interests are involved? Are they staunch defenders on principle? (For justice, fairness etc.) Or do they only call out for those things when they are being treated unfairly or unjustly.

Patience and watching will tell you everything you need to know about a person. You just have to be willing to be in limbo for however long it takes for the truth to come out. We, (humans) tend to prefer to know right away, and in our haste, we often use the wrong criteria to make quick judgments.

reply to post by wildtimes

For some weird reason (I think there's a tattoo on my forehead that only sociopaths or the needy can see) people seem compelled to tell me their problems. Doesn't matter if it's a teen on a train, a clerk at a home improvement warehouse, a frustrated coworker, a client, a friend of my kid's, another customer waiting at a mechanic's garage -- it just seems that people who want to vent or need support are drawn to me...and talk to me....perfect strangers to close friends, since I was a preteen, it seems.

It is not weird at all. People see you truly will listen to them and actually care.

reply to post by wildtimes

It seems to point to certain "charisma" that can rouse people to join up with mutineers. An individual who can say "Look how you're weak, you don't deserve this treatment but it's not your fault, and it's also your fault, so do something!"

Leaders are few and far between. You normally do not have a bunch of sheep mutiny, you have to add a goat. Metaphorically or in actual life (My goats always lead the escape attempts not the sheep)

I'm curious about the "replacement" posters who are here. I'm far too new a member to have noticed drastic changes in style/theme/attitude in any one member, but that is REALLY interesting to think about.

Do you suspect there are "sock uppets" here on ATS?

To what extent do you trust that posters on this board are authentic and sincere?

Do you think ATS is being screened for rabble-rousers, or even that it might be a propaganda machine itself?

Hmmmmm.....

...Replacement??? Do not know. Subverted? perhaps.

...Sock puppets - Yes

...screened for rabble-rousers - Of Course

...it might be a propaganda machine itself? It has crossed my mind but more likely infiltrated and used. The last election was rather enlightening. Obama was THE MAN here on ATS. Now Ron Paul seems the more popular....

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

....We dont have a lot of time if we want to alter the course here. They know it too, which is why some of their moves, (Libya) are so aggressive and poorly propagandized. They need to act quickly before we revolt, and that means we need to stop them before we cannot revolt.

TPTB are very sneaky and have more than one hundred years of study and concrete experiments in manipulating the people under their belts. It is truly a David and Goliath in more ways than we can ever imagine. (The Soviet Union was one of their "experiments" )

I just notice today a possible "Trojan Horse" mentioned here on ATS Leash Being Prepared for Congress It is about the states forcing a Constitutional Convention. The problem is such a convention allows the WHOLE Constitution to be rewritten!

Constitutional Convention: www.watchblog.com...

www.usconstitution.net...

reply to post by wildtimes

And so, ATS,

What would be your PERSONAL tipping point?

What would you want to be in place before YOU would take action?

What would you be willing to OFFER a sweeping change movement?

I never answered the last question: "What would you be willing to OFFER a sweeping change movement? "

What I actually offered the group I was supporting was research and analytical skills. I can be a leader if I am pushed into it but I am much much better at feeding info to someone who has the charisma that I do not.

Many leaders are backed by research teams they trust and that is where I function best. I am the only one in my family who is NOT a superb salesman.