the companies don’t want ppl to talk about salaries, so they can pay unfair. it’s okay to talk about salaries or unions.
Totally missing the point of the meme
Also, it’s great to talk to coworkers about wages. But it’s rude to ask acquaintances how much they make. Just like it’s rude to ask random women how old they are.
Holy shit, I can’t believe I’m explaining this meme like I’m in a Dhar Mann video, are people really this dumb these days?
“Revolutions up until now were all good, except for those pesky unsuccessful ones - I mean coup attempts - but now it’s time to stop. We’ve gained the ability to ‘talk about it’ since, people back then were all mute and deaf.”
The white moderate all over again
What is a “liberal”?
My opinion of a liberal is one who thinks change can happen by hoping a central authority figure will fix it.
Some liberals think no change is needed as long as authority is followed.
The key idea is that both types are authoritarians, and need to follow rules and orders
Liberalism is a political tradition that dates at least to the enlightenment era. One of the defining characteristics of liberalism is the emphasis on the individual. This makes it highly compatible with capitalism, in fact, I would call Liberalism the state religion of Capital.
As the dominant political and intellectual tradition in the west for centuries, it can be difficult to even imagine a politics not built around fighting over different flavors of liberalism.
In my opinion, there’s a huge gap between the values liberalism espouses in theory (individual liberty, human rights, self-determination) and what we actually see in practice (slavery, fascism, imperialism, ecocide, genocide, world war).
Of course, committed liberals view fascism as outside of their tradition, whereas their ideological opponents generally regard fascism as an extension of liberal ideology. This quickly devolves into a No True Scotsman debate.
Moderates who think that capitalism can be reformed.
Not… The most universally accurate definition
Close enough 🤷
A larval nazi.
I wouldnt go as far as to call them nazis. Most of them are just would-be leftists.
We’ll see. It only broke that way once in one place in history.
If I recall, one of the great drivers of women’s rights was actually the washing machine. Not sure how accurate that is.
It isn’t accurate at all. In the last 100 years, the amount of time spent doing domestic work has not changed at all. Technology doesn’t drive new rights, if anything it does the opposite.
Rights are gained by organized mass movements over long periods of campaigning and struggle, not home appliances.
Kinda sounds like one of those horrid Freakonomics takes
In the last 100 years, the amount of time spent doing domestic work has not changed at all.
Are you joking? That’s absolute bullshit.
Claiming the washing machine was responsible for women’s liberation might be gross oversimplification but to say that technological advancements had nothing to do with it is ignorant at best.
It is bullshit that we have been lied to about how technology affects our lives. Its bullshit that people just rudely dismiss what other people say with zero curiosity and zero consideration. But, the ignorance is all on your side, goofy
Hester and Srnicek suggest that there are two explanations. First, timesaving technologies increase standards, so we end up devoting additional hours to satisfying more-stringent norms. It is easier to launder our clothing than it was before the advent of running water, but as a result, we are expected to look better and clean our wardrobes more frequently. The second culprit is “increasing individualization,” which yielded the fabulously wasteful institution of the nuclear family. With the advent of industrialization and the attendant division of labor, tasks that had historically been distributed throughout neighborhoods and kinship networks began to fall exclusively to an emerging new figure, that of “the lone housewife.” Instead of instituting communal laundries or kitchens, we reached new heights of inefficiency by outfitting isolated houses with washing machines and fancy ovens. If the familiar anti-work agenda might be achieved by automating paid work and leaving the rest of life as we know it intact, a project focused on reducing domestic labor demands a wholesale reimagining of family life. After all, “the home is not simply a refuge, but also a (highly gendered) workplace.”
Hours Spent in Homemaking Have Changed Little This Century
While the time spent has not changed, what it is spent on has. Ramey reports that in the 1960s, housewives “spent less time on food preparation and clothing care, but more time on care of others and much more time on purchasing, household management, and travel than farmwives and town housewives in the 1920s.” Changes in living situations have had a large effect on home production. From 1900 to 1930, single employed women spent an estimated seven hours a week on home production. Most of them lived in boarding houses or with their families and relied on mothers or boarding house keepers for their home production. By 1965, they were spending 17 hours per week in home production. By 2005, time spent had risen to 18.1 hours per week. Non-employed men also increased their housework hours from 11.9 hours in 1900 to 21.2 hours in 2005.
Theres much, much more, studies and that go back decades.
Decades of concentrated lobbying for statutory protections, a shift in legal scholarship, and even a Constitutional Amendment and campaigning for referendum votes? Yeah, they may not know the answer — civics education in the US is embarrassing.
Hunger strikes for womens rights
AIDS die-ins
Occupying government official’s offices
Creating semi-public spaces for them to gather, strategize, and comfort one another
Creating zines and their own publishing houses
Meetings, meetings, meetings where people would share their stories, understand the systemic nature of their oppression, and find ways to resist
Developing alliances with other oppressed groups
Infiltrating powerful social institutions and intimidating powerful members (removing homosexuality in the DSM)
Creating allies with sympathetic members of said institutions
Shifting cultural consensus through public displays of defiance (bra burnings and coming out)Politics is the final stage of toil after years of people working in the dark only to emerge and piss of most but win over some. Change doesn’t start with lobbying politicians or crafting laws, but standing up and saying together, “We exist and we matter”. If your movement’s first move is the political, you don’t understand how politics works. Turbulent flows shift mountains.
You forgot the rivers of blood.
rights imply laws. laws aren’t anarchist.
That implies that you can’t have any rights unless the government says you can have them.
No rulers is not the same as no rules.
You should probably understand the concept behind human rights before you talk about either anarchism or liberalism, both of which accept the idea.
