undefined | Better HN

0 pointsanm895y ago0 comments

You are comparing a government to a company. Peasants don't optionally sign contracts to belong to their nation. For the record I think the peasants should and have every moral (althouth probably not legal)right to revolt.

Revolting from your company is called quitting. So go ahead and revolt if you want.

If believing that both companies and workers should have the freedom to set their own terms for how they want to operate within the bounds of the law is authoritarianism then I will proudly take the label although of course, this is directly inverting the definition of authoritarianism.

0 comments

djrobstep5y ago

> You are comparing a government to a company.

Indeed. Both can be run either a democratic or authoritarian fashion. "Ownership should mean absolute power" is a common belief (everywhere but particularly in the US where labor rights have never been strong), but is only one option, and more democratic forms are possible.

> Peasants don't optionally sign contracts to belong to their nation.

Thinking that employers "belong" to the companies they work for is quite strange language. But more to the point, employees don't "optionally" sign employment contracts - most people are forced to work to pay the bills - in other words, they are coerced into signing the contract. Most people hate their jobs and would rather not do them.

Magicstatic5y ago

Sincere question - not meant to be inflammatory: Do you actually believe that most employees in the United States are coerced/forced to sign employment contracts, or are you simply playing devil's advocate?

drewbug015y ago

It is virtually impossible to survive in the United States without employment.

I don’t think the “coercion” perspective is the most convincing argument, personally: but there really isn’t much of an alternative to employment. The fact that the US has starving children speaks to how little of a social safety net we actually have.

I guess while I wouldn’t personally use “coercion” in a debate about this stuff, it’s also somewhat of a reasonable argument when you consider the alternatives. It’s just very ... meta.

djrobstep5y ago

Of course. For most people, if they don't work, they can't pay for food and shelter. They will then be coercively denied those things via property law enforcement.

"Do the bidding of an employer or be forcibly denied food and shelter" sure sounds like coercion to me.

anm89OP5y ago

So the concept of having a boss is authoritarian? Again I'll proudly wear the label of authoritarian as you describe it.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

djrobstep5y ago

> You are comparing a government to a company.

> Peasants don't optionally sign contracts to belong to their nation.

Magicstatic5y ago

drewbug015y ago

It is virtually impossible to survive in the United States without employment.

I guess while I wouldn’t personally use “coercion” in a debate about this stuff, it’s also somewhat of a reasonable argument when you consider the alternatives. It’s just very ... meta.

djrobstep5y ago

Of course. For most people, if they don't work, they can't pay for food and shelter. They will then be coercively denied those things via property law enforcement.

"Do the bidding of an employer or be forcibly denied food and shelter" sure sounds like coercion to me.

anm89OP5y ago

So the concept of having a boss is authoritarian? Again I'll proudly wear the label of authoritarian as you describe it.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse