TankovayaDiviziya @ TankovayaDiviziya @lemmy.world

Posts

7

Comments

1,220

Joined

2 yr. ago

I don't remember which company it is, but a CEO with socially progressive views was appointed by shareholders. He believes that you can be ethical and still run a multibillion company. After a year, he was replaced. It wasn't explicitly mentioned but we know why he was replaced.

Unless you own the company yourself, I think you could be ethical. But more cut throat rivals would undermine you, leaving you with no choice but to either let your company be bought because you simply cannot compete, or you could keep up with the Joneses and follow along with cut throat tactics to remain competitive.

The third option though is if you are comfortable enough with what you are earning that you don't feel the need to compete and expand. This is what many family-owned Japanese businesses do. Those businesses have been passed down from generation to generation stretching back hundreds of years. A lot of said businesses explain they do not want to expand because it is risky and are happy enough with their enterprise.

MacNamara's 100,000 idiots programme during Vietnam War wasn't a success, so the next best thing for them is to institute the programme domestically and with intended results.

Not the person you replied to, and I am not trying to sound elitist, but a lot of people have ill-informed views. If they simply didn't know before, it's okay; but a lot people proudly prance as if they're right, when their views are Twitter-takes instead of coming from expert sources.

I did not make the rules, the ruling class did. If you are not aware, the UN is never meant to have legal power. Why do you think the UN General Assembly "pass" resolutions in favour of the oppressed (stopping the war in Ukraine , lifting sanctions on Cuba, stopping the Israeli settlement on Palestinian lands, declaring the war on Iraq as illegal), and yet nothing happened?

The UN is meant to be a "platform" for diplomacy, not act as the world government. If you read more about international "law", the more you will realise how farcical and practically nonexistent it is. The terms accords, agreement and treaty don't mean the same thing in international "law". The United States even repeated several times they will invade The Hague should the international courts prosecute any American citizens.

Notice I have put quotations on some words, which is to highlight that in practice, they don't have binding power and therefore don't mean anything.

The international courts are courts in name only. They don't have power because it is by design and thus any rulings are non-binding. The only real power there is is the UNSC, and it is extremely corrupt as everyone knows.

Hell must be freezing right now with FoxNews even calling out Trump. With tumbling stock market, I did not think that "voting with your wallet" actually works.

I am more curious as to what will Democrats do next in light of Trump admin's first hundred and more gaffes. Will the Democrats learn from their mistakes and reform? Or will they exploit Trump's gaffes like during Covid, but learn nothing and the Republicans will field someone worse for the next election (assuming there will be a next election)? Or, at worse, will Democrats continue to enable Trump like they are now with Chuck Schumer?

Out of curiosity, where do you live? If you live in a conservative state, that explains a lot about the scoffing and the dismissal of the unfamiliar and new by your peers.

Anyway, screw the haters. They are the ones who will regret missing out on those privileged pay from paternity leave.

If aliens could judge us, they'd say: "So you are telling me, that humans have killed each other for imaginary lines on the ground; in the name of feckless leaders who don't give a fuck about you; and bananas?"

I have been around when the bean meme came and I still don't know how that meme started.

Things will get worse before it gets better.

AOC won surprisingly at her first foray into politics when she was up against an established monied opponent. If she primaries against Schumer, she might just be able pull it off again. Remember that even some MAGA appreciates her anti-oligarchy run, which in turn makes her look authentic for the masses. The look for authenticity in a politician is what many affluent people-- both liberals and conservatives alike-- do not understand of the Trump phenomenon, or even the popularity of Sanders, Walz and AOC.

I don't know why you are picking fights and letting a faceless, random Internet stranger live rent free in your mind. The centrist Democrats/liberals are tone deaf. There is no getting through to them other than their value of private property, free market and stocks. If those things are even nudged, they will immediately side with fascists and make up some circular logic of excuses, instead of admitting what they truly value for siding with fascists.

Going a little bit tangent, legal philosophy always fascinates me. My particular interest is international law and its paradox. It is by intention the terms "agreement", "accords" and "treaty" do not mean the same thing, and their level of legality and enforcement varies.

"VoTe BlUe no mAtTeR who"

Liberals as always would rather side with fascists.

So many have been brainwashed that DNC is the "left".

So as of now it's none?

As of now. But there are some who are already making a push back and even Fox news are starting to question Trump. After all, Trump keeps flip flopping because obviously some are already expressing frustrations behind closed doors.

If the silly tariff threats goes on long enough, enough people will become overtly angry.

Honestly, I did not think it would work!

Will be many if the stock market does not rebound soon enough.

You are in .ml, of course they would advocate for someone further left than Bernie and AOC no matter how implausible their ideas are.