Ancestors

Written by tante on 2025-01-25 at 14:10

My big problem with this argument isn't that it's not true or that it's pragmatic. It is that we frame rights that every human being has as up for debate, as something that needs to work for business.

https://tldr.nettime.org/@tante/113889360712277025

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from tante@tldr.nettime.org

Toot

Written by tante on 2025-01-25 at 14:15

You can apply that everywhere: "Healthcare is good cause your workers come back faster", "schools are good cause you get better skilled workers".

People are not their economic value. Why do we accept that framing?

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from tante@tldr.nettime.org

Descendants

Written by tante on 2025-01-25 at 14:59

I know pragmatism and shit. Okay, have some middle of the read neoliberal make that case.

It matters who makes an argument.

Build coalitions with milquetoast groups, great, important. But if you give up value based arguments then there is no defender anymore.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from tante@tldr.nettime.org

Written by Maaike on 2025-01-25 at 14:18

@tante because most people have been thoroughly brainwashed by the productivity cult (which is just the uber capitalist cult).

I'm not saying anything you don't know, most likely. And I share your frustration.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from maaikees@sw-development-is.social

Written by Konosocio on 2025-01-25 at 14:22

@tante isn't it often applied when employers/well-off people argue against health care or education? isn't it often used to express wonder that not even this argument seems to be convincing? this would be the point where I'm annoyed: believe your eyes, they hate people and have zero empathy.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from konosocio@mastodon.online

Written by Archie on 2025-01-25 at 14:38

@tante I remember hearing that argument all the time when I was studying psychology TU Dresden. The department was pretty explicit in their view that the only justifiable reason for publicly funded psychotherapy was to get workers/students back to work faster, otherwise it's a waste of time and money. TUD psychology is notoriously positivistic/data-driven, but that single point is a big part of why I quit the program.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from archesofscratch73@zirk.us

Written by Max von Webel on 2025-01-25 at 15:19

@tante But it is useful because it debunks the myth of the right: that DEI is something that makes organizations worse while the opposite is true. It’s the right thing to do AND it’s the more profitable thing to do.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from 343max@mastodon.social

Written by Thomas Bartz on 2025-01-25 at 18:30

@tante hat vermutlich nichts mit irgendwas zu tun, aber ich saß gestern in einem Motivationsvortrag von Joey Kelly, der aus der Hippie-Phase der Kelly Family irgendwelche motivierenden Vertriebsstrategien rausgezogen und referriert hat. Sein ganzes Leben als Metapher für den Weg zum Erfolg.

Vielleicht gibt es ja wirklich kein richtiges Leben im Falschen.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from sixumbrellas@toot.berlin

Written by Michael Hartle on 2025-01-25 at 15:00

@tante I reject framings all day long, but to little effect. Just because a framing is used in news or political statements does not mean it represents established public opinion, but rather an intent to shape that. Unfortunately, pushing shit long enough seems to work.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from mhartle@mastodon.online

Written by Little Detritus on 2025-01-25 at 15:01

@tante Maybe because it is a frame that can be understood independently of your value system?

If you frame ppl according to your idea of humans there will be differing ways to understand those. I liked the following TED talk explaining one way to look at the different perspectives of the idea of humans, perhaps you like it:

https://ed.ted.com/lessons/jonathan-haidt-on-the-moral-roots-of-liberals-and-conversatives

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from littledetritus@geraffel.social

Written by Penumbra on 2025-01-25 at 16:57

@tante I assume that it depends on who it is you're addressing. The people, institutions etc. with the power to change policies are oriented towards outcomes/results not intentions/values because the latter are much more difficult to quantify.

Example:

"A four day work week is the right thing to implement because life is meant to be more than just labour!"

vs.

"A four day work week means people are more relaxed and concentrated, thus being able to get more work done in less time."

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Penumbra@mastodontech.de