Archive for October, 2011

Merit and Capitalism

Monday, October 31st, 2011

One of the favorite arguments of the swindlers who justify their own exploitation is the idea that capitalism is a system of “merit.” If you “work hard,” you get ahead. The people who are unemployed, underemployed, disgruntled or otherwise unhappy with their own situation should blame themselves. Oh yeah, and we don’t hire the the unemployed.

Take a look at monster.com or careerbuilder.com. I realize that a true job search entails far more than this, but I am proving a point. Everything is “this much experience, that much experience.” Is this merit, or is this seniority? What if a guy with a year of experience can do the job better than someone who has ten years? The people who look to hire others will never know because they have already narrowed the pool of competitors.

This is merit. You shoot a gun to start a marathon and the person who crosses the finish line first wins. When “Yuki Kawauchi” finished third in the Tokyo marathon despite working a full time job and not being a professional runner, nobody said “but your background isn’t a proper fit for the medal” or “your previous times weren’t fast enough, so your performance shouldn’t count.” No, he was not judged on his paper qualifications but on his performance. But I do not see merit in our corporate culture. What I see is that people are rewarded by how they look on paper to an extent, but really it is also “who you know” more than “what you know.” Our corporate culture has become so corrupt that employers even look for ideological matches now and search the internet for digital dirt. They are more interested in your facebook updates than your skills. But we never stop hearing about how capitalism is about merit.

A company has a good fiscal year and they make money, largely on the backs of employees. A company has a bad fiscal year and they lay off those employees who brought them the good year. Is this merit, or is this a case of people who have power and people who do not have power!? What competition did the owner “win” that made him the owner!? Does he have to defend his title every month? Does he cost less than the individual salaries of the people he is laying off in masses?

It is a fact that employers hire off of whims and that bosses often hire workers so they can later blame them if something goes wrong. I guess that is merit too. Hire someone, then screw up, then blame your employee.

Then you have the fact that a good idea has more potential in an established market monopoly than in someone’s garage. Let’s imagine that I had thought of the theoretical framework behind the ipod or Windows Operating System in a garage. Because I would not have possessed any means to bring the thought to reality, it would have been nothing more than a short day dream. Yet if someone such as the late Steve Jobs had the idea, he could have actually done something about it because he was rich and powerful and had access to the connections to do what he needed to do.

This article is mainly empirical. That means that this article is highly colored by my own views and I am not including citations or research. However, I think I am right! Capitalism is not a system of merit. It is a system of networking. I dare you to go to monster.com or careerbuilder.com if you doubt me. There are so many damn prerequisites that it gives the impression that today’s employers are more concerned with how someone looks on paper than how they actually perform. Capitalism isn’t meritocracy in any way. Free market? That means you are free to be a moron. Free to be incompetent! Even if your customers continue to support you, maybe they are idiots.

Then when you consider that the Government is funded by big business and protects big business, the revolving door makes American capitalism a global problem as the employing class controls the military as well. Of course the people who fight their greedy wars are the people who are unemployed through the fault of the mismanagement of the employing class. Seems like the system does not have a lot of “merit” to people who were not brainwashed by it, such as the Iraqis and Palestinians (granted religion is a form of brainwashing).

RAHOWA : Gangster Bolshevik Radio

Sunday, October 30th, 2011

Click Here

American Onslaught host Breckenridge Elkins and his demented troll (demented is good here) “Yakub Israel” team up with Free Media Productions for an anti-social radio program. This radio show is now included into the Audiozone section of the Free Media Productions website as well. Watch the termites as they eat away at society. If they can’t build something, at least they will destroy something.

The Push to outlaw off-the-job censorship

Saturday, October 29th, 2011

The link

Two days after I wrote an article about social networking and free speech, this article is written. Is it a coincidence, or am I the puppet master?

Seriously, this is a real concern. Employers are becomingly increasingly arrogant and demanding not just a set of skills but matched ideologies as well. People who have differing opinions on race, religion, music, politics, life etc. are abusing their executive powers to punish people for reasons that are not business related. Some employers are more honest about this and some are less honest. Some terminate people over controversial political views and then give a bs reason.

It is great to see two senators fighting against this. I give them my endorsement in this fight.

While the use of social networking is widely regarded as a valuable tool for recruiting, its use as a source of information for pre-employment background screening remains unresolved. However, the potential risks in using social media for background screening are clear.

The incorrect gathering or use of information obtained from social media profiles could expose an organization to compliance risks, including claims of discrimination. Additionally, the quality of the information obtained from social media sources and how that information is used must also be carefully considered.

The rising concern of using social media in background screening is highlighted by the scrutiny it is receiving from Congress. Recently, U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Al Franken (D-MN) expressed their concern that the gathering and reporting of social media activity to employers could harm individuals seeking employment for positions where a background check report includes social media information.

Concerns with Accuracy and Rights
The Senators’ concerns revolve around the accuracy of social media information provided to employers by third party providers, consumers’ right to online privacy, website terms of service and intellectual property violations.

Some of the concerns include:

How is accuracy determined for information collected from social media sites?
Are there processes in place for applicants to dispute information that is collected?
Is consent obtained from the job applicant before the search is performed?
How are terms of service and intellectual property violations addressed for social networking sites that prohibit the reuse or sale of the content without prior consent?

Implications for Employers
According to the 2011 HireRight Employment Screening Benchmarking Report, more than 50% of employers are using or are planning to use social media for recruitment purposes. Thus, the Senators’ letter is part of a growing trend by the federal government to closely scrutinize employers’ use of social media.

In fact, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has taken an increased interest in employers that discipline or terminate employees based on their social networking activities.

In addition, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently concluded that an employment background screening company that collects social media information is considered to be a “consumer reporting agency” under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).

The implication for employers is plainly to evaluate whether to rely on social media when making employment decisions and if so, how to do so while remaining in compliance with laws and reducing the risk of a claim. In this regard, employers should consider the following three best practices:

Review whether and how you are using social media and any compliance obligations associated therewith (e.g., compliance with the FCRA).
Consult with experienced labor counsel before disciplining or terminating an employee for social networking activities.
Consider the reliability of information obtained from social media sites, which may be less reliable than traditional background screening sources (such as court records), to avoid potentially losing opportunities with otherwise suitable candidates.

Occupy Philadelphia Scene

Thursday, October 20th, 2011

Here is a video of the scene at occupy Philadelphia by me. I support the movement of course, but think that these movements outside of New York City are mainly emulation movements. The real movement is to address a real problem in Manhattan and the movements in other cities are good movements but sort of spin offs of the original Wall Street movement.

Before I took this video, I heard a man who was at the New York Occupy Wall Street speak to a crowd about a lack of a steady message. As I have indicated in the facebook groups, this lack of a coherent message has prevented the working class from organizing in America for a long time. What is happening now is long over due but it will take more effort. The man was talking about how they were trying to show fifty different messages. A hundred things are wrong with this country, but the lack of a coherent message is the problem. There should be only one message – “militant class struggle is the only solution.” Not identity politics. Not abortion. Stay on message. It’s the exploitation and greed of the ruling class. People who talk about how “white males are holding me down” do not understand the capitalist system and how it has progressed (or metastasized) to the stage of globalization. In today’s business environment, being too politically incorrect can get you fired if your boss has paranoia issues.

I picked up a flyer and I called Patrick Toomey (a Pa Senator) and told him to bring the troops home and invest in the working class via message to one of his secretaries. One of the demonstrators had me do this.

Here is the video I shot (it does not contain the events described above):

The working class must have its own back! Labor solidarity is the only solution to corporate greed. We must take control of this country whether or not the employers who fund the Government consent to it.

“What we want” – Occupy Wall Street

Thursday, October 20th, 2011

This is a pretty good commercial. The part about jeopardizing jobs is key.

If people were not afraid of losing their jobs, they would express far more opinions that are critical of the state of this country. At will employment is a violation of the first amendment. The idea that someone can pay a privatized penalty for their speech that is off the job and unrelated to business is something that is going to have to change and it is going to have to change against the will of many business owners.

I will say it openly. If you plan to dictate politics to me and expect me to stop blogging – don’t hire me.

Cyberbullying and “Free Speech”

Monday, October 17th, 2011

The link
Let’s give a big round of applause to the Democrats who want to criminalize harassment over the internet explicitly, more so than it already is criminalized. They have my full support. Free speech does not mean that you can impersonate identities, libel people, make accusations that you know are false just to make them defend the accusations, post your own content then accuse others of plagiarizing etc.

When people are put in the slammer who think they are anonymous because they harass other people, I will throw a salute. Being a political dissident and being an anonymous coward are two different things. One has the right to dissent, as I obviously dissent. One has no right to “stealth attack” using the methods I hinted at above.

On Occupy Wall Street

Monday, October 17th, 2011

I support the class conscious people who are working to occupy wall street. I believe that most of the people understand that corporate greed is the problem. Any so called Marxist who does not support this because of some contradiction to Marxist theory is a bullshit perfectionist who would be diagnosed with Aspergers syndrome by a psychiatrist who needs some extra cash.

I do not support the people who obscure the class question by alleging that whites are racially conscious and somehow putting race before profit. That’s a lie, and the identity politics assholes know it is a lie. We must keep the identity politicians out of our movement for the sake of our movement (and because they are wrong). Special interest groups have ruined the so-called left in America by replacing the class struggle with racial/ethnic grievances, not that I believe the terms “left” and “right” are legitimate. Also for the sake of national identity, who can come and who cannot come is a legit debate to have. Occupy wall street must not be taken over by open boarder ideologues who do not know how to run a stable country and have no interest in seeing Mexico reach a higher potential.

I support the emulated movements too – such as Occupy Philadelphia. However I think we can all realize that the original and core is the movement in New York.

Why young people are revolting

Monday, October 17th, 2011

What happened was that during the 1990s we were told that anyone who wanted to become middle class could. That America was a moral country and the best country in the world. All that gibberish.

A bunch of younger people were raised saying “go to college, follow the rules, work hard, you’ll be rewarded if you put in effort and don’t break the law. Don’t talk back to your supervisors (even if they are incompetent). BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH.”

Where has “behaving” got us? We have taken it up the rear from the capitalist system! And like a metastasizing cancer, this pathetic country attempts to spread it around the world. The Afghan government lives off of donations and is a failure even from the standpoint of being a market supporter. As a loss leader, it is receiving America revenue instead of generating revenue for the bosses in Wall Street and Washington. That is the where the money goes, but when a part time or menial labor job is lost that was held by a “behaved person,” that originally did not pay much at all, young people are often denied unemployment as well. Instead of investing in the working class domestically, we “spread capitalism.” Saddam Hussein should still be in power. Even someone who thinks that Saddam Hussein should have been deposed would still argue that the operation has been a blunder.

Bush was the biggest jackass in American history, but Obama has proven me correct that nobody internal to the American system will fix the American system. The problem is not a particular politician. The problem is wall street, its government and its wars.

It isn’t my government!

Basically the plan was to buy off the working class. But now America, deep into debt, cannot AFFORD to bribe the working class anymore.

And now all these people sacrificed a lot to develop skills that are no longer being hired if you are young. They go fight stupid wars because they cannot find jobs. The wars are fought with the intention of eventually providing enhanced outlets for capitalist exchange, but even that is not working.

When will the people with power in this country realize that even Americans hate them? They probably already know.

A battle we can win

Sunday, October 9th, 2011

Let us describe the way that social media background checks would be governed if the Government worked the way it should on behalf of the populace. If the Government really wanted to allow rights to its individual citizens, instead of allowing corporations to penalize people for free speech because corporations directly fund the capitalist and imperialistic Government, then some of the rights of corporations would be smaller. In exchange for a true right to free speech, employers would have to lose some of their rights to make hiring decisions off of political ideology or off the job legal conduct. What the bourgeois class loses, the middle and proletariat classes gain.

Instead all we hear about is “free markets,” the “rights” of employers and “democracy.” But below is a reasonable moderate social media policy. While many goals that the working class are shooting for are a bit out of reach, I do believe we can reach this goal. We can make it illegal for employers to penalize employees and potential employees based on off the job conduct that is legal and not directly impacting on business operations. I do believe the fear of being out of work in a bad economy causes a large amount of people to stay silent who otherwise would correctly fight harder for change.

When discussing social media, blogs and employment background checks, one of the trite arguments made by apologists for the bourgeois class is “if you make it public, then we can judge you on it.” In legal issues, the standard proof of criminal conviction is “beyond a reasonable doubt.” I believe a similar standard should be required of employers who assess employees not on their performance but on their lives outside of work. The standard must be that it must be determined, beyond a reasonable doubt, by a Jury that the conduct is directly causally related to a legitimate and proven loss of business (loss of customers, loss of employees) for such behavior to be retaliated against.

For example, if John Doe posts about his hatred of midgets and you find it on his facebook, your business should not be able to retaliate against John Doe by firing, not promoting or treating him differently simply because YOU are offended. Instead, John Doe’s right to free speech should be prioritized over your “right” to retaliate against him. Sure, you have the right to disagree with John Doe and say “hey, that is offensive, I disagree” but that should be the end of it.

John Doe has the right to say he does not like midgets or the Government of Iowa. A business should have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt by a Jury, that John Doe making his “tweet” about midgets is costing the company employees or customers. Correlation is not causation. Now it is true, he did “put it there” and it is “public,” but if it is not directly tied to a business issue, retaliation should not be an option. You being offended about John Doe’s tweet should be an insufficient cause for termination, lack of promotion or consideration of the behavior.

We must find a strategy to lobby for such change in legislation, so that the American people can be truly empowered to speak up for their own interests instead of for the interests of the small minority who profit the most from doing in the private sector what the Government does not do in the public sector. Let us face it, until we develop labor solidarity, we will never have any rights.

It is entirely legitimate to make jokes, to speak informally when addressing friends, to post a picture, to make political opinions, to listen to music others do not like, to write music, to have a life. Until the government sets an example by criminalizing the retaliation against free speech in the private sector by employers against employees and potential employees, there are no rights in the “land of the free” (the land of imperialistic warfare, cosmopolitan greed, rootlessness, racial self-hatred and politicized religion).

Real American People (northeast) Revolting

Friday, October 7th, 2011

I thought it was funny that the one lady said it was happening “all over the country.” Then she said she was from Jersey city as an example, as if that’s not right next door to New York City. If people outside of traditional America who live in Chicago. San Antonio, Seattle and Los Angeles are protesting, then that is fine. But the Northeast (America) is leading the way and that is what I am most concerned about.

Watch the video and ignore the writings about it. While Mark Dankuf does go off and blames “The Jews” for Wall Street, overall this is a very sobering report on events. Blaming the Jews comes from a misguided analysis in which special interest lobbies are seen as a cause rather than a symptom of society and from failing to identify the perverted twist of the profit motive. I must side with the females but I do appreciate the fact that Mark Dankuf is supporting the American people against the elite power structure. Americans (northeast) are protesting their leadership. Mark Dankuf is from Deleware, but I consider that to be mid-Atlantic while some Southerners argue that Delaware should belong to the South.

The talking points made about the two parties being a syndicate could have came right out of free media productions. This video has content similar to what we were saying back when Obama was elected. The sobering thing about this is that free media productions was in every way an innovative website. I, for instance, did not adopt these viewpoints whisper down the lane – but “discovered” them for myself. It is good to see that other people can look at the material conditions and independently draw the same conclusion I have in that I too wanted Obama to fix things, but I knew he could not. The problem is not an individual leader. The problem is the capitalist system. From the beginning both Besoshvilli and I knew that electing Obama would not bring parity against the elites who mislead America. The question was asked “Why did it take so long for Americans to wake up?” The answer is that the two party system is like Professional Wrestling and the Americans are just discovering that the apparent opponents are actually deceiving the crowd together. The recession has prevented the exploiting class from “buying off” the working class.

The female is correct that while Israel is an oppressor, American capitalism is the Octopus and Israel is just a tentacle. This fits well with my line in that I have always ridiculed the idea that Israel and the Jews control things on their own, but I have lately (as of about 2009) been more critical of Israel from a perspective against imperialism and for national liberation and the proletarian class.

I am happy that they are speaking out about globalization and imperialism. Imperialism exists today and it existed yesterday in America.

SEO Powered By SEOPressor