A Freedom-Hater sticks her nose into something that is absolutely none of her business:
Get a load of this story:An acclaimed British conductor has been fired from a prestigious American music festival after a seemingly innocent joke he made to a black friend was labelled racist.Matthew Halls was removed as artistic director of the Oregon Bach Festival following an incident in which he imitated a southern American accent while talking to his longstanding friend, the African-American classical singer Reginald Mobley.It is understood a white woman who overheard the joke reported it to officials at the University of Oregon, which runs the festival, claiming it amounted to a racial slur.Shortly after Halls, who has worked with orchestras and opera houses across Europe and the US, was told by a university official his four year contract, which was to have run until 2020, was being terminated.This sounds like a bad Title IX inquisition. Further down in the story, it is explained that the University of Oregon never spoke with Mobley, who is appalled at the University’s action.
Mobley says he and Halls often playfully mock each other's accents (British and southern, respectively). Alas, he was not consulted on the situation by the jackboots who cut Halls loose.
Those type jackboots are all over the corporate world. As always, all it takes is one rat fink. But of course you must be in favor of the legal concept of employment at will. Works both ways. Employers who you almost always protect from so-called freedom haters are often the biggest FHers we got going in the good ole former USA.
ReplyDeleteAt-will employment is hardly the issue here. The issue is that a certain very activist swath of society has assumed the right to narrow the parameters of what we're allowed to say and think about race and demographics in general, and now even to police the private humorous exchanges of friends. Yes, the jackbootery happens at the corporate level - also in classrooms and on campuses, and in many other areas of societal life.
ReplyDeleteI did not say at will employment was the issue here. It's the result of a lowly rat fink in the workplace. Such has it ever been, but now you are comparing about the reason the corporate jackboots fired this fine freedom lover (in your opinion). Coulda been over something as harmless as smoking a stogie in a bar after hours or on the weekend. Oh what your hero Ronnie wrought with his piss testing which you have continually defended. Starts with pot, now with tobacco, what's next, unacceptable cholesterol levels. At least you're standing up now for the right to mimic the speech patterns of one Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III in the workplace.
DeleteSo lay low and avoid the authorities. Thus it has always been for the non-conformist in Amerika
ReplyDeleteYou are mixing apples and oranges. This is not about general-case rat-finking. It's not about a hodgepodge of unrelated types of corporate-world nosiness. Although you do touch upon the Left's other obsession, along with identity politics, and that is health nannyism.
ReplyDeleteYou have continually defended the freedom of the corporations to hire within their criteria, constitutional or not and call efforts to reign in corporate power freedom hating. Well, they've always pretty much been free to hire and free to fire. Sorry about your beloved freedom lover joining the rest of the scum in the unemployment line, not that they'll qualify for compensation (freedom hating anyhow).
ReplyDeleteHealth nannyism, please define nannyism ? Is "nannyism" related as a term solely on health ?
ReplyDeleteHealth nanny-ism is institutions and government looking into people's eating habits, whether they smoke, etc.
ReplyDeleteI agree with that. Maybe a secondary "nannism" is more as "protectionism", a net work of laws which really need worked on. Without "working" legislation you might as well be living in 1900.
ReplyDelete1900, we'll get there again. The corporations have blurred the line between employee and independent contractor so they don't have to pay bennies, not even the employer contribution to OASI. No work comp, no paid holidays, but the biggie is no health insurance. Freedom lovers.
ReplyDeleteWhich has the flimsiest connection to the subject of this post.
ReplyDeleteBut just real quickly, while we're digressing, corporations nor any other type of employer have to offer any particular arrangement of compensation forms. It's not like there's some kind of right to "bennies."
Nope, no rights if we're going all the way back to 1900.
ReplyDeleteJust today saw an article affirming what I was talking about above. It also discusses the ole "at will" issue later on in the piece.
ReplyDelete"In “Private Government,” Anderson explores a striking American contradiction. On the one hand, we are a freedom-obsessed society, wary of government intrusion into our private lives; on the other, we allow ourselves to be tyrannized by our bosses, who enjoy broad powers of micromanagement and coercion. Anderson believes that many American workers are constrained by rules that would be “unconstitutional for democratic states to impose on citizens who are not convicts or in the military.” She estimates that more than half are “subject to dictatorship at work.” In “Private Government,” she asks whether this might be a failure of our political system—a betrayal of America’s democratic promise."
https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/are-bosses-dictators?mbid=social_facebook
And as I said when you quoted this in another thread, this author shows his embrace of the essence of leftism - that people are poor helpless souls with no options and no sovereignty over their lives.
ReplyDelete