Ich habe am Donnerstag die Kündigung bei meinem Arbeitgeber eingereicht, da die Firma zum 1.9. übernommen wird und ich darauf wenig Lust habe.
Daraufhin wurde ich bis Samstagabend emotional von meinen Chefs unter Druck gesetzt, meine Entscheidung doch noch einmal zu ändern. Mir wurde vorgeworfen, ich wäre ich-bezogen, würde maximalen Schaden anrichten und mir wäre das Wohlergehen meiner Kollegen vollkommen egal, da diese nun alle arbeitslos werden würden. Außerdem wurde mir vorgehalten, dass ich mein Insolvenzverfahren durch Hilfe der Firma ja erfolgreich abgeschlossen hätte und man sich da etwas Entgegenkommen von meiner Seite aus wünscht. Das war schon harter Tobak, denn das Verfahren habe ich durch das Erlangen von Gehalt abgeschlossen und das wäre auch in jeder anderen Firma so gekommen, die nicht nur Mindestlohn zahlt.
Ich habe mich bemüht, sachlich zu bleiben, habe dann schlussendlich aber auch sehr harte Worte finden müssen und ihnen mitgeteilt, dass der Job in erster Linie nur dafür da ist, meine Miete und mein Essen zu bezahlen und ich nicht für das Anstellungsverhältnis meiner Kollegen verantwortlich bin. Dann hat der Druck endlich aufgehört - toll geschlafen habe ich am Wochenende allerdings nicht wirklich.
Das war schon krass, ich habe es nach einer Kündigung noch nie erlebt, dass man so bedrängt wird. Heute war der Geschäftsführer der neuen Firma vor Ort und scheinbar findet die Übernahme auch ohne mich wie geplant statt - das macht die ganzen Vorwürfe noch absurder als sie eh schon sind...
In der Kurzvorstellung des neuen GFs fiel der Satz "Also wir haben fast gar keine eigenen Programmierer, wir machen eigentlich alles mit Freelancern" und es wurde betont, was für ein tolles junges Team sie haben und was für ein krasses Event sie letztes Wochenende alle gemeinsam gefeiert hätten. Hatte irgendwie so'n bisschen was von einer Startup-Kultur und mich nur nochmal in meiner Entscheidung zu gehen bestätigt.
Gestern Abend konnte ich zum Glück von diesem ganzen Stress runterkommen und mir "Fly Me to the Moon" im Kino auf Englisch ansehen. Ein großartiger Film, der Comedy, Drama, Romance und eine Prise SciFi miteinander vereint. Ich bin sehr froh, den gesehen zu haben und kann ihn euch allen wärmstens ans Herz legen. :)
Why condemn it? Violence is an unfortunate tool, but a tool nontheless, and abandoning it when oppressors use it without care just means you aren't taking things seriously. Hitler should have been assassinated.
By weighing all violence as immoral you are not ruling it out completely. You make it a last-resort, where you avoid one great injustice with a lesser injustice - a lesser injustice which you still face consequences for.
The alternative is morally sanctifying some murders, which leads to 'morally justified' murders being done by all political sides (since they each view themselves as 'the moral ones'), and which eventually gets twisted into the party in power murdering their opponents with impunity because it's 'morally justified'.
Moralism itself is just a tool to justify the status quo. Nothing is inherently good by maintaining "civility," especially if violence is the status quo.
Shooting Nazis is good. Shooting Gazans is bad. Violence is a tool, but not always the correct one, nor is it never correct.
I think that is a misreading of why moral codes come into being, and I am not trying to preach moralism.
Moral codes are not universal truths, but instead rules of engagement for maintaining order within a system, and they exist within every social scope, though their level of detail tends to decay as the scope becomes more interpersonal. They're not really a tool of the state, but instead just a human tool. The state just codifies its own and disseminates it into the social collectives it rules.
My statement above is a moral observation about political morality within the US, and which I view is generally a useful rule within any democratic political system (I am referring to systems which have a structure and voting system associated with democratic processes, not necessarily ideal or actual democracies).
I am also not saying that this moral code is necessarily good for us or the system itself at any given moment, but stating why this moral code exists in the first place, and why anyone who is apart of our system and wants that system to survive (whether that be for avoiding personal turmoil or political ideology) will continue to condemn assassination attempts from any side.
Moral codes are not universal truths, but instead rules of engagement for maintaining order within a system, and they exist within every social scope, though their level of detail tends to decay as the scope becomes more interpersonal. They're not really a tool of the state, but instead just a human tool. The state just codifies its own and disseminates it into the social collectives it rules.
Yes, moral codes are generally arbitrary. When wielded by the state to maintain the status quo, it becomes a tool of the state.
My statement above is a moral observation about political morality within the US, and which I view is generally a useful rule within any democratic political system (I am referring to systems which have a structure and voting system associated with democratic processes, not necessarily ideal or actual democracies).
The US isn't truly democratic. Both major parties serve the interests of their donors, ie huge Capitalists, and the candidates presented fit with that alignment. In this manner, political pressure outside the scope of "civility" is presented as immoral, despite civility itself being used to perpetuate anti-democratic structures.
I am also not saying that this moral code is necessarily good for us or the system itself at any given moment, but stating why this moral code exists in the first place, and why anyone who is apart of our system and wants that system to survive (whether that be for avoiding personal turmoil or political ideology) will continue to condemn assassination attempts from any side.
Yes, this is why Biden has batted more for Trump than any child murdered in Gaza. Biden needs civility to remain, or else he too will become a target.
You do realize poor and destitute people existed long before modern capitalism right. Medieval europe, and the ancient world was full of them, along with many socialist countries
No, history is full of people living their lives. It's history's insufferable idle middle to upper class people trying to justify their miserable existence that has labeled that a class struggle
Capitalism is an evolution on previous class societies, not the first one, yes. Socialist countries have eradicated poverty with comparison to their pre-Socialist systems, and that can and should be recognized.
Can confirm, just wish other people around the fediverse would realize you can adore and speak out against Israel without being antisemitic. To clarify I mean that can you speak out against genocide AND that you don't have to say shit like "fuck the Jews".
Been fighting that bullshit since Israeli Trump started his genocide.
In both of those posts he is comparing Israel's atrocities to Nazi Germany's. If he truly was an antisemite then Nazi Germany wouldn't have been such a good comparison would it?
Okay yeah, I looked at your profile, and you are an instant block. Go get some mental health support, it's the least bit of advice I can leave you with.
What do you mean? There's only 21 comments, only one top level comment is inciteful, and pretty much everyone is calling them out. There's nothing unusual going on in here.
kbin.zerstoererbande.de
Aktiv