Showing posts with label intimidation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label intimidation. Show all posts

Friday, July 3, 2020

No Burka, No Hijab, No Service

The recent pandemic and rioting has lead me to frequently ask the following question: "Is there no shit you will not eat?" It is sort of a line out of an e e cummings' poem, and I'm not the only one asking this.
 

Rise of the Karens

State and local governments’ responses to the China Flu have led to the rise of the “Karens.” These are people who have gorged mightily the propaganda coming from media, politicians, and supposedly credible medical organizations, and who aren’t afraid to impose their will on those of us who realize that the China Flu is nothing but a sham pandemic – a shamdemic.

These Karens are to be derided not only for their uncritical acceptance of the details and timing of the shamdemic but also their unwillingness to let others act according to their own best judgement.

Karens are nothing new. In previous times they were called by the more accurate term: collaborators. But we are living in an age where honesty is seen as aggression, and truth must be sugared over or else be rejected as hate speech.
 

Narrative Collapse

What fuels the Karens' control freak binge is not only the relentless social programming coming from the media and left-wing politicians, but also the gaping holes in the stories. Inconsistencies and absurdities became clear very early in the shamdemic - and these weren't just the usual "fog of war" uncertainties but ongoing narrative revisions and obvious political jockeying made by people wishing to frighten a nation and who assume Americans have no memory beyond the immediate now. Not only history being rewritten, but current events are being reworked in a feverish quest to find something that sticks.

Examples of the inconsistencies include:

The public policies based on these inconsistencies and ordained by our representatives have done nothing but reveal their incompetency and expose their contempt and malevolence towards those that elected them.

Prisoners were released under the excuse that keeping them confined would increase their risk of becoming infected. Masks apparently don't work inside prisons. As can be expected, many of these released prisoners immediately repeated the kinds offenses for which they were originally being held.

Companies that were deemed "inessential" were ordered closed, unless, say, a governor had a personal stake in the business, for example a "life-sustaining" cabinet supply company.

Most damning of all was the decision by several states to move patients with China Flu into nursing homes, senior care centers, and similar facilities. One nurse at a nursing home in Illinois said, "our patients are dropping like flies." New York's Governor Andrew Cuomo understood the danger, stating that illness would go through elderly patients like "fire through dry glass." He ordered nursing homes to accept China Flu patients anyway. Nationally, the number of nursing home deaths has been reported to be 16,000.

Of course, putting China Flu patients into nursing homes is acceptable for us commoners but not for the ruling class - Pennsylvania's secretary of health Rachel Levine (formerly Richard) moved his mother from a nursing home into a hotel as the death toll rose. Richard was the one that allowed nursing homes to accept China Flu patients in the first place. Stunning and brave, Richard, stunning and brave.

These acts are criminal, and hopefully the governors and secretaries of health who implemented all this will receive the swift and severe retribution that they are due.
 

The Magical Virus

Meanwhile the magical powers of the virus causing Szechuan Sickness continue to expand!

The virus is attracted to small businesses, churches, weddings, and funerals... unless the deceased was a black man killed by a white police officer. Then multiple nationally televised funerals with dancing pallbearers and horse-drawn carriages are safe, because the church doors are marked with the blood of a fentanyl user who also tested positive for the Mandarin Malady.

The virus knows not to infect people who "social distance" (what an oxymoron!) by standing 6 feet apart (not 5'11"), except at certain types of protests. The Asian Affliction is attracted to shutdown protests and Trump rallies, and it is able to be detected without waiting for the usual 14-day incubation period to elapse. BLM and Antifa riots, however, have the Cantonese Contagion's approval, as well as the approval of least 1000 health professionals.

In fact, BLM protests actually may have slowed the overall spread of the virus. All hail the woke virus!
 

The Timing

Then there is the timing. The governors and mayors who are most adamant about keeping their states in lockdown or who devise the most circuitous staged reopening plans are Democrats. Amazing, isn’t it, that the China Flu began getting press almost immediately after the impeachment proceedings against President Trump fizzled. Then the George Floyd riots began just as the press realized that people were experiencing Covid-19 “burn out.” Now that the riots have mostly stopped, Covid-19 coverage has increased, with a focus on squaring away the importance of “social distancing” with the proximity of the rioters to each other.
 

But Back to the Karens

All of this – the narrative inconsistencies, the stupid policy decisions, the timings, as well as the fact that not many people directly know anyone who has had the China Flu – should give people reason to be just a little skeptical, and everybody should be outraged at the nursing home deaths. The Karens aren’t, for Karens don’t have time for suspicions, common sense, logic, the evidence of the senses, or for outrage beyond their own indignation – they’ve got religion, and they are oftentimes the same people who believe in global warming cooling climate change, a theory that has not produced one accurate prediction over all the decades it has been in existence.

For everybody else, all of this is a bill of particulars.

Some people would excuse the Karens by claiming that they are just exercising their freedom of speech. Notice that these apologists only allow Karens to use their First Amendment rights, and when the Karens do so, it frequently is in the form of either muttered insults or explicit threats directed at the no-mask wearing people and their families.

Unmentioned by the apologists is the harm that Karens do: some states maintain "snitch" websites that allows Karens to report individuals and businesses to state authorities for violating the dictates, or for companies to report employees for unemployment fraud. The state authorities can then take action, especially against small businesses.

On several occasions the snitch lists have been published. The Karens were incensed - how dare the businesses and individuals they reported have the right to face their accusers!

After she was exposed for using Missouri's snitch website, one sniveled "I'm not only worried about COVID, I'm worried about someone showing up at my door, showing up at my workplace or me getting fired for doing what is right." Welcome to the club, Karen. One would hope that the level of fear implied by that individual would lead to just a little character improvement. It won't, for when Karens get called on their bullshit, they turn all Manga eyed like that one did, and if you turn your back on them for one minute, they will revert to their old informant ways.

Never asked about these informants is whether they have ulterior motives: it is easy to foresee situations where one business owner may snitch on another, thereby using the power of the state to gain a competitive advantage that the informant's ability and determination never will provide.
 

Corporate Karens and the Problem with Masks

Karens aren't limited to being individuals - there are corporate Karens, too. These are businesses that not only meekly cooperate with the dictates coming from local and state governments, but are enforcing them on their customers and employees as well. And the companies insist of calling these dictates "laws" instead of what they are: orders.

This happens in particular with the mask orders.

The most common defense of businesses that require their customers and employees to wear masks is this: "No shirt, no shoes, no service wasn't affecting your rights. Neither does no mask, no service." When you call these apologists on their bullshit, the response is always "well that's very progressive of you, it is their private property after all." They no doubt say this while sipping the Libertarian equivalent of a Starbucks Vanilla Bean Mocha Frappuccino.

This is not only the most common defense, it is also the most disappointing, for they might as well be saying "no burka, no hijab, no service." Companies wield powerful economic and social forces and are in some ways and some situations as powerful as armies. To insist that we wear rose-colored blindfolds to this fact is criminal, and it is a gateway to innumerable abuses.

One has to wonder how far these apologists would go with this excuse: should government or semi-government offices have the same right to refuse you service? What if all private businesses of a certain type all decide to deny service? Are your rights still not being infringed?

And there's this: some cities and states, like New Orleans, are requiring companies to have their customers and employees participate in contact tracing. Logically, the apologists must still excuse this by saying "they're private companies, they aren't infringing your rights."

Again I ask: is there no shit you will not eat?

Perhaps these apologists may have good (though not well reasoned) intentions, or they may be "going along to get along," or they may just be cowards. Regardless, the result is inaction on their part and criticism of those who refuse to be inactive.

Let's analyze the "private companies get a pass" remark: the ownership of a particular business is not in question. What is in question is the propriety and overall wisdom of their enforcement of Peking Plague ordinance.

It is not a company's job to enforce dictates on their customers or employees - a business doesn't come with a badge. Law enforcement is and must solely be the responsibility of the police, and the China Flu dictates are orders, not laws.

"But, but, but... does that mean Christians should be forced into baking wedding cakes for gays?" Nope, for they (the Christian bakers) aren't acting as collaborators or dictate enforcers.
 

What to Do?

What responses are warranted by those denied entrance or service for not wearing a mask, not maintaining "social distance," etc.? Are we to simply fold like one of Ron Paul's cheap suits?

One proper reaction is to use "the power of the purse," but it must be done in an effective manner, not merely as lip service.

Do not simply go to another store. Make sure that the store denying you entrance or service knows that you are not going to be purchasing from them because they are in bed with fools. If you make it to the cash register and are denied service, make them understand that it is they who will be the ones returning the stock to the shelves, and why they will be doing so.

This is the real power of the purse: you have to make sure the business not only knows they are losing money, but why they are losing money. Otherwise all they see is a small downtick in revenue when they do their books, and they can easily explain it away as random.

Another approach is to protest outside the homes of health officials, or to dox them. According to one report, these actions have caused some officials to resign their posts out of fear for their safety. Good.

Coordinated actions are possible too: go mask-less shopping with friends, participate in boycotts and class-action lawsuits, etc. Coordinated actions can fail, but individual actions will always result in at least a small victory.

Whatever the approach, make it expensive for them not to accept your money. Make those businesses understand in concrete terms that your patronage is not a given, and that their actions will come at a cost.
 

Conclusion

The immediate goal of the scamdemic is to cause division.

In day-to-day terms, ask yourself how many calm and rational in-person debates have you had with people who hold the opposite views on the China Flu? Before the shutdowns and the masks, it was an almost daily thing with me. The last one I had was with a dental technician whose office was shut down and who now works at a convenience store. With the coming of the masks, every interaction - if interaction was even possible - has become either an enforcement act or a shouting match instead of a healthy debate.

How much of the unemployment, the business closures, the economic suffering, and most importantly the level of political animosity and vitriol would we have now if companies didn't blindly follow these orders? Animosity and vitriol are the thing we should be most concerned about because we are now much closer to mass civil disorder or even civil war than we ever were over the last 12 years. Masks are just one more wedge issue used to divide and conquer us.

A second goal is to swing the 2020 election. The one accomplishment that even leftists cannot deny is the incredible economic prosperity that resulted when Trump began to roll-back policies of the previous several administrations. The shutdowns have thrown millions of people out of work (the "inessentials") and have forced the shuttering of thousands of small businesses - some forever, thus ending this prosperity.

The ultimate goal of the masks, the shutdowns, and all the rest is to normalize fear and instill control. The concrete symbol of the control is the mask, and it signifies submission. The enforcers of the control are collaborating companies, their employees, and the Karens.

That is to be the new normal, something that must be resisted at all costs.

Saturday, February 4, 2017

Two More Minutes of Hate

The shortest distance between two points is a straight line. This maxim holds not only in geometry, but in business as well. In that situation, the two points are the producer of goods or services, and the customer. The transactions between the two, for it to be "businesslike", must not involve any interference by any agency, government "service", third party, or side issues. No diversions must come on the shortest path between producer and customer.

This singlemindedness is the hallmark of a good businessman, and a similar thing holds for any person with any talent: no irrelevancies allowed.

Unfortunately, American businesses have forgotten that: they allow distractions to enter. Like politics, for example.

We've seen National Football League player Colin Kaepernick kneel at the playing of the national anthem. He's protesting "a country that oppresses black people and people of color". In 2016, he had a base salary of $11,900,000, a roster bonus of $2,000,000 and a workout bonus of $400,000, according to SpoTrac. Poor Colin. Poor, poor Colin.

We've read Starbucks promise to hire 10,000 refugees over the next five years in the 75 countries in which they conduct business. Will these include the Starbucks that anti-Trump protesters destroyed during the inauguration? How about the Starbucks destroyed by the rioters at UC Berkeley?

These issues are nothing but distractions from the respective purposes of the NFL and Starbucks, yet they are allowed to happen.

On Thursday, February 2nd, Comcast held protests over Trump's executive order limiting immigrants from seven countries known to breed terrorists. Those protests took place at several Comcast offices, including the Philadelphia one.

The organization of these protests started in the Comcast Silicon Valley (CSV) office located in Sunnyvale, CA. The organizers created a Slack "channel" (a chatroom) that soon included over a thousand members. As plans were evolving, a VP from that office sent the following email to a list of current and former CSV workers:

Hi folks,

As many of you know, a group of Comcasters in Philly and CSV are organizing a walkout for tomorrow (Thursday) at 11 Pacific to protest the Trump administration’s immigration policies. The organizers were inspired by the walkouts at Google campuses around the world on Monday.

If you want to participate or learn more about this, join the #walkout Slack channel.

I’m personally extremely supportive of this action. As a grandchild of immigrants, I understand the contribution immigrants from all over the world have made, and continue to make to this country. And I deeply appreciate that our country, at its best, has extended the opportunity for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to people in need.

I want to emphasize that this action is being taken by a group of individuals, motivated by their own social and political views. This isn’t a company-sponsored event, and the participants aren’t making any demands of the company. If your views are different, or if you don’t agree with the action for whatever reason, you shouldn’t feel any pressure. We’re supposed to be “the land of the free” so let’s all respect each other’s rights to speak our minds, or stay silent if that’s what feels right.

-A-

I learned of this chatroom from that email. There were various informal and heated discussions of this protest by my coworkers, and there seemed to be a concerted effort to exclude me from such discussions. Which is fine by me.

Organizers of the protest had consulted with management and Comcast legal services. They determined that protesters were not allowed to use the Comcast logo or name on any of their signs.

The protest was not mandatory. It was not an official Comcast event, though employees were allowed to take one hour of paid time off to participate.

I decided to counter-protest.

The night before the protest, I finished the essay called "Two Minutes of Hate" in response to the protests at various airports (and soon, Comcast) over Trump's order. About a half-hour before the protest was to start, I posted it to this blog, as well as to that chatroom. I also sent it in response to that email from the CSV VP.

Almost immediately, people began talking to me about the protests, and the consequences of either boycotting or counter protesting. Typically, my response to them was that they should be resolute, and to remember that they are correct on this issue. Here's an atypical response...

Fellow employee who was afraid to counter-protest: "You think the police will protect you?"
Me: "You think the police can protect them from me?"

The protesters gathered at the plaza in front of the Comcast Center building, as shown in this photo:

The man on the right with the megaphone used to be my manager. His parents were Vietnamese Boat People. They started a highly-respected restaurant, and are living the American dream. Their son didn't learn.

I stood with a sign that read "#RememberTheVictims" and also held a photo of a man with whom I used to do business, and who was killed in the Orlando night club shootings. I stood in a place where people could see those signs as the left the plaza and headed to City Hall.

I followed them to City Hall, listened to them chat, then again stood in a place where the protesters could see the signs as they returned to Comcast. It was a short protest, management gave them only one hour of PTO.

Of course, my manager, most of my teammates, as well as everyone with whom I sit were against Trump’s executive order, so they were protesting, and they saw me with my signs.

The next day, I was fired. My contracting company said they wanted to continue to work with me, and that Comcast was willing to rehire me for another team.

The reasons for my termination are becoming muddied, and I've already received two different excuses for my termination: one was that I was "unhappy" at my current position, the other that my team wanted an operations person instead of a software developer.

I've been a contractor at Comcast Philadelphia for approximately two years. Near the end of my first year there, they tried to hire me full time, but we were unable to agree on the salary. Before my contract ended, my old manager worked to move me to another team. That new team was dissolved a few months later, and that manager found me a spot with what used to be my current team.

Comcast was happy with me and I was happy with them. Until the counter-protest, that is.

I'm uncertain about working with Comcast in the future. Like all corporations, the chicken choking left hand does not know whom the right hand is wanking. For that reason, I hold no ill will towards the company as a whole.

But I am certain that I can no longer trust them. This is the first consequence for employers who become political, when they stray from the shortest path: doubt is introduced into the employee's mind about any action that management takes. Management undermines themselves, thus revealing their own incompetence.

Saturday, March 29, 2014

Improvise, Adapt, and…

Last spring, I was talking with this one retired Marine - his maritime security business wasn’t doing too good, and I was encouraging him to make some changes to it, but to persevere. He should “improvise, adapt, and be victorious,” I said.

He stopped me in the middle of what I hoped was an inspirational rant and said: “Overcome. It’s ‘improvise, adapt, and overcome’.”

Rant: over. Moment: gone. Marine-turned-business-owner: not victorious.


This is how I learned the phrase “improvise, adapt, and be victorious”.

The context: The year was 1981 or 1982 1979 or 1980. Jimmy Carter was the asshole in office. It was a couple of years after the asshole gave the Panama Canal away, and a year or so after the asshole Peanut Farmer in Chief decided to impose draft registration on all men 18 and over. Asshole.

The scene: I was in downtown Akron, Ohio, my hometown. There was a man holding a sign that read “Don’t Register for the Draft”. He was a few years older than me, light brown curly hair, wearing a red checkered shirt. He wasn't part of a group or anything, just a one man protest.

He was being harangued by this one woman. She was right in his face, in an emotional state somewhere past furious, past apoplectic, and bordering on homicidal. The man with the sign stood there, perfectly calm. It was irresistible force vs immovable object, and it was the best show of restraint I have ever seen!

The lady saw me. I don’t remember exactly what she did next, but she walked away.

The man and I started talking. I had already made up my mind not to register. I was having trouble finding the words explaining this decision. It would be years before I would phrase it as: “because I’m a free man, and I intend to stay free.”

I asked him “what can be done?” He replied: “all we can do is improvise, adapt, and be victorious.” I remember thinking that that was a strange phrase, but didn't inquire.

I sometimes wonder whatever happened to the man with the sign. Did he survive? Yes, I’m sure of it. Did he survive intact? No: none of us did. The treatment we all got was, and continues to be, quite rough. 

Getting through all that will leave one with enough anger, enough rage, to last a lifetime. And, enough pride for 10 lifetimes. Exactly the ingredients needed to overcome and to be victorious.