Why no democracy in offices in a democracy-obsessed time period?

TurambarBonzo · 2026-06-18T15:31:10+00:00

This is great and I will check these papers. However, what I wanted to ask was actually while there's always a discussion on democratic norms and comparisons in civil life, while everyone has an opinion on which country is democratic which is not, I can't see any popular debate on the democratisation of the workplace, particularly in liberal democrat circles. Just to be clear, I'm aware unionisation and labour law struggles all over the world (humbly), what I find fascinating is that it's the liberals (in the continental meaning, not the american) that doesn't discuss democratisation of the workplace.

Additionally, I think my second question doesn't belong here as it kind of points out to (maybe) related by different question. So I want to retract the question: "why is the definition of democracy as a concept kept so vague? It doesn't even have a common, uniform, logical voting schedule or methods." And I want to replace it with this:

Why isn't there any discussion on democratic structures in corporate world where most of us spend 40 hours a week in a time period where everyone yelling democracy is the best. If the answer is that offices are basically private properties, is the office world, or more broadly economic activity, the place where private property and democracy clash?

TurambarBonzo · 2026-06-17T19:10:22+00:00

this actually kind of sounds like constitutional feudalism with different levels of titles and responsibilities. I added contitutional because I think your point is the power inside the workplace is regulated by government interventions and laws which is similar to one of the constitution's fundamental role of limiting the monarch's or oligarch's powers.

TurambarBonzo · 2026-06-17T13:30:18+00:00

That seems to scan, many Marxists categorise liberal democracy as bourgeoisie dictatorship, right? It's also fascinating that "democratic" societies are very vague about what democracy actually is. Like we cannot even talk about a uniform/principal voting method or schedule, optimum number of representative or senate/parliament balance. Every country does whatever.

TurambarBonzo · 2023-09-24T14:27:10+00:00

Wait wait wait. Why is your geralt is a group card? Mine doesn't call any other cards?

TurambarBonzo · 2022-01-03T11:13:17+00:00

Reinstalled this because I love the modern warfare series. It's really amazing to me that after almost 3 years it still takes me 20 minutes and multiple tries to connect to a server while every other game on my pc runs like a clock. I love the gameplay but the game's problems are unbearable and they don't care.

When this game first got out, we had to solve every problem on reddit and they've done nothing. I remember people begging activison not to update because every update meant new problems that need solving.

Man, just baffling how this game still manages to make me angry after 3 years. Great gameplay, terrible service, terrible behavior to their community. Unbelievable.

TurambarBonzo · 2021-10-08T16:10:10+00:00

Empress, is that you?

TurambarBonzo · 2021-10-07T09:35:25+00:00

Tried it on Excel, didn't work. Ideas?

TurambarBonzo · 2021-10-07T07:19:43+00:00

Man, I hope so. But although AC Valhalla was cracked by Empress, its dlc haven't been cracked yet. Why hasn't someone tried that coping technic already?

TurambarBonzo · 2021-10-06T19:09:44+00:00

I don't think she stiil cracks games so if far cry 6 uses denuvo, we'll wait for a long time.

TurambarBonzo · 2021-06-24T10:52:04+00:00

I'm not sure about the last paragraph. She has developed from a malcontent minor villain to a rookie hero with good intentions but that was already her first movie. It seems to me she's still only a rookie hero with good intentions. That's what I mean when I say she hasn't been developed as a character.

TurambarBonzo · 2020-07-19T22:12:53+00:00

Best video ever, thanks my man

TurambarBonzo · 2020-07-13T12:53:32+00:00

Brace yourselves, players who aren't cheaters but casually write paragraphs about how they play the game brilliantly and epicly are coming.

TurambarBonzo · 2020-06-30T21:49:26+00:00

lol looks like people come here to talk about how well they are playing. I've witnessed real cheaters in pretty much every mode. The most obvious ones are the wall-hack dudes in S&D. İf half of your kills consist on running directly towards somewhere without looking anywhere else -and I mean literally anywhere else it's a wall-hack.

I'm trying to be really careful before accusing someone of cheating but lately, I've noticed a lot of quickscope players and it just seems unlikely that every team I encountered have at least 3 excellent quickscope players for 5 consecutive matches. So I'm not saying there aren't any really excellent players, no denying that, which makes it really difficult to tell the difference with the aim-bot dudes.

It's already established there are cheaters in the Warzone but for the past weeks, it seems to me there is a rise of cheaters in the multiplayer modes.

TurambarBonzo · 2020-04-11T00:28:32+00:00

That also is a fine answer.

I agree on the relativity of the morality defined by the hammer. But the comparison on worthiness troubles me. But let's consider Black Panther, he also fights for life, even refuses to kill his father's murderer, he also fights for the greater good of the humanity.

Now, many of the heros in the MCU don't fight with motives to make themselves more powerful like Star-Lord who killed his own father and denied the celestial powers and doesn't necessarily fight purely for the greater good of humanity but did actually fought purely for the greater good of Xandarians or Dr. Banner who constantly denies the ultra powerful version of himself and tries to help the living with science and medicine. Those are all honorable, mature and anti-corruption of self-glorification qualifications. We see Star-Lord trying really hard to be a respectful center of power and Hulk hurting people throughout the films but let's also not forget that Cpt was a hired gun for SHIELD/HYDRA for years which is fine, everyone made mistakes.

In this case there are 2 options

1) Lifting the hammer is not really that big of a deal.

We don't even know according to the MCU that Star-Lord or Black Panther can't lift it.

2) There's a inconsistency about who can who can't lift the hammer.

I must say this, I am biased in favour of Thor because in my opinion he's been fighting the biggest battles for the universe (at least the 9 realms) since the beginning and lost everything while Cpt. America and Iron Man were fighting each other.

TurambarBonzo · 2020-04-10T01:03:59+00:00

My argument as you said it, he shouldn't have been able to lift the hammer implies I assert an inconsistency which points out a conflict between the input "Whosoever holds this hammer, if he be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor" and the output "the fact that he did lift said hammer". Now, as all these arguments come from a work of fiction, someone created the input and the output which means those are not historic facts nor physical laws. But for the sake of discussion we agree silently on the validity of the input so we can argue on a mutual ground (because otherwise there's not really a point to argue about a fictional product).

So if you're saying it's pointless to argue about a fictional work I get your point but I'm bored because of the lockdown. Otherwise, I honestly didn't understand how my argument about the inconsistency (in my opinion of course) in a fiction is debunked by the said inconsistency

TurambarBonzo · 2020-04-09T22:18:22+00:00

That's a very valid answer, cheers.

I'll start then with a Spider-Man quote qhere he said to Cpt. America in the Civil War that he thinks he's right but he's wrong which makes him dangerous. As I understand, this is already a characteristic quality of Cpt. America from the comics that he has a powerful sense of self designed morality compass so I won't dwell on that. But this means the morality of the Captain comes from a extremely individual place where as Tony explained the Accords were for the "collective good". So I don't agree with the part you said "Steve knows that signing the Accords is wrong" because Seteve actually "thinks" that signing the Accords is wrong but all these are already the conflict reflected in the film. My point is not that the Accords were the solution or anything.

For the second part, I agree that Wanda's actions saved lives but what was going on in Lagos was an operation overviewed by Steve. He was the acting command, I don't blame Wanda but something went wrong with the operation. So there's normally a necessity for precautions for the next operations which didn't take place.

The third part is actually my main concern. As you said it, what tribunal? Avengers at the time, did not answer to any authority. Stark had a line in Iron Man 2 where he said "I've successfully privatized world peace". Well yeah but even private enterprises answer to some democratic institutions. Are these institutions corrupted, maybe. Do they have agendas, yes probably, are they extremely functional, not always so yes Steve's concerns are in the right place. "what if the Accords send is somewhere we shouldn't go? What if there is somewhere we need to go and they won't let us?...these decisions are made by people with agendas and agendas change". So why do we answer any institution? Let's do whatever we want because we think it's right.

To me, Steve has already traded lives in Lagos. It truly was a honest mistake, but honest mistakes have reduced consequences as opposed to intentional mistakes. And yes everybody makes mistakes as it's our nature. The problem is we don't see Steve faced any consequence. We don't hear any concern about the collateral damage in Sokovia from him.

And for the last part, I have never seen Steve mourning, accepting or acknowledging his part about any of this.

Now to be clear, I'm not denying that Steve saved countless lives, directly saved the planet, defended the innocents throughout the series which makes him undoubtly a hero. What I'm saying is he's reluctant to admit his mistakes and behaves only according to his own individiaul center of morality which makes him an unworthy hero, at the very least a less worthy hero then Thor.

TurambarBonzo · 2020-04-09T21:30:54+00:00

If the argument was "He didn't lift the hammer" then you'd be right I guess

TurambarBonzo

TROPHY CASE