• @[email protected]
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      11
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Yeah, this thought is someone trying to compare apples to oranges.

      Then there’s the throw away comment of how you barely know anyone there, that’s a personal thing. I work for a small company now but I used to work for a hospital with over 2,000 employees, I didn’t know most of them but I knew the 100 or so people I interacted with pretty well and did things outside of work with many of them on more than one occasion.

    • kersplooshA
      link
      9
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      As I walk through the front door of my air-conditioned office building and say hello to the receptionist I can’t help but feel this is just what it was like living under Marcos or Pinochet.

      /s

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        010 months ago

        Plenty of people live comfortable lives under dictatorship, you can compare that office worker to a citizen in Qatar and they’d probably live similar lives materially.

        You could also compare the sweat shop worker for the company that office workers company contracts their manufacturing out to, to the migrant pseudo-slave workers in Qatar.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      610 months ago

      To the level that the corporation has control over your life, yeah. What do you think banana republics are? The more the company can control your life, the more its undemocratic nature becomes apparent. Working for a small company in a competitive market might not look like a company town, but it has the same fundamental structure as one. The main difference is that the small company has to offer a good deal to their employees compared to competitors. If the company is the only hirer in town, then they’ll suddenly not have as much motivation to treat you well. If they control the housing, means of travel, and cops as well, you’re basically enslaved.

    • Bernie EcclestonedOP
      link
      English
      -610 months ago

      The CEO can take away your livelihood at a whim, destroying your future career, and everyone has to tug the forelock.

      Dictatorships are not bad in and of themselves. A benign dictatorship could be the most effective form of governing, there’s just no mechanism to stop them when they stop being benign.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        610 months ago

        And on the flip side a CEO can improve and expand many people’s careers and therefore wealth.

        A dictatorship like Mao Zedong, Mussolini, Hitler, etc can flow all the wealth and power to themselves, oppressing the people under them.

        The point it: You can’t talk about best case scenario of one and not the other. Usually, as it’s human nature, both are going to sequester wealth and power for themselves over the people under them, but a bad dictatorship is leagues worse than a bad company/CEO.

        • Bernie EcclestonedOP
          link
          English
          6
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Yeah, there’s good CEOs and bad ones. But the hierarchical power structure is the same.

          CEOs are like kings of their empire.