Politically-Conservative Web 2.0 Activists

Ft. Hard Knox

July 16th, 2007 at 11:03 pm

Corporate Diversity…Socialism’s Change Agent?

top502.jpgThis is a follow-up to my earlier post, Corporate Diversity…Subverting the Constitution? In response to that post, a reader correctly pointed out that corporations do, indeed, have a right to limit internet use on company servers during company time to company business. Indeed, employers have many legitimate reasons for doing so, including labor efficiency and network security. However, while the reader was correct in this assertion, I believe he was incorrect in explaining that the companies have this right because of “individual property rights.”

Yes, I do believe in individual property rights. However, the American corporation is not an individual. It is a government-sanctioned entity (corporations have federal and state tax benefits and legal protections not afforded to individuals).

Here is a sobering quote by Abe Lincoln:

I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. –U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864 (letter to Col. William F. Elkins) Ref: The Lincoln Encyclopedia, Archer H. Shaw (Macmillan,
1950, NY)

An important aspect of Socialism is the reprogramming of society - a transition from capitalism and to communism. In the words of Vladimir Lenin:

The expression ‘the state withers away’ is very well-chosen, for it indicates both the gradual and the spontaneous nature of the process. Only habit can, and undoubtedly will, have such an effect; for we see around us on millions of occasions how readily people become accustomed to observing the necessary rules of social intercourse when there is no exploitation, when there is nothing that arouses indignation, evokes protest and revolt, and creates the need for suppression.

Here are some ways (other than the afore-mentioned selective enforcement of internet usage) that this reprogramming is happening in corporate life, especially for those companies that are striving for commendations for being “diverse.”

  • Use of employee restrooms: One of the main focuses in the last few years for Diversity Inc. is benefits for GLBT people. The use of company restrooms is an issue in many of these more diverse companies. A company which is trying to get to the top of the Diversity, Inc. list not only has to provide insurance for partners of homosexual and lesbian couples but may also take GLBT accommodation a step further by making special allowances for transvestite and transgender people. This either involves letting employees use whichever bathroom they please, or simply having unisex restroom. Employees who don’t like this and complain are disciplined under “sexual harassment” policies, mandated by the new diversity ethics. (Here’s an example of a discussion on that issue.)
  • This new code of diversity ethics is affirmative action on steroids. The major corporate conglomerates are bragging about employee hiring and retention rates of minority rates of 30, 40, 50%…this is not proportional to the population in very many areas of our country, and is far above the requirements of affirmative action.
  • Pressure on Families: Employees, particularly management employees of these organizations are required to participate in “diversity training.” (See #33 on DiversityInc’s list: http://www.diversityinc.com/public/1838.cfm Employees who have attended these training sessions sometimes refer to them as “reprogramming” and “brainwashing.” They are required to not only “live and let live,” in terms of alternate lifestyles, but actually promote homosexuality and other GLBT-agenda issues. Some also have family events, in which employees who have children are strongly encouraged to teach these new “values” to their children by having the children participate in coloring contests showing what diversity means to them.
  • Pressure on Vendors: The major corporations that want diversity bragging rights are not only scrutinized for their internal practices…they are evaluated based on the diversity practices of their vendors, as well. So, if you work for a smaller business that is not fully assimilated in to this “Borg” of political correctness, you may find it harder and harder to get contracts with these larger, more “diverse,” companies.

Greater public awareness is needed, so that the employees, customers, vendors and communities affected by these corporations understand the political-correctness agenda that is now being forced upon them through this corporate diversity program.

Once individuals become aware of this specific attempt to subvert free speech, they will come up with a number of solutions that will be effective in fighting it, such as voting with their feet, exposing the agenda for what it is (socialism), and standing up to the corporate bullies just like individuals, communities, and small-business people have been successfully doing for years.

This is very important. If we, as individuals and private citizens who value individual liberty, choose to ignore the fact that the most powerful economic entities in our society are being hijacked by socialists/progressives who are using corporate economic power and social influence to promote their agendas, then we are foolishly giving up the freedoms that others have fought so hard to win and preserve for us.

Also see:

6
  • 1

    There is a good point in all of this, and it brings up an age old question. Does the first amendment apply on private property? An employer generally can set rules for speech and conduct and an employee cannot claim that they can break those rules in the name of “first amendment rights.” On the other hand, that same company can claim first amendment rights in it’s own speech or conduct. It’s an interesting double standard.

    However, where it really gets interesting is when you take into consideration the fact that the government can reach in and control speech and conduct in a company through nondiscrimination laws, which makes you wonder just how much control a company actually has on its own property when it comes to speech. In theory, they should have the final say as to what happens on their property. However in practice it is not so simple.

    The big question then becomes where does this control actually end? Can nondiscrimination laws interfere with the company’s business where free speech ordinarily would be protected? Looking at the prevailing example, if a Christian bookstore expressed anti-gay sentiment, could a gay employee claim discrimination and legally go after them, or does the shop’s right to free speech prevail.

    In simpler times, that answer would be very clear, but in this day and age of ridiculous nondiscrimination laws, it’s hard to say for sure who would win.

    arclightzero on November 16th, 2007
  • 2

    [...] What am I talking about? I recently did a two-part series on Corporate Diversity programs. (See Corporate Diversity…Subverting the Constitution? and Corporate Diversity…Socialism’s Change Agent? [...]

  • 3

    [...] Corporate Diversity…Socialism’s Change Agent? [...]

  • 4

    [...] Corporate Diversity…Socialism’s Change Agent? [...]

  • 5

    [...] corporation with an international bent toward subverting the U.S. Constitution and acting as socialism’s change agent. Don’t believe it? Check out its “Helping Society” page, outlining its [...]

  • 6

    [...] corporation with an international bent toward subverting the U.S. Constitution and acting as socialism’s change agent. Don’t believe it? Check out its “Helping Society” page, outlining its “diversity” and [...]

 

RSS feed for comments on this post | TrackBack URI

  •  

    boycottAPmini

     


     

     

    Who are the FHK Collaborators**?

     

     

  • Popular on FHK

    Web 2.0 Info

    How to talk to a "truther," if you must.

    Right Videos

    WWF Facebook Group

    FHK on YouTube

    Web 2.0 Wiki


    TXPoet's 'Ghost Ranger' on BTR

    Thursdays, 10PM (CST)

     


     

    ...also watch for:

    The WebWarriors of Ft. Hard Knox (WWF) will be offering a series of Web2.0 workshops online.

     

    Update 06/24/08: Survey #2 Results

     

  • FHK Blog Honor Roll

     

    Where's the Blogroll?!

     

    Obama: America's Biggest Mistake Waiting to Be Made

    Understanding "the American Jewish" vote is a subject that simply makes me crazy. I understand that as families, and groups of peoples, we tend to vote as did those we grew up with, conversed often with, loved and respected...(Maggie's Notebook)

     

    An Interview With Kathleen Parker, Author Of "Save The Males"

    John: Now, the average left-wing feminist response to your book is probably akin to, "Ah, men have the advantage in every way. Why would anyone need to 'save the males?'" What would you say to that? Kathleen: You're exactly right. I get a lot of that and what they point out generally is that men head most of the corporations and men dominate in the Congress. While that is statistically true, what I try to do in Save the Males is show where our current trends are leading...(Right Wing News)

     

     

    I Demand...

    I demand the government make certain I have a roof over my head every day of my life, even if I have done nothing personally to earn it. I demand the government make certain I always have food to eat, even if I have sat on my ass and done nothing for it...I am today's youth...Are you listening? (Kenders' Musings)

     

     

    Blog Honor Roll Archive

     


     

    rss1.jpg
    technorati

     

  • Sponsor* FHK

     

     

     

     


     

    x-click-butcc-donate1.gif

     


     

     

     


    *The opinions of our collaborators, sponsors and guest authors, expressed on FHK or elsewhere on the web, do not necessarily reflect the opinion of FHK. We appreciate, however, their contributions and widely-varying perspectives on an impressive variety of topics.