- McJobs and Workers -

Revolution is no excuse for poor etiquette

Posted by: Flint Jones ( IWW, USA ) on September 02, 1998 at 21:02:49:

In Reply to: Knock what off? The working class? posted by Quincunx on September 02, 1998 at 10:05:30:

QX: Geez! And I'm supposed to just let pro-McD's call down anybody or organization who refueses to be co-opted and be diplomatic about it just in case we get on prime-time television? Time to clue into the techniques of the unionbusters. Don't you think? they'll say the IWW is really rude and everybody'll be convinced. Maybe even a Wobbly or two.

Flint: You are being rude, and you're not listening. You seem to be more focused on winning all arguements, than building a union. Everyone who you've criticized so far has mentioned that they aren't anti-union. Everyone you've been attacking have only said what they liked about McDonald's. There are things you can like about McDonald's. There is a time in a place of harsh words. Listen, if you want to discuss it, email me. It is quite possible to be civil and not be co-opted. I don't suger coat my ideology at all. I don't pretend to be after anything but Abolishing the Wage System. I just don't treat people like morons because they don't agree with me and haven't read everything I have read. Your not winning anyone to the cause when you call them a Sychophant. If they are, you aren't going to convince them, if they aren't... you just insulted them.

The highest type of human society in the existing social order is found in the parlor. In the elegant and refined reunions of the aristocratic classes there is none of the impertinent interference of legislation. The Individuality of each is fully admitted. Intercourse, therefore, is perfectly free. Conversation is continuous, brilliant, and varied. Groups are formed according to attraction. They are continuously broken up, and re-formed through the operation of the same subtile and all-pervading influence. Mutual deference pervades all classes, and the most perfect harmony, ever yet attained, in complex human relations,
prevails under precisely those circumstances which Legislators and Statesmen dread as the conditions of inevitable anarchy and confusion. If there are laws of etiquette at all, they are mere suggestions of principles admitted into and judged of for himself or herself, by each individual mind.

Is it conceivable that in all the future progress of humanity, with all the innumerable elements of development which the present age is unfolding, society generally, and in all its relations, will not attain as high a grade of perfection as certain portions of society, in certain special relations, have already attained?

Suppose the intercourse of the parlor to be regulated by specific legislation. Let the time which each gentleman shall be allowed to speak to each lady be fixed by law; the position in which they should sit or stand be precisely regulated; the subjects which they shall be allowed to speak of, and the tone of voice and accompanying gestures with which each may be treated, carefully defined, all under pretext of preventing disorder and encroachment upon each other's privileges and rights, then can any thing be conceived better calculated or more certain to convert social intercourse into intolerable slavery and
hopeless confusion?

--S. Pearl Andrews The Science of Society


Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup