Comment by devwastaken
7 years ago
>corporate terrorism
Unless they're bombing buildings the word you're looking for is extortion, not terrorism.
Striking has changed a good amount of business's in the history of the U.S . public outcry and worker cooperation is the halmark of workers rights.
The reason protest is required is because the company will not change without a better force. 'asking nicely' doesn't go anywhere when the bottom line is money and image.
Employee collaboration for workers rights does not automatically mean they're against the company. They're against parts of it's operations, but still have wants to do their work. That's, again, been all apart of the last 100 years of workers rights. You should perhaps look into how companies can possibly stay afloat even when there's unions. Not that I agree with unions typically, but if there can be no trust and workers just dont care about the company then it should all fail.
>Unless they're bombing buildings the word you're looking for is extortion, not terrorism.
You don't have to blow up a building to be a terrorist. You don't have to carry out an act of violence, or even suggest one, to be a terrorist. Organizing a walk out is intimidation,
ter·ror·ism /ˈterəˌrizəm/ noun the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
You are misreading the “violence and intimidation” in that definition as if it were “violence or intimidation”; it actually contradicts rather than supports your claim.
I cited one defintion, here's one for you from Merriam-Webster
"terorrism: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion"
If you go look at press coverage right now, it looks like there's a minimum of dozens of employees at each of many worldwide locations that have walked out. If you're telling me a company doesn't feel that, doesn't feel a hundred or possibly thousands of employees refusing to work even 1 shift, because they are upset about how something was handled, that that isn't 'the systematic use of terror' to coerce Google to change policy then...
2 replies →
>You don't have to carry out an act of violence, or even suggest one, to be a terrorist
>ter·ror·ism /ˈterəˌrizəm/ noun the unlawful use of violence and intimidation
u srs bruh?