The government in 1700 didn’t have as strong of a grasp on the military as it does now. And the police kind of didn’t exist in this time. The biggest inventions of the 20th century are mass surveillance, repression, and propaganda. An armed force being able to go from one side of the country to the other in a few hours is also a strength for government stability.
I know plenty of small businesses. I know none that keep to one person and aren’t disguised employees.
But then, if there are two persons in your business, who’s the boss? And if there’s none, congrats, it’s a cooperative!
Employment is something workers won in the early 20th century. Ask yourself why they fought for it maybe. Then come back with your arrogance.
Small businesses grow, that’s how capitalism works. When OP talks about empowering individuals, that’s liberal ideology. When talking about how self-employment is better for society, that’s liberal ideology.
Wrong. A company can be a cooperative or state owned.
Being self employed though means you are the only one to support the risks of your activity and it leaves you a pray from bigger businesses.
But liberal propaganda did its job and you’re probably indoctrinated with individualism and liberalism.
And that’s even worse.
Being self employed means you support all the risks of your activity, without any mutualisation or support from society or partners. That’s a distopia.
The problem with what you’re saying is that either you’re employed without any if the benefits of employment, or you are a capitalist.
In either way you lose.
On the other hand a company can be a cooperative or state owned.
But in the US you hate the state, you are indoctrinated with individualism and you hate socialism. So it’s a lost cause.
Self employment is very much not something you should seek. Self employment means the worker support all the risk. That’s a boon for the capitalists. Why do you think uber and stuff are so successful?
Self-employment is detrimental to people. Because it has the workers support all the risks. It’s not the solution.
What the fuck?! This shit with tiltok is one of the ugliest imperialist shit the USA pulled this century, dropping the rule of trade to the full on empire mode, and you’re talking here about whataboutism?
We have a country literally stealing a company because it’s profitable and can spread influence! And you’re here like “China bad”?
Is this the strategy? Anytime something bad from the US comes up you deflect for it to be about China I guess?
That’s quite ironic coming from the USA! Did the patriot act got amended recently or is this sheer hypocrisy?
deleted by creator
We’re talking about history where mysoginy left a big footprint because it was made by men that incapable of thinking that women could be more than what they were in their time.
Exactly like today. You’re asking why it matters whether it was a man or a woman, yet this whole conversation sparked because someone said that it could be a woman.
That’s conservatism for you.
you talked about enemity first, remember? you have this view of a fight, and that anyone who dare say that a woman did something and not a man, is fighting men.
You have a very defensive position. Which means you feal attacked. You say it directly when you talk about “enemy”.
You are the problem my friend. Your first comment is aa problem. And the support it receives is concerning and scary.
You are ignorant of recent history then.
Men did do their best to segregate women in the 18th and 19th century. And they succeeded. Even in the language.
Women fighting for women to be recognized in history is an important fight for women to be respected and recognized for their doing, because even now they aren’t.
And I’m not saying it’s an all men problem. It’s a society problem.
Seeing the reactions in this thread, it does seem that a lot of men are indeed enemies of women. Why would it be so hot otherwise to discuss this?
I don’t know about English, but in French in the 19th century men did enforce the use of homme (men) instead of humain (human) in the déclaration des droits de l’homme et du citoyen, and in the language, because they did want to segregate women. It was a purposeful and deliberate decision.
I am convinced it’s exactly the same in English.
So you’re arguing that people would have more use to write moon cycles than women cycles? And you talk about bigotry?!
When you remove all financial support from people who need it to survive, they instantly are poor, it doesn’t take years.
But I’m sure it’s a hard to swallow pill for liberals.
Meanwhile middle age fantasy had black knights and it was fine.
Racists are gonna be racists is all there is.