When your boss asks you to come in on Saturday, its not an order either. You can say no with all policy backing you.
In many workplaces people say yes despite not wanting to because they know that "cooperation" isn't optional. They aren't asking, they are giving themselves plausible deniability while demanding.
Politicians are managers of the system, they aren't bosses.
Hey you know who is usually the "boss" you report to everyday? Its not the CEO of Burger King, its the fucking manager. I don't even understand how you can type such a statement and think its anything worth saying.
they were clearly more than happy to cooperate with whatever entity asked them to to enact & justify more censorship.
This just in, you can't be ordered to do something you want to do. Apparently the world has bent backwards to change definitions of words just for your sake here.
I know when my own boss orders me to go home when I'm not looking 100%, its certainly not what I wanted to do anyway no sir.
Yes my original exampled used a common occurrence to demonstrate that "cooperation" isn't always given as an option, but as a front to pretend you have that choice. Even if you actively wanted to do so, its still an order. Some people enjoy/want the extra hours while others want to be home with their family. It doesn't magically change from an order because the result is different.
You giving a more specific example requires a specific response, it doesn't make anything I've said wrong in the slightest. But solid attempt at a gotcha, 4/10 would work on Twitter mobs.
The issue is that you're trying to pretend something is an "order" from a "political party" when it's not.
Except it is. They are being told to "review" these, with the clear intent being to "handle it" because they deemed it problematic. The twitter retards being happy to jump when asked how high doesn't change the original intention behind it. An order doesn't require resistance in any form, except whatever world you live in.
When your boss asks you to come in on Saturday, its not an order either. You can say no with all policy backing you.
In many workplaces people say yes despite not wanting to because they know that "cooperation" isn't optional. They aren't asking, they are giving themselves plausible deniability while demanding.
Hey you know who is usually the "boss" you report to everyday? Its not the CEO of Burger King, its the fucking manager. I don't even understand how you can type such a statement and think its anything worth saying.
This just in, you can't be ordered to do something you want to do. Apparently the world has bent backwards to change definitions of words just for your sake here.
I know when my own boss orders me to go home when I'm not looking 100%, its certainly not what I wanted to do anyway no sir.
Yes my original exampled used a common occurrence to demonstrate that "cooperation" isn't always given as an option, but as a front to pretend you have that choice. Even if you actively wanted to do so, its still an order. Some people enjoy/want the extra hours while others want to be home with their family. It doesn't magically change from an order because the result is different.
You giving a more specific example requires a specific response, it doesn't make anything I've said wrong in the slightest. But solid attempt at a gotcha, 4/10 would work on Twitter mobs.
Except it is. They are being told to "review" these, with the clear intent being to "handle it" because they deemed it problematic. The twitter retards being happy to jump when asked how high doesn't change the original intention behind it. An order doesn't require resistance in any form, except whatever world you live in.