In case you don't remember, I'll go over this a bit again. The entirety of HR, Advertising, and PR is purely Leftist. There is no part of HR which is right-wing, centrist, Liberal, or even center-Left. All 3 industries are entirely captured. For the past 5-10 years, the entire HR industry, without exception, states explicitly that racial, ethnic, religious, ability, neurological, and sexual diversity are the only ways for these companies to make money. They have plethora of "studies" on it. Every single expert in the field will tell you the same thing: diversity = profit.
Then on top of that, they say that Zoomers are 100% Leftist, and vote very explicitly around politics. If you want any Zoomer to buy any product, it better have an inclusivity statement feature on the box, or you might as well not sell it.
Then, on top of that, the people at the top of these PR, Ad, & HR institutions are DIE zealots, themselves. They will actively seek to seize control of the company and centralizing all marketing, recruiting, and retention opportunities to their individual departments with no oversight or quantitative measurements. They will not accept outside input from leadership or other departments, especially regarding compensation and recruitment. They will not tell people why or if a marketing program is working; just whether or not they need more money or a lot more money. They will not allow for other departments (like IT, accounting, legal, etc) to make retention or recruiting decisions on their own. Those departments will never see potential hires without HR giving a DIE color swatch test first. Those departments will not be allowed to promote without HR deciding whether or not the equity balance of the department is jeaporidized by that promotion. Those departments will not be allowed to give raises before HR decides to close the "pay gap". Those departments will not be able to fire people before HR, and especially DIE, run consoling session after consoling session, advocate a dozen trainings, and basically run interference against all of the worst employees so long as those employees are of the correct demographic make-up. Those departments might suddenly find that an incorrect demographic employee who violates a rule might start being aggressively consoled before that department's leadership takes any steps at handling the situation in-house.
Then on top of that, they know to use activist institutions externally to their advantage. PR and Advertising used Twitter to cultivate bots and journalists to heavily popularize anything DIE, and condemn anything not DIE. If HR wants to justify seizing all control of compensation, pay disputes are leaked to the press, a hit piece is manufactured on the media, 1000 Leftists on Twitter screech, and a DIE organization offers to help mediate the dispute (in favor of HR having full control). Not only do you get 'hate-bombed' on social media if you step out of line, but if you walk the line: you will get 'love-bombed' for your "brave" stances, and be rewarded with positive attention.
Then, on top of that, are the DIE mandates on loans. By now, most of you would have already heard of ESG scores, and realized that these are a fantastic way for the largest banks on Earth to guarantee political loyalty; but each individual loan or grant also has their own sub-requirements in order to receive money or credit to the tune of tens of thousands to millions of dollars.
Oh, and I almost forgot. These HR departments regularly do ideological excursions for senior leadership. They literally target senior leadership and send them on a "Diversity Training Session" to extremely wealthy and luxurious accommodations where they begin grooming them on Leftist ideology, and make book requirements.
So when these zealots tell corporations that DIE is the only way to make money going forward; these corporate leaders absolutely believe them because there is not a single dissenting voice that they are aware of.
Working in HR for a time (not anymore, thankfully), I can assure you, right-wingers do exist in it.
And they want diversity! Because those eye-gougingly bad diversity initiatives that everyone hates? They reduce employee cohesion, lower employee faith in each-other, and hinder cooperation. This means less unionization, weaker unions if they do form, with less bargaining power. And without unions, it leads to less talking about their wages and less negotiating for higher salaries, complete with a built-in excuse to not give raises or better salaries: Sorry, but our diversity quotas say we can't give you that raise or it throws them out of whack.
There are numerous studies on it. It's very reliable. Fastest way to break employee cooperation is to yell out lefty words at them, ideally from someone who seems like they should be their ally.
Some of those billion dollar companies are billion dollar companies because they are protected from bad decisions by political rackets, not because they are well run.
Just how many people did Bernie Madoff swindle again?
Some of those billion dollar companies are billion dollar companies because they are protected from bad decisions by political rackets, not because they are well run.
And has that happened in either case?
Quite the contrary; Budweiser is already reversing this decision and distancing themselves.
But there's no hope for people like you so keep doubling down to save face on something so simple that anyone with half a brain can see it.
Quite the contrary; Budweiser is already reversing this decision and distancing themselves.
Is this not at odds with the implication that billion dollar companies are so smart and wouldn't make the wrong decision? Or is the idea that all of this, including them backing down, is part of their grand plan?
That happens in every case. That's the purpose of the regulation. These billion dollar companies are protected by bad decisions by the political racket. The issue is that the racket is weak. Not that Budweiser is more competent than all the false data they are fed.
Not sure where the aggression is coming from (you and u/Gizortnik have some kind of beef?) but there's plenty of stupid people in the business world. What he said obviously applies to much of the corporate rot today. It's not even at odds with the spirit of this post, the only thing at question is the amount of agency we assign to marketing/HR vs. other executives.
You have to remember these are managers we are talking about. The people running these old corporations aren't self-made billionaires like Lindell or Trump - who had "a small loan of a million dollars". They got where they are by being skilled at company politics (including brown-nosing and virtue signaling) and nepotism. They usually defer to other "experts" for decisions. From my own experience, highly placed professionals in any field are typical NPCs and very myopic. They'll talk about specific technical topics at a level that makes you think they must have a super high IQ, but then turn into a midwit and claim "oh that's above my pay grade" or rattle off some liberal platitude they don't really believe when any social or political topic is broached. I can easily imagine the other execs at Bud deferring to the "expertise" of their marketing bitch-whore who probably said all the right things in meetings. They have literally zero pulse on what normal people like or want except for what she tells them.
I just don't see why someone would think that billionaires can be morons.
As much as I hate the WEF, they aren't in direct control over most things. They just have a financial and influence racket, and most of their time they are trying to react to sudden pressures or events. Also, their taste in music is terrible. Most of the stuff that actually happens at Davos is fart-huffing. They're still a dangerous cabal, but they are typically missing shit that many of us would find obvious due to their lack of exposure or prioritization of information.
You have to remember these are managers we are talking about. The people running these old corporations aren't self-made billionaires like Lindell or Trump - who had "a small loan of a million dollars". They got where they are by being skilled at company politics (including brown-nosing and virtue signaling) and nepotism.
Yes, absolutely. If we were run by Vanderbilt, Rockefeller, or JP Morgan alive and well; we'd be actually in pretty good shape (we just wouldn't be free). It's one of my annoyances with Tucker Carlson: he's an industrialist. He wants a kind of industrialist oligarchy to run the country in a Chicago-School style economic way. I don't blame people for thinking that; that's a thousand times better than what we have; but none of those people are in positions of power.
The families of those same men are basically just monetary vehicles for other organizations. Those families are just husks of the men who made them.
What we have in front of us is actually far more horrifying than a secret cabal of dangerous and ruthless men enacting a scheme: we actually just have a hundred different factions of bureaucrats fighting among themselves for dominance of their own agenda; while their only unifying principle is their hatred of dissenters and people outside their racket. Some factions have larger paymasters, and some do not, but that only makes the situation more chaotic and more untenable.
The terrifying reality is that we think we here voices in the cockpit planning on crashing the plane. So, we kick the door open, only to realize that the cockpit is empty. There is no one in charge at all. The voice we heard is merely the GPWS alarm blaring: "TERRAIN! TERRAIN! PULL UP! PULL UP!"
Then, on top of that, are the DIE mandates on loans. By now, most of you would have already heard of ESG scores, and realized that these are a fantastic way for the largest banks on Earth to guarantee political loyalty; but each individual loan or grant also has their own sub-requirements in order to receive money or credit to the tune of tens of thousands to millions of dollars.
I posted about these. Nobody gave a shit.
You're right. Captured from the bottom by female-dominated admin roles and from the top by feminist-backed banking agendas.
I'm afraid the redditor is 100% correct.
In case you don't remember, I'll go over this a bit again. The entirety of HR, Advertising, and PR is purely Leftist. There is no part of HR which is right-wing, centrist, Liberal, or even center-Left. All 3 industries are entirely captured. For the past 5-10 years, the entire HR industry, without exception, states explicitly that racial, ethnic, religious, ability, neurological, and sexual diversity are the only ways for these companies to make money. They have plethora of "studies" on it. Every single expert in the field will tell you the same thing: diversity = profit.
Then on top of that, they say that Zoomers are 100% Leftist, and vote very explicitly around politics. If you want any Zoomer to buy any product, it better have an inclusivity statement feature on the box, or you might as well not sell it.
Then, on top of that, the people at the top of these PR, Ad, & HR institutions are DIE zealots, themselves. They will actively seek to seize control of the company and centralizing all marketing, recruiting, and retention opportunities to their individual departments with no oversight or quantitative measurements. They will not accept outside input from leadership or other departments, especially regarding compensation and recruitment. They will not tell people why or if a marketing program is working; just whether or not they need more money or a lot more money. They will not allow for other departments (like IT, accounting, legal, etc) to make retention or recruiting decisions on their own. Those departments will never see potential hires without HR giving a DIE color swatch test first. Those departments will not be allowed to promote without HR deciding whether or not the equity balance of the department is jeaporidized by that promotion. Those departments will not be allowed to give raises before HR decides to close the "pay gap". Those departments will not be able to fire people before HR, and especially DIE, run consoling session after consoling session, advocate a dozen trainings, and basically run interference against all of the worst employees so long as those employees are of the correct demographic make-up. Those departments might suddenly find that an incorrect demographic employee who violates a rule might start being aggressively consoled before that department's leadership takes any steps at handling the situation in-house.
Then on top of that, they know to use activist institutions externally to their advantage. PR and Advertising used Twitter to cultivate bots and journalists to heavily popularize anything DIE, and condemn anything not DIE. If HR wants to justify seizing all control of compensation, pay disputes are leaked to the press, a hit piece is manufactured on the media, 1000 Leftists on Twitter screech, and a DIE organization offers to help mediate the dispute (in favor of HR having full control). Not only do you get 'hate-bombed' on social media if you step out of line, but if you walk the line: you will get 'love-bombed' for your "brave" stances, and be rewarded with positive attention.
Then, on top of that, are the DIE mandates on loans. By now, most of you would have already heard of ESG scores, and realized that these are a fantastic way for the largest banks on Earth to guarantee political loyalty; but each individual loan or grant also has their own sub-requirements in order to receive money or credit to the tune of tens of thousands to millions of dollars.
Oh, and I almost forgot. These HR departments regularly do ideological excursions for senior leadership. They literally target senior leadership and send them on a "Diversity Training Session" to extremely wealthy and luxurious accommodations where they begin grooming them on Leftist ideology, and make book requirements.
So when these zealots tell corporations that DIE is the only way to make money going forward; these corporate leaders absolutely believe them because there is not a single dissenting voice that they are aware of.
Working in HR for a time (not anymore, thankfully), I can assure you, right-wingers do exist in it.
And they want diversity! Because those eye-gougingly bad diversity initiatives that everyone hates? They reduce employee cohesion, lower employee faith in each-other, and hinder cooperation. This means less unionization, weaker unions if they do form, with less bargaining power. And without unions, it leads to less talking about their wages and less negotiating for higher salaries, complete with a built-in excuse to not give raises or better salaries: Sorry, but our diversity quotas say we can't give you that raise or it throws them out of whack.
There are numerous studies on it. It's very reliable. Fastest way to break employee cooperation is to yell out lefty words at them, ideally from someone who seems like they should be their ally.
Either the executives running a billion dollar business are stupid or you're stupid.
One of them has to give and it's not them being stupid.
I have bad news for you.
Some of those billion dollar companies are billion dollar companies because they are protected from bad decisions by political rackets, not because they are well run.
Just how many people did Bernie Madoff swindle again?
And has that happened in either case?
Quite the contrary; Budweiser is already reversing this decision and distancing themselves.
But there's no hope for people like you so keep doubling down to save face on something so simple that anyone with half a brain can see it.
Is this not at odds with the implication that billion dollar companies are so smart and wouldn't make the wrong decision? Or is the idea that all of this, including them backing down, is part of their grand plan?
That happens in every case. That's the purpose of the regulation. These billion dollar companies are protected by bad decisions by the political racket. The issue is that the racket is weak. Not that Budweiser is more competent than all the false data they are fed.
https://hbr.org/2016/12/the-scary-truth-about-corporate-survival
Really, the longer a large corporation is in business, the more likely it is to succumb to the Gervais Principle.
The Gervais Principle
Not sure where the aggression is coming from (you and u/Gizortnik have some kind of beef?) but there's plenty of stupid people in the business world. What he said obviously applies to much of the corporate rot today. It's not even at odds with the spirit of this post, the only thing at question is the amount of agency we assign to marketing/HR vs. other executives.
You have to remember these are managers we are talking about. The people running these old corporations aren't self-made billionaires like Lindell or Trump - who had "a small loan of a million dollars". They got where they are by being skilled at company politics (including brown-nosing and virtue signaling) and nepotism. They usually defer to other "experts" for decisions. From my own experience, highly placed professionals in any field are typical NPCs and very myopic. They'll talk about specific technical topics at a level that makes you think they must have a super high IQ, but then turn into a midwit and claim "oh that's above my pay grade" or rattle off some liberal platitude they don't really believe when any social or political topic is broached. I can easily imagine the other execs at Bud deferring to the "expertise" of their marketing bitch-whore who probably said all the right things in meetings. They have literally zero pulse on what normal people like or want except for what she tells them.
I don't recognize OP, so no beef from me.
I just don't see why someone would think that billionaires can be morons.
As much as I hate the WEF, they aren't in direct control over most things. They just have a financial and influence racket, and most of their time they are trying to react to sudden pressures or events. Also, their taste in music is terrible. Most of the stuff that actually happens at Davos is fart-huffing. They're still a dangerous cabal, but they are typically missing shit that many of us would find obvious due to their lack of exposure or prioritization of information.
Yes, absolutely. If we were run by Vanderbilt, Rockefeller, or JP Morgan alive and well; we'd be actually in pretty good shape (we just wouldn't be free). It's one of my annoyances with Tucker Carlson: he's an industrialist. He wants a kind of industrialist oligarchy to run the country in a Chicago-School style economic way. I don't blame people for thinking that; that's a thousand times better than what we have; but none of those people are in positions of power.
The families of those same men are basically just monetary vehicles for other organizations. Those families are just husks of the men who made them.
What we have in front of us is actually far more horrifying than a secret cabal of dangerous and ruthless men enacting a scheme: we actually just have a hundred different factions of bureaucrats fighting among themselves for dominance of their own agenda; while their only unifying principle is their hatred of dissenters and people outside their racket. Some factions have larger paymasters, and some do not, but that only makes the situation more chaotic and more untenable.
The terrifying reality is that we think we here voices in the cockpit planning on crashing the plane. So, we kick the door open, only to realize that the cockpit is empty. There is no one in charge at all. The voice we heard is merely the GPWS alarm blaring: "TERRAIN! TERRAIN! PULL UP! PULL UP!"
I posted about these. Nobody gave a shit.
You're right. Captured from the bottom by female-dominated admin roles and from the top by feminist-backed banking agendas.