Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

n_n OP wrote (edited )

they seem to be saying is that self-employed aren't included in this grouping

I know, I can read you know.

You can think all business owners deserve to be robbed

When did I INCLUDED this groups and when did I SAY that all business owners deserve to be robbed? I already said in the whole fucking discussion that I didn't talk about that so you can't claim ignorance. For some reason they think that I'm talking about all business owners when I single out a very specific kind of business owners. I already explain myself of what I was talking about and they keep bringing that. We know that they are not included so whats' the problem? What they keep bringing that?

largely consists of white millionaires with dozens of employees.

I understand that they are included but on what are you basing that are a majority? Because it is stated that they are a minority in the sources that I linked. The self employed are listed as other group in the census. So I don't understand what they have to do with the "mom and pop micro businesses" who are employers.

think this misunderstanding came about because English isn't your first language

I understand English very well. I don't have any "inability" to understand English. My English is not limited to read, it's limited to write. Ableism is discrimination against people with disabilities or who are perceived to have disabilities. A disability is any condition that makes it more difficult for a person to do certain activities or interact with the world around them. Talking about my perceived "inability" to understand is very ableist. So I request that you do something about it and stop making apology fo that.

It is, by and large, not talking about "mom and pop" micro businesses.

My point is that "small business" as a term includes very large "small" businesses, "mom and pop" shops, and self employed people. So we're both talking about self employed people (maybe you don't understand your own reference table?).

I said that I'm not talking about self employed people so what they keep saying that we are talking about self employed people? First they try to brush off the blame on mom and pop business, then they deflect the conversation toward the self employees. I was very clear of what I was talking about. So why they keep bringing that? Can you explain me?

−4

ziq admin wrote (edited )

I know, I can read you know.

I know you can read but you asked me to get involved so I read your convo with them 20 times to try and understand what the problem was and came to the conclusion that they didn't say anything that would necessitate admin involvement.

When did I INCLUDED this groups and when did I SAY that all business owners deserve to be robbed?

Here: "My point is ROB AND BURN THE MOM AND POP BUSINESSES."

They had just made the point that self-employed hairdressers in their community are also small businesses, that a lot of PoC are self employed and unlicensed (taking money under the table) and also qualify as small businesses, and you responded by saying "rob and burn" them in all-caps.

Again, my instinct is this is a misunderstanding because English isn't your first language. I don't know if you actually want to rob and burn black women who happen to be self-employed hairdressers ("the mom and pop shops" in your conversation), but you did say it. Maybe you don't understand what they mean by "mom and pop shops", or maybe you do, but I'm not making any judgement against you, I'm simply trying to mediate.

I understand that they are included but on what are you basing that are a majority? Because it is stated that they are a minority in the sources that I linked.

I'm not looking at any external sources, just reading the conversation that exists on raddle between the 2 of you. When I said "largely consists" I didn't mean a majority, just stating that from my own experience, a large number of small businesses have up to 50 employees and the owners are millionaires. It's not for me to decide which of you has better sources, or to take a side in your debate, all I'm here to do is decide if there is a ToS violation that I need to address.

I understand English very well. I don't have any "inability" to understand English. My English is not limited to read, it's limited to write.

My mistake.

Ableism is discrimination against people with disabilities or who are perceived to have disabilities. A disability is any condition that makes it more difficult for a person to do certain activities or interact with the world around them. Talking about my perceived "inability" to understand is very ableist. So I request that you do something about it and stop making apology fo that.

I don't think they've said anything that would require me to take any action. If another admin disagrees, they're welcome to chime in. They were being rude but I don't think they were being wilfully oppressive. "Maybe you don't understand" isn't an ableist statement, especially when said to an anonymous block of text on the internet. There's no way they could know you're disabled when they said that.

When they said "your inability to understand the thing you're using to frame your argument" I believe they mean your attack on "mom and pop stores", since you had just quoted this in order to justify opposing them:

A small, independent, usually family-owned, controlled, and operated business that has a minimum amount of employees, has only a small amount of business volume, and is typically not franchised, therefore open for business only in a single location.

This definition you give of mom and pop stores would include the self-employed black hairdressers they used to make their argument. Including people with zero employees.

5

n_n OP wrote (edited )

They had just made the point that self-employed hairdressers in their community are also small businesses

Yes they did, they also made the point that they are not the same group than the mom and pop business. Read it again:

My point is that "small business" as a term includes very large "small" businesses, "mom and pop" shops, and self employed people.

So that argument can't hold up. They said, the part that I specifically contested, that the site was "not talking about "mom and pop" micro businesses."

This definition you give of mom and pop stores would include the self-employed black hairdressers they used to make their argument. Including people with zero employees.

Minimum amount of employees is at least 1, to include the zero employees it should be "with a minimum or none employees". But let's say that we interpreted that part differently, now DO YOU THINK that I'm talking about those who are non-employers like black women hairdresser and anarchist bookfairs when I said (before the"rob and burn" in all-caps) "The vast majority (88 percent) of small businesses employer firms have fewer than 20 employees and nearly 40 percent of all enterprises have under $100k in revenue." and the "petit bourgousie", and then clarify that I wasn't talking about the self employees. Can you explain me how the fuck can you interpret that I'm talking about the non-employer when I said that and why they keep talking about that? They said that the statistics don't include them so what is the problem anyway? They stated that they are not the mom and pop business so even if we put them in the statistics the number among the employers that support Trump won't going to change, their blame in perpetuating this oppressive circle is not washing away by accounting the non-employers that were left out. I'm sure that if their were included the total percent of Trump supporters will be less but as I said the number of those that I singled out in the employer group would be the same. So why they keep bringing that up? How the fuck do you interpret that I'm talking about PoC hairdresser and anarchist bookfairs when I was saying and clarifying constantly all that?

−5

n_n OP wrote (edited )

"Maybe you don't understand" isn't an ableist statement

"your inability to understand" is ableist, the other adds to this one. And not knowing that I'm disable doesn't make it less ableist when they are speaking in despicable manner on disabilities like i.e receptive aphasia.

About the bootlicking I should have explain my self, sorry for that. I listed them here because I think that f/anticapital doesn't have active moderators. Please, try to take capitalist apologist out of radical forums, specially out of that forum in particular. People are being exploited as much by the petite bourgeois as the other employees. I saw enough protest against homeless people by "concerned" mom and pop business owners because they "harm their business" to know that they are as oppressive as anyone else. Again more than 50 percent of the homeless in the US are black. If I have to defend anyone would be the poor and exploited. Not the employers, be big or small.

−5

n_n OP wrote

You people can downvote all you want but it won't change nothing if you don't give arguments. u/Ziq you are not explaining why you won't going to do something about the ableism and the sexism. About the bootlickers, what happened to abolish work and the wage system? Why people are defending employers here? What's the problem with my statement against the private property of those employers when poor people is being jailed and workers are being exploited and these groups are being part of that exploitation? And why are people in Raddle are more concerned with what is happening in Reddit than what is happening here? This is a let down really. Fuck work and fuck wage system and fuck those who perpetuate this system.

−6

ziq admin wrote (edited )

You people can downvote all you want but it won't change nothing if you don't give arguments. u/Ziq you are not explaining why you won't going to do something about the ableism and the sexism. About the bootlickers, what happened to abolish work and the wage system? Why people are defending employers here? W

I don't know why you're under the impression that I ban people that don't think like I think. Most leftists are pro-work and most raddlers do what they have to do to survive under capitalism. We don't ban people for not being perfect. But there's not even any indication that they're pro-work. Just because they say self employed black hairdressers don't vote for Trump, that doesn't make them some kind of monster. Wanting to abolish work and recognizing that most people have no choice but to work in order to survive are 2 different things. There is no rule on that forum saying people can't defend self employed people.

What's the problem with my statement against the private property of those employers when poor people is being jailed and workers are being exploited and these groups are being part of that exploitation?

No one said there was any problem with your statement. Rob and burn whatever you want.

And why are people in Raddle are more concerned with what is happening in Reddit than what is happening here? This is a let down really. Fuck work and fuck wage system and fuck those who perpetuate this system.

I don't understand what you expect them to do? You had an argument with someone, is everyone supposed to talk about it for days? It's not even an interesting argument.

I'm not banning them for what they said to you because it doesn't warrant a ban. There are different levels of oppression. Just as saying "this video is dumb" is not on the same level as saying "Jack is a reta**". The later would require I get involved (censor and ban them), the former would not, unless it was just to direct them to an article about ableist language. I already pinged them and told them the word "hysterical" has misogynist roots and should be avoided, and that's all the action I'm going to take.

If anyone agreed with you that the user should be banned, they would have said so by now. It's not reasonable to expect me to ban them for a mild disagreement.

4

n_n OP wrote (edited )

I'm not banning them for what they said to you because it doesn't warrant a ban.

I don't know why you're under the impression that I ban people that don't think like I think.

I don't know why you're under the impression that I asking you to ban people. It's that all you can do? That's why you didn't do nothing? Now I understand why conflicts keep going here.

Just because they say self employed black hairdressers don't vote for Trump, that doesn't make them some kind of monster.

Wanting to abolish work and recognizing that most people have no choice but to work in order to survive are 2 different things. There is no rule on that forum saying people can't defend self employed people.

So self employed are in fact employees petite bourgeois, that's what do you think? Damn, you must be a gigantic piece of shit to think that self employed hairdresser women are capitalist employers. What's next, are you gonna say that they are also the police? Seriously, what's wrong with you?

−7