So it is conceptually worse and more harmful when the communication is nonpersonal, and can be safely ignored, as opposed to personally communicated, where there is an expectation of affirmative agreement? That can't be what you mean, so please enlighten me.
David Shemano -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Louis Proyect Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 3:42 PM To: Progressive Economics Subject: Re: [Pen-l] the Master speaks On 10/19/12 6:27 PM, David Shemano wrote: > In other words, I recognize that there are very real negative social > and economic consequences if I exercise my free speech rights. Does > this bother me? Not one bit. This is nearly too weird for me to comment on, but since I am retired I have more time for foolishness. When the Koch brothers decide to tell their employees how to vote, this is not done around the water cooler. It is done through snail mail or email in a totally unidirectional fashion. An employee has the right to tear up the mail or delete it, not reply to some kind of Koch, inc. listserv like PEN-L or Marxmail. Corporations are the least democratic institutions in the U.S.A and it is rather disingenuous to pretend otherwise. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
